Review: Left 4 Dead 2

Jaranja

New member
Jul 16, 2009
3,275
0
0
Internet Kraken said:
Jaranja said:
Caliban1972 said:
Jaranja said:
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
Nah, I really think your just full of it.

I played L4D on Expert as a matter of course, and L4D2 is much harder than L4D1 on Expert.

It just sounds like you are one those guys who has to brag about how good they are at things they haven't really done. You probably just played through it on Easy and got bored after one play through.
You're one of those people who thinks they always know exactly what's going on. I have played L4D2 on Expert and I found it easy. Just because you find something hard doesn't mean it's hard for everyone.
Out of curiosity, which campaign did you play? And did you try it with realism enabled?
Played at a friends house so I can't remember the campaign and no, realism was disabled.

I seem to have Dead Center stuck in my mind, that a campaign?
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
Jaranja said:
Internet Kraken said:
Jaranja said:
Caliban1972 said:
Jaranja said:
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
Nah, I really think your just full of it.

I played L4D on Expert as a matter of course, and L4D2 is much harder than L4D1 on Expert.

It just sounds like you are one those guys who has to brag about how good they are at things they haven't really done. You probably just played through it on Easy and got bored after one play through.
You're one of those people who thinks they always know exactly what's going on. I have played L4D2 on Expert and I found it easy. Just because you find something hard doesn't mean it's hard for everyone.
Out of curiosity, which campaign did you play? And did you try it with realism enabled?
Played at a friends house so I can't remember the campaign and no, realism was disabled.

I seem to have Dead Center stuck in my mind, that a campaign?
Yes it is. But I seriously doubt that you beat a campaign on Expert if you don't even own the game. Even if you were incredibly good at it, you would need to have incredibly good team mates as well.

Also realism does increase the difficulty.
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
paralost said:
The_root_of_all_evil said:
I'm really struggling on this.

L4D was possibly my game of 2009. Truly godlike.

L4D2 feels like L4D(1.5). It's good but...

And it's that that stops me buying at full price.

I don't even know what it is that doesn't make it as good, it's just that...it's not quite as good.

Yeah, the flames are gorgeous, the bilebomb is great and useful, the Infected are great, but...

And I really can't explain any more than that.
i feel the same way. i loved LFD1 i thought it was awesome and had a tremendous replay value. me and some friends kinda rushed through it the first time put then we got 4 players and actually played strategically as if we actually were in a zombie apocalypse. i played the LFD2 demo but from what i saw it's all...meh. even this review, which i was hoping would put me over the fence on a yay or nay, still leaves me in the center. i think everything added to LFD2 is a vast improvement and will add to the game significantly. but i still think everything they added could still have been given to us through DLC. i just don't think adding some characters, new weps, and different levels are worth 60$. i mean there are still only 5 campaigns. i might get it...later...when the price goes done or something.
I don't get this. Even if all this content was given as DLC (which it couldn't be), it would still be worth the same amount of money. Why complain about it just because it's not DLC?
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
thanks for pointing out the difficulty curve in this game. Dear lord is realism on expert freakin' tuff. still havent made it pass chapter 3 on campaign 1 !!! the director is vicious this time around.

Nothing like getting hit in 1 room with a charger, walk out into hall hit with spitter and subsequently another charger in the adjacent room, while 1 teammate is smoked coming to the rescue, the other is jumped by hunter, and 4th guy get boomed on with a jockey on his head... insta wipe
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,342
8,840
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
Probably one complaint I could level against L4D2 (and considering how I usually play, it's an odd complaint for me to make): Between the new target-penetration abilities of the rifles, and the power of the melee weapons, the shotguns now feel nearly useless in comparison. It feels much more effective to draw the horde into narrow entryways and use controlled bursts from the AK-47 (from which one round will kill two Common Infected and all Uncommon Infected except the Guard [from the front] or the Crewman [usually takes two shots]) than to unload buckshot into wider crowds like in L4D1. The only advantage the shotguns seem to have is the ability to push the Common Infected out of the way of subsequent shots.

That being said, though... if the Escapist goes to GameX again next year, I may just have to show up dressed as Nick.
 

Jaranja

New member
Jul 16, 2009
3,275
0
0
Internet Kraken said:
Jaranja said:
Internet Kraken said:
Jaranja said:
Caliban1972 said:
Jaranja said:
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
Nah, I really think your just full of it.

I played L4D on Expert as a matter of course, and L4D2 is much harder than L4D1 on Expert.

It just sounds like you are one those guys who has to brag about how good they are at things they haven't really done. You probably just played through it on Easy and got bored after one play through.
You're one of those people who thinks they always know exactly what's going on. I have played L4D2 on Expert and I found it easy. Just because you find something hard doesn't mean it's hard for everyone.
Out of curiosity, which campaign did you play? And did you try it with realism enabled?
Played at a friends house so I can't remember the campaign and no, realism was disabled.

I seem to have Dead Center stuck in my mind, that a campaign?
Yes it is. But I seriously doubt that you beat a campaign on Expert if you don't even own the game. Even if you were incredibly good at it, you would need to have incredibly good team mates as well.

Also realism does increase the difficulty.
I'll have to try out realism mode, thanks for the tip.

Really the main reason I don't like the game is because it just always feels like a mod to me. An overpriced mod at that.
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
Jaranja said:
Internet Kraken said:
Jaranja said:
Internet Kraken said:
Jaranja said:
Caliban1972 said:
Jaranja said:
Jiraiya72 said:
Jaranja said:
It gets old really quickly. It's far too easy. It's monotonous.
Too easy? I think you're full of shit. This game is easily twice as hard as the first. Killing zombies never gets old and the whole point of constantly killing zombies is the POINT, not monotonous.
Well maybe you just can't play it as well as some. Killing zombies does get boring, very quickly, in fact. Saying something is twice as hard as another isn't really that smart either; Double 1 is 2 and it's still a small number. I'm really nitpicking now. I'll stop.
Nah, I really think your just full of it.

I played L4D on Expert as a matter of course, and L4D2 is much harder than L4D1 on Expert.

It just sounds like you are one those guys who has to brag about how good they are at things they haven't really done. You probably just played through it on Easy and got bored after one play through.
You're one of those people who thinks they always know exactly what's going on. I have played L4D2 on Expert and I found it easy. Just because you find something hard doesn't mean it's hard for everyone.
Out of curiosity, which campaign did you play? And did you try it with realism enabled?
Played at a friends house so I can't remember the campaign and no, realism was disabled.

I seem to have Dead Center stuck in my mind, that a campaign?
Yes it is. But I seriously doubt that you beat a campaign on Expert if you don't even own the game. Even if you were incredibly good at it, you would need to have incredibly good team mates as well.

Also realism does increase the difficulty.
I'll have to try out realism mode, thanks for the tip.

Really the main reason I don't like the game is because it just always feels like a mod to me. An overpriced mod at that.
Left 4 Dead 2 or Left 4 Dead in general?

And don't expect to much from realism. Yeah it makes the game harder, but there is only one major change between it and campaign that I really noticed; the lack of the highlights surrounding team mates and items. That does have a significant impact on game play, but with properly communication and good observation you can still manage it. I feel that Valve could have done a lot more with realism. Hopefully they'll improve it in the future.
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
Caliban1972 said:
Internet Kraken said:
I don't get this. Even if all this content was given as DLC (which it couldn't be), it would still be worth the same amount of money. Why complain about it just because it's not DLC?
Well, in theory if it was all DLC for the 1st game you could still play all the original campaigns with the new features. And any who purchased the game would add to the existing pool of players, instead of having a new, seperate pool of players for L4D2, and an ever shrinking pool of players for those still on L4D1.

I'm hoping they will redo the original campaigns with the new tech at some point, and add it as free DLC.
People are already working on importing the original Left 4 Dead maps into Left 4 Dead 2. Some already got No Mercy working, though it's still got some new bugs and glitches. Valve will probably do it officially at some point, as they planned to, but I bet the community will get it done first.
 

beddo

New member
Dec 12, 2007
1,589
0
0
Distorted Stu said:
It bored the life out of me, im glad i didnt buy it. Nice review though, Funk always gives a full coverage and is only slightly bias :p
Perhaps you were playing in Normal? Try Extreme difficulty on Realism Mode and then tell me if it's easy. Also, versus mode means you are not limited to weak computer AI that resorts to cheating.
 

beddo

New member
Dec 12, 2007
1,589
0
0
Jaranja said:
I'll have to try out realism mode, thanks for the tip.

Really the main reason I don't like the game is because it just always feels like a mod to me. An overpriced mod at that.
I've never played a Mod anywhere near this complex and with such wide ranging content. On PC it only cost me £20 as part of a four pack and considering I have already got 15 hours of gameplay from it so far I'd say it's great value.

I know it was produced quickly but the engine was already there along with the concept. It was just a case of tweaking the gameplay and putting in new content.
 

Byers

New member
Nov 21, 2008
229
0
0
Caliban1972 said:
Byers said:
I see nothing here that couldn't have been patched into the original game instead of being released as a new game six months after the original.
Lies and exaggerations. It's larger than the entire 1st game (5 campaigns compared to 4 campaigns). It has new weapons, new graphics, new infected, new mechanics, new game modes, improved AI. Every single aspect of the game has been improved in some way.

And it's been a lot longer than "6 months after the original". Left 4 Dead was released a full year ago.
The campaigns can be completed in 15 minutes each. The graphics are the practically ancient source engine with minor tweaking. Don't tell me a couple new campaigns and weapons/monsters couldn't have been added through patching/DLC and community service. At the very least they should have priced the game as an expansion instead of this obvious cash-in ploy.

Caliban1972 said:
Money talks and bullshit walks.
So you are walking then?
You're so clever.

(To clarify, that was sarcasm. After consideration I felt it prudent to clarify it, due to the extreme likelihood of you not being mentally equipped to recognize it, judging from your very poor insult attempt).
 

Internet Kraken

Animalia Mollusca Cephalopada
Mar 18, 2009
6,915
0
0
Byers said:
Caliban1972 said:
Byers said:
I see nothing here that couldn't have been patched into the original game instead of being released as a new game six months after the original.
Lies and exaggerations. It's larger than the entire 1st game (5 campaigns compared to 4 campaigns). It has new weapons, new graphics, new infected, new mechanics, new game modes, improved AI. Every single aspect of the game has been improved in some way.

And it's been a lot longer than "6 months after the original". Left 4 Dead was released a full year ago.
The campaigns can be completed in 15 minutes each. The graphics are the practically ancient source engine with minor tweaking. Don't tell me a couple new campaigns and weapons/monsters couldn't have been added through patching/DLC and community service. At the very least they should have priced the game as an expansion instead of this obvious cash-in ploy.


The campaigns can't be completed in 15 minutes. I don't think that would be possible even on Easy.

And yeah, the game couldn't have just been DLC, for reasons stated in my other post:

Internet Kraken said:
There's a lot that couldn't have been put in the original game. The new AI director is vastly superior to the old one, and now uses the special infected in far more effective ways. Now they mostly use teamwork rather than bumbling into the survivors gunfire on their own. This was a major improvement to the AI director that was not possible to add to Left 4 Dead. The new engine for generating common infected could not be implemented into the old game. The same goes for the gore engine added into the game.

But when you get right down to it, none of this really matters.Left 4 Dead 2 is vastly superior to the original in almost every single way, and there is more than enough content to justify it as a sequel. Some of the new items such as the Adrenaline and Defibrillator have a significant impact on game play. The 5 new campaigns are incredibly well designed and each provides a unique and thrilling experience (also the weather mechanic in Hard Rain could also not be added to the original game). Plus the new game mode Scavenge is pretty damn good.
 

theultimateend

New member
Nov 1, 2007
3,621
0
0
Susan Arendt said:
Distorted Stu said:
It bored the life out of me, im glad i didnt buy it. Nice review though, Funk always gives a full coverage and is only slightly bias :p
Bias is a noun. Biased is an adjective.

Plus, I am boycotting this game due to its lack of broom. I mean, cricket bats are cool, and all, but come on.
biased is an adverb!
biasing is a verb!

Woot! Now we have 4 separate forms of bias!

Lets make a super hero team out of them!
 

copycatalyst

New member
Nov 10, 2009
216
0
0
Why start by saying he's never played the first one only to make the review almost entirely a comparison to the first game?

As for comments asking "Is it different enough to be worth a full sequel?" What about yearly sports games? I mean, I don't buy those, but people eat that up rather than demand that updated rosters be provided as free patches to download. People who play subscription MMOs are probably sinking ~$180/year into the same game and they still buy expansion packs. I don't see what the big deal is.

I only bought L4D1 a few months ago, and even still I'm considering getting 2. The only real reason I haven't is that I'm currently in Korea, and it's a game I'd need to play with a group of (English speaking) friends, and for me that means a 14 hour time difference, not to mention the lag.
 

Arcane Azmadi

New member
Jan 23, 2009
1,232
0
0
Awesome game, true. Would be a 90%+ game except-

1) It's VERY buggy. I'm sick of games being released only half-working and having to be patched. My achievements have been wiped TWICE!

2) -20% of the Australian version for being FUCKING GAY! I would say it's not really Valve's fault, but it is- rather than toning back the level of gore to, say, the level of L4D1 when they resubmitted it to the ratings board, they just got lazy and tossed them the pussy-ass-wimp German version instead, only without the extra weapons and stuff the Germans got to compensate. It is GIMPED to the point where it actually affects the gameplay (when you can't tell which infected are burning and which aren't).
 

Caliostro

Headhunter
Jan 23, 2008
3,253
0
0
Susan Arendt said:
Distorted Stu said:
It bored the life out of me, im glad i didnt buy it. Nice review though, Funk always gives a full coverage and is only slightly bias :p
Bias is a noun. Biased is an adjective.

Plus, I am boycotting this game due to its lack of broom. I mean, cricket bats are cool, and all, but come on.
Katana. Fireaxe.

I think I made my point.

PS: Stu/jar/whomever, stop playing it on normal/easy. Play it on advanced, expert, and if you really think the whole thing is still a breeze, go expert on realism mode.
 

Radelaide

New member
May 15, 2008
2,503
0
0
Byers said:
I see nothing here that couldn't have been patched into the original game instead of being released as a new game six months after the original. Money talks and bullshit walks.
The_root_of_all_evil said:
I'm really struggling on this.

L4D was possibly my game of 2009. Truly godlike.

L4D2 feels like L4D(1.5). It's good but...

And it's that that stops me buying at full price.

I don't even know what it is that doesn't make it as good, it's just that...it's not quite as good.

Yeah, the flames are gorgeous, the bilebomb is great and useful, the Infected are great, but...

And I really can't explain any more than that.
I'm honestly glad to see that I'm not the only person who feels like the "game" could be DLC (don't ***** at me about the graphics. L4D1's graphics are fine.) or it isn't as great as L4D1 is. I've got about 14.5 hours (not as much as Funkypants over there, admittedly) and I'm struggling to get through campaigns. If you check out my Steam Profile with L4D2 achievements, you'll see that I've only finished two of the campaigns (before and after Steam deleted my achievements).

I'm struggling to find the justification behind the cash I spent on the game when it all could have been easily patched into the first game. The game feels rushed and cheap. And that's probably because it was rushed. You can't expect a great or even good game to come out of a years worth of work.

I don't see why it got so hyped up. It's just so... mediocre.