Something went wrong. Try again later
    Follow

    Left 4 Dead 2

    Game » consists of 10 releases. Released Nov 17, 2009

    In the sequel to Valve's cooperative zombie shooter, a new team of four ragtag survivors must work together to survive the apocalypse, facing new Infected threats as they fight their way across the Southern United States.

    The Left 4 Dead 2 Conundrum

    Avatar image for scamp115
    scamp115

    20

    Forum Posts

    683

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 4

    Edited By scamp115

    In light of all the announcements and all the amazing previews that came out of this years E3 I am very satisified. If there is one place that I have any true gripes, it is with Left 4 Dead 2. When rumors of this game being announced at E3 started flowing last weekend, I was skeptical. I thought that the timing wasn't write for a sequel and that Valve hadn't really delivered on their promise of DLC a la TF2 for the original. Even as I write this post I remain conflicted as to the necessity of this sequel so soon after the release of the original.


    My first point of contention is the relatively minimal amount of content present in the original game. The original game shipped with a co-op and versus multiplayer mode spanning 4 champaigns (at least in the co-op mode initially), 8 total weapons (excluding environment weapons i.e. gas cans, mini-gun), 4 playable survivor characters, and 4 playable Infected characters. Call me crazy, but TF2 launced with 9 distinct  characters (they are really only 5 distinct character types in L4D), each with their own unique primary weapon, a slew of unique secondary weapons (sure the pistol and shotgun were repeated a couple times), ~8 maps, and a number of games types to change up the game experience. I am aware that this isn't a direct apples to apples comparison, but when you look at it, it seems that TF2 launched with more content and at a price point less than half of that of L4D  (and yes I realize that TF2 wasn't released as a standalone until a few months after the release of the Orange Box, but hang with me here).

    This lack of content was acknowledge by most major blogs and game sites, but it was also dismissed as a minor complaint because everyone expected Valve to support this game in the same way that they have been supporting TF2. TF2 has been come something much more engaging and much more special through the continued support that Vavle has given to this game, and it is just a little disappointing that this hasn't happened for L4D. Judging a game based on content alone is a tricky thing to do as well. I know that I have spent tens of hours (not quite hundreds yet) playing L4D, so did I get my $50 bucks worth. Sure, when you compare that to other $50 retail games that only truly last for 12-20 hours. If you compare that to TF2 which I have spent at least 120+ hours on then L4D still comes up a bit lacking. 

    While I may be peeved about this lack of continued expansion, I can understand why Valve is doing what they are doing. Chet Faliszek said in an interview (can't remember with whom at the moment) that when he presented this idea to Gabe Newell it was not accepted warmly. Gabe felt that that is not what Valve does, but he was willing to support the project if that was what the team was really passionate about doing. Gabe should be commeneded for his understanding of a team's passion, but I think it light of what we know maybe this game shouldn't have been a sequel. The way it happened I can't see a way to avoid doing this as a sequel simply because keeping such a large team working on a project that will be free add-on DLC can't be good for the bottom line. Vavle can afford the TF2 updates because it is a smaller team working on them and every time the release new DLC they see a bump in sales for the original game. With Left 4 Dead, you can't keep the entire team working on free DLC and expect to make other games that really help pay the bills.

    Ultimately I really think that L4D should have been delayed to give the team some more time to really flesh most of these ideas, but then they would be able to give us the smaller DLC at a steady pace while working on another full scale game to keep the coffers full. As it stands Valve's biggest piracy deterant has been bucked so that the dev team can fullfil the dream they had for the original game.

    It all comes down to:
    The Good - We get a ton of L4D content just a year after the release of the original game and the developers get to create the game they wante to create in the first place.

    The Bad - We get to buy all of this content again even though the original was lacking (although this can be debated).

    The Ugly - Valve has to deal with a bunch of people that are going to complaing about anything and everything.

    I'm still hoping that Valve will come out with something that can convince everyone (myself included) that this game is really worth the reinvestment and that are original investment in L4D was in vain.
    Avatar image for scamp115
    scamp115

    20

    Forum Posts

    683

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 4

    #1  Edited By scamp115

    In light of all the announcements and all the amazing previews that came out of this years E3 I am very satisified. If there is one place that I have any true gripes, it is with Left 4 Dead 2. When rumors of this game being announced at E3 started flowing last weekend, I was skeptical. I thought that the timing wasn't write for a sequel and that Valve hadn't really delivered on their promise of DLC a la TF2 for the original. Even as I write this post I remain conflicted as to the necessity of this sequel so soon after the release of the original.


    My first point of contention is the relatively minimal amount of content present in the original game. The original game shipped with a co-op and versus multiplayer mode spanning 4 champaigns (at least in the co-op mode initially), 8 total weapons (excluding environment weapons i.e. gas cans, mini-gun), 4 playable survivor characters, and 4 playable Infected characters. Call me crazy, but TF2 launced with 9 distinct  characters (they are really only 5 distinct character types in L4D), each with their own unique primary weapon, a slew of unique secondary weapons (sure the pistol and shotgun were repeated a couple times), ~8 maps, and a number of games types to change up the game experience. I am aware that this isn't a direct apples to apples comparison, but when you look at it, it seems that TF2 launched with more content and at a price point less than half of that of L4D  (and yes I realize that TF2 wasn't released as a standalone until a few months after the release of the Orange Box, but hang with me here).

    This lack of content was acknowledge by most major blogs and game sites, but it was also dismissed as a minor complaint because everyone expected Valve to support this game in the same way that they have been supporting TF2. TF2 has been come something much more engaging and much more special through the continued support that Vavle has given to this game, and it is just a little disappointing that this hasn't happened for L4D. Judging a game based on content alone is a tricky thing to do as well. I know that I have spent tens of hours (not quite hundreds yet) playing L4D, so did I get my $50 bucks worth. Sure, when you compare that to other $50 retail games that only truly last for 12-20 hours. If you compare that to TF2 which I have spent at least 120+ hours on then L4D still comes up a bit lacking. 

    While I may be peeved about this lack of continued expansion, I can understand why Valve is doing what they are doing. Chet Faliszek said in an interview (can't remember with whom at the moment) that when he presented this idea to Gabe Newell it was not accepted warmly. Gabe felt that that is not what Valve does, but he was willing to support the project if that was what the team was really passionate about doing. Gabe should be commeneded for his understanding of a team's passion, but I think it light of what we know maybe this game shouldn't have been a sequel. The way it happened I can't see a way to avoid doing this as a sequel simply because keeping such a large team working on a project that will be free add-on DLC can't be good for the bottom line. Vavle can afford the TF2 updates because it is a smaller team working on them and every time the release new DLC they see a bump in sales for the original game. With Left 4 Dead, you can't keep the entire team working on free DLC and expect to make other games that really help pay the bills.

    Ultimately I really think that L4D should have been delayed to give the team some more time to really flesh most of these ideas, but then they would be able to give us the smaller DLC at a steady pace while working on another full scale game to keep the coffers full. As it stands Valve's biggest piracy deterant has been bucked so that the dev team can fullfil the dream they had for the original game.

    It all comes down to:
    The Good - We get a ton of L4D content just a year after the release of the original game and the developers get to create the game they wante to create in the first place.

    The Bad - We get to buy all of this content again even though the original was lacking (although this can be debated).

    The Ugly - Valve has to deal with a bunch of people that are going to complaing about anything and everything.

    I'm still hoping that Valve will come out with something that can convince everyone (myself included) that this game is really worth the reinvestment and that are original investment in L4D was in vain.
    Avatar image for deactivated-5b45500a95f79
    deactivated-5b45500a95f79

    628

    Forum Posts

    11

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    Good summary.  Thanks

    Avatar image for cmckinla
    cmckinla

    19

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #3  Edited By cmckinla

    Good read. I agree with your points. I think what this is all really going to come down to is a decent game just like the original, that offers little in the way of innovation, just more variety of the same style as the original. Of course, it'll all be backed by angry nerd drama :)

    Avatar image for natetodamax
    natetodamax

    19464

    Forum Posts

    65390

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 32

    User Lists: 5

    #4  Edited By natetodamax

    Everyone should just get over the whole thing and learn to deal with it.

    Avatar image for tekmojo
    tekmojo

    2365

    Forum Posts

    104

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 3

    #5  Edited By tekmojo

    The only problem is that the game will suffer the same criticism as the first. Lack of content. I was expecting Valve to take that into consideration before moving on with sequels. 

    Avatar image for ineedaname
    Ineedaname

    4276

    Forum Posts

    410

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 3

    User Lists: 0

    #6  Edited By Ineedaname

    I also can't help but think if the SDK eventually comes out for L4D this is content people could make.

    Avatar image for insectecutor
    Insectecutor

    1264

    Forum Posts

    217

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 2

    #7  Edited By Insectecutor

    So do we know the retail/steam price for L4D2 yet?

    Avatar image for scamp115
    scamp115

    20

    Forum Posts

    683

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 4

    #8  Edited By scamp115

    Price was an issue I was considering as I went to bed last night. Although they haven't announced a price for the game yet, the assumption seems to be that this is going to be a full retail game that sells for $50/$60 on the PC/X360 respectively. I figure that Vavle could clear up this issues by considering L4D2 as more of an expansion and selling it to gamers that have bought the original for twenty-five or thirty bucks. The only real problem I see with that plan is that it much more difficult to verify that an X360 owner actually owns the original without dealing with sending in the UPC's or something. I would be much more receptive of this game if I were only spending $75 total for both games and all the content that goes with them.

    Avatar image for epicsteve
    EpicSteve

    6908

    Forum Posts

    13016

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 89

    User Lists: 11

    Avatar image for arbitrarywater
    ArbitraryWater

    16105

    Forum Posts

    5585

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 8

    User Lists: 66

    #10  Edited By ArbitraryWater

    I will probably buy L4D2 (or ask for it for Christmas) and enjoy it, even if I do feel like a sucker (I bought the first game about a month ago). What would sell me on it completely is if they emulated Rock Band 2 and allowed me to import the old campaigns and character models and use them if I so wish.

    Avatar image for kowalskimandown
    KowalskiManDown

    4170

    Forum Posts

    3525

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 19

    #11  Edited By KowalskiManDown

    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007), Call of Duty: World at War (2008), Modern Warfare 2 (2009)

    Where's the uproar about that?!

    Avatar image for ineedaname
    Ineedaname

    4276

    Forum Posts

    410

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 3

    User Lists: 0

    #12  Edited By Ineedaname
    @creamypies: You've posted that in like 3 topics now and that's wrong 3 times, Treyarch don't have any involvement in CoD: MW
    Avatar image for scamp115
    scamp115

    20

    Forum Posts

    683

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 4

    #13  Edited By scamp115
    @creamypies: There are a couple difference with the Call of Duty franchise: 1.) It is expected each year that some major gameplay tweaks will be encorparated in release, and 2.) Those games come packed with content.

    I think a lot of the negativity surrounding L4D2 comes from the fact that the original game was short on content, and didn't really have a story of its own to tell. Many reviews including Giantbomb's forgave the game its dirth of content because it was expected that Valve would deliver more content as time went on. This also might not be as big of an issue if people were interested in the progression of the story, but seeing as there wasn't a real story in L4D people don't need to see a continuance of it. Granted there is an overarching plot and you get glimpses of that through each of the disparate campaigns, but again there is little motivation to see a continuance of the story.

    I think there is time for Valve to really impress us with the amount of new content that they have made for this game, but as of right now this game seems even weaker than an annual Madden game interms of improvements to gameplay and feature set. 

    This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.