Widescreen Gaming Forum

StingingVelvet: I think I may be able to put the finger on what is making L4D2 feel so much worse than L4D1.
It's Pokémon: Zombies Edition, give the originals a new look, add a couple more creatures, same basic story, slap a new label on it, sell for premium price, ???, profit!

Perhaps. The speed of release doesn't bother me too much, it's huge for an "expansion" and I personally got it at expansion price, so I have no real issue with the value of the product. That said it does feel somewhat tired from being a bit of a retread.

I am someone who played the original a lot though, so I could just be burned out a bit.

Perhaps. The speed of release doesn't bother me too much, it's huge for an "expansion" and I personally got it at expansion price, so I have no real issue with the value of the product. That said it does feel somewhat tired from being a bit of a retread.

I am someone who played the original a lot though, so I could just be burned out a bit.

May I ask you a relevant question?
Did you like Warcraft 3?
Did you like World of Warcraft?

[quote]Perhaps. The speed of release doesn't bother me too much, it's huge for an "expansion" and I personally got it at expansion price, so I have no real issue with the value of the product. That said it does feel somewhat tired from being a bit of a retread.

I am someone who played the original a lot though, so I could just be burned out a bit.

May I ask you a relevant question?
Did you like Warcraft 3?
Did you like World of Warcraft?

Never played either.

Not sure how that is relavent either since as far as I know they are different genres of game entirely.

The relevancy comes in with, how much do you want your sequels to stray off the path provided for them? Would you have preferred Invisible War to be more like the original Dues Ex? I would have.

I do agree that L4D2 probably could have went slightly more off that path, In which direction I am not sure but I wouldn't want it to wander too far.

The relevancy comes in with, how much do you want your sequels to stray off the path provided for them? Would you have preferred Invisible War to be more like the original Dues Ex? I would have.

I do agree that L4D2 probably could have went slightly more off that path, In which direction I am not sure but I wouldn't want it to wander too far.

Oh I agree with that, as a matter of fact I usually get called anti-innovation because I complain when sequels stray. I don't have a problem with L4D2 being more L4D and apart from losing a bit of mood and ambiance I would say L4D2 is a massive improvement.

I think a year just isn't enough time for me to need more Left 4 Dead. I was still playing the original somewhat regularly and the good mods were just coming out. It just felt too soon to me. Looking at it as an expansion makes that more "ok" but then I wish the games were connected instead of seperated.

In all I would even say I love the game, there is just something that keeps me from being as excited about it as the first.

I think a year just isn't enough time for me to need more Left 4 Dead. I was still playing the original somewhat regularly and the good mods were just coming out. It just felt too soon to me. Looking at it as an expansion makes that more "ok" but then I wish the games were connected instead of seperated.

Fair enough.

Things you said which amazed me:
-You based any part of your review on "Normal" difficulty. Would have considered "Normal" difficulty in your evaluation of the original L4D?
-"The selection of new...add little to this now well-flogged, dead horse." Basically you're saying the original is a dead horse. Why did you buy the sequel? Didn't you know it would only be a variation on the original?
-"Francis say he hates something...because it's a deterrent to his surviving" Um...nope...did you listen to Francis? Most often, he has no obvious reason for hating things. He just does.
-"The new special infected...don't exactly inflict the same type of fear as the originals, which have now been given the shaft and relinquished to the dark recesses from whence they came." Hunters, boomers, and smokers are all still there, pretty much unchanged, except for the skins. They do seem less fear-invoking, and I think that's because their audio cues aren't as noticeable from a distance. But you're suggesting they're simply gone.
-Audio. Yeah. There is lots of musical variety, but it's much more distracting than in the original game. I want to hear the infected around me, to hear that smoker or spitter or hunter attack. The music shouldn't ever be overpowering - it's as if the developers thought: right, NOW PLAYERS MUST FEEL THIS WAY. I don't like that. (And yes, I loved the gun sounds - and I don't want them to sound as loud as real guns, thank-you.)
-74% overall. Why? The tone of your review suggests a rating of about 35% is coming. You've got to highlight many, many more positive features before giving such a high score.
-Finally, you've left out so much. You mentioned that there are new special infected. You didn't evaluate them. You didn't evaluate any of the new game modes. You didn't comment on the new melee principle. You didn't comment on the running-to-safety principle. I'll comment on those myself.

The developers felt it wouldn't be distracting to have hand-held swords and frying pans killing 4 or 5 zombies more quickly than a combat shotgun. I don't agree - and that's my biggest disappointment with the new game.
The developers felt standing still and shooting at incoming zombies was boring, so they tried to minimize it. I don't agree.
The developers felt a "jockey" infected that could suddenly take over a player's movements wouldn't be distracting. I don't agree.
The developers felt that an acid-spitting infected whose spit miraculously stayed on the ground all the time wouldn't be distracting. I don't agree. (You couldn't get rid of boomer bile just by running 10 feet to one side.)
The developers felt that routinely finding bottled boomer-bile wouldn't seem strange. It still does, after 87 play-hours.
The developers felt a day time zombie attack would work out well. It almost works well.
The developers felt running-to-safely would be a great new principle. It sort of works...but I'm not really sure of the reasons for running down a roller-coaster track, or why so many infected show up when a gate gets ready to open...maybe if the music weren't so loud, I'd understand better...
The developers felt fewer pitch black rooms wouldn't be missed. I miss them.

I'm not expecting to stick to Left 4 Dead 2 the way I played Left 4 Dead for 11 months. Mostly because the game feels so much less real. But for now, it's the only place where you can find a fun group of co-op players quickly.

I give the game a score of 86%.
63% for the game itself.
93% for the players I can quickly find for a co-op game.
(I'm not a big fan of averaging sub-scored together to produce overall scores.)

I just played the original again for the first time in a long while to try out a mod campaign (City 17) and I have to say I still prefer the original game to L4D2. The original just had better pacing and atmosphere somehow, I think the new infected are cool but maybe make the game more hassle than fun in some ways and the moody atmosphere of the original is more immersive.

I'm not saying L4D2 is bad, but there is certainly something it lacks compared to the original for me, despite having actually more content.

I just played the original again for the first time in a long while to try out a mod campaign (City 17) and I have to say I still prefer the original game to L4D2. The original just had better pacing and atmosphere somehow, I think the new infected are cool but maybe make the game more hassle than fun in some ways and the moody atmosphere of the original is more immersive.

I'm not saying L4D2 is bad, but there is certainly something it lacks compared to the original for me, despite having actually more content.

I actually played L4D (the original) earlier today just to kill some time.

It's still quite fun. I had a blast running around Death Toll with a couple people on Expert, just screwing around for the most part. Given, I haven't played L4D2 (or the demo!), but the original L4D is still alive and kicking (even without too many players online to prove it).

And: Holy crap there's a City 17 mod? I have to try that out...

Value to Cost: 7/10 (This really should have been an expansion to the original.)

You know, I like this game a lot but I won't disagree with you on the game itself. I will disagree with the score for value to cost. I agree that this game feels like an expansion pack. You can also get it for expansion pack price. I got it through the 4 pack deal for $33 cost to me. That's essentially the cost of an expansion pack. I remember paying around that much for FEAR Extraction Point and Neverwinter Nights expansion packs and Call of Duty United Offensive. I think the value to cost is very good.

Also considering there's been many deals on it lately.. I mean Steam had it on sale like 2 weeks after it came out or something like that for $37 and the 4-pack for even cheaper than it was originally, and it was on for $28 I think during one of the Christmas sale days and it's been $37 for the entire christmas sale period as well. I'd say you could have easily gotten the game for expansion pack price which makes it worth the money.