| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (81)

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:04PM vmenge said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
First!1!1!!one!!111! Now give me my beta code!


I kid, I kid.
Nice to see that this game had nice reviews, now I'll just wait for one of those famous special offers from Steam and buy it :D
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You may be kidding, but the damage is done.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:12PM MowDownJoe said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You HAD to do that reward the trolls contest, Joystiq... you just HAD to...
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:03PM Xocolatl said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Hey, lookie me, I replied to first!

I wouldn't expect anything less from Valve. Not for a few years anyway.
I'm so looking forward to getting back home and playing TF2 again. My damn laptops doesn't play a thing--I'm about 3 updates behind!
Reply

Posted: Nov 21st 2009 10:56AM vmenge said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, I was actually poking fun at the contest, not trying to participate in it, but ok...
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:06PM Ravenshadow said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My friend and i tried it on the xbox 360 , the co-op demo, and it was really choppy, so choppy the zombies jumped around and made it hard to hit. We both have good connections and play other games just fine on xbl. Anyone else have this problem with the demo? we only tried it a couple times before we both deleted the demo in frustration.

Anyone else experience this? is this present in the retail game also?
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:12PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The game is really laggy on xbox live. Hopefully it gets patched (again) soon.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:11PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This was because it was a demo and the server's got overloaded, also this was fixed if you hosted it yourself, learn to experiment.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:20PM xGeneral DEATHxDEETH82 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
There's an option to host the match yourself (and no, that's not the default setting when you start a MP game); you have to set it and your lag issue will be fixed. I had the same prob too; had to figure it out OL' SCHOOL.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:08PM TheC0A7S said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
gamesharks made me feel like a leet hacker in Jr. High! lol

What a pathetic kid I was
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:16PM Funkmaster General said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I felt the same way. I had Gameshark Pro (or something) for my Gameboy Color. I felt like such hot shit.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:39PM whylekat said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Yeahh the good ole' days... I had 4 game genies for NES. you plug them all in To each other and It let u put in 4 pages of codes! Haha only drawback was It made the actual game cart extend out like 1foot. Ahh good times.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
L4D2's difficulty = bad. Demon's Souls difficulty = greatest thing since sliced bread.

???

Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:18PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
One is due to bad design, one is due to good design based around a decision to actually make the game hard.

Although I personally didn't find it hard from what I played of it, but I am a child of the NES/SNES eras.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:50PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@tmac
I know there's no use in arguing with a troll, but to claim that L4D2 is badly designed is really off the mark. It's designed to be punish poor teamwork. If you go off by yourself, you'll be killed. If you stroll slowly though the level, you'll be killed. I've never played Demon's Souls so I can't comment on how its designed but any game that is difficult enough for me to feel like I've accomplished something after beating it is good in my book.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:01PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
No, the campaigns in L4D2 are just really badly designed, sorry.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:02PM sonicspike41 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
I can't wait until you get a Wii and start offering more... informed decisions on Wii games and get called a Wii fanboy.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:12PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Of course it's poorly designed. Poor developers had to crank it out in less than a year, more likely closer to 7-8 months.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:17PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Give me a break dude. I've played hours upon hours of both of them, and love them both. You've played only 1, never played the other, and clearly have a bias towards it before it was even released.

MW2 is a great game. I love it. But to say that it's more different from MW1 than L4D2 is from L4D1 is one of the most outrageous statements I've ever seen you make.

MW2 didn't even fix the annoying little things that people complained about (party leader backing out doesn't back out the whole party, match settings reset after every map in private MP matches, etc).

MW2 has more in common with R6V2 than L4D2 in terms of how much it evolved from its predecessor. That's not a bad thing, because MW1 was awesome and even the small changes in MW2 make it a lot better. It's not a bad thing, it's just the way it is.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:24PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Doh, I clicked the wrong reply button.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah I agree I think most journalists prefers FPS to be easy but not RPGs. I think we are lacking good difficulty in FPS'. lol I love the little PS3 cheerleaders "bad design"
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:10PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Only people who think this game sucks are PS3 owners, because they can't play it.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:12PM maaax said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
i've got a pc and x360 and no ps3 and i think l4d is a horrible game.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:12PM doubtingthomas said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But we can play it on our PC's
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:14PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Judging by your grammar, I think you've never played it. That or your parents bought it for you but it wasn't like Hello Kitty Island Adventures so you didn't like it.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:14PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Oh according to Bane, that makes me a ps3 fanboy again! That didn't last long this time.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm a PS3 and a PC owner and I do play l4d..sigh* people these days *Tactical Palmforehead*
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Judging by your grammar, I think you've never played it."

Judging by your comments how the hell did a 9 y/o get his hands on L4D2, let alone a 360.

And his grammar is fine, so what he didn't use capital letters. Build a bridge and get over it.

Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:51PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
[banned]
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I just finished all the campaigns and I think it's a bad game. And I really liked the first one.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:13PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Couple of my friends bought this despite my warnings not to, and a day later they bitched that it was basically the same game again. Well, what did you expect from a game made in less than a year after the first!

Seeing these reviews though make me sit back and wonder what the media's thinking when they say "game x is a rehash and the series needs to innovate or die" but don't do the same with game y. I also think it's a by-product of the media's huge hardon for anything Valve.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:18PM PuNK45S said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
It really is a completely different game and experience...whether or not it is better/worse than the original is up for debate...but to continue calling it the same game with different people is just...wrong.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Putting my fanboyism aside, I agree. L4D2 came out way to soon, and the media gives any Valve game a handjob when it's released.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:21PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Can we move past this?

The good thing about games is that you have a choice whether you buy them or not.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:24PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
get past what? Did I miss some fun in the l4d2 review article?

I'm just saying what some people's reactions were that already played it. I already knew it was going to be a rehash, so I made the good choice by not buying it (not that I was ever going to, not really a fan of Valve games).
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:40PM ducttapeBigSexy said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So I'm not the only person who's annoyed by the gaming media (and most gamers) shooting their wad to everything Valve does.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:52PM Vcize said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
L4D2 plays quite differently from L4D1.

Besides, sequels SHOULD be very similar to their originals. A sequel should be an evolutionary improvement over the 1st game. Take what made the 1st game good, expand on that, add new weapons/maps/story/enemies, fix the stuff that people complained about in the 1st one, and add a couple cool new features.

Trying to totally redefine a game in its sequel is beyond stupid. You may as well just make a new IP at that point. By making something completely different you're only going to piss off fans of the 1st. They're buying the sequel because they liked the 1st and want more of it, with some improvements, not because they want something totally different.

Head on over to Epic's Gears 2 forums for 5 minutes if you need an example of how the community reacts to the game totally changing what class it's in in its sequel.

But then again, how can you even comment on this stuff Tmac when you don't even play multiplayer games? I guess the rest of us just aren't "gamer" enough to keep up with you.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:54PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And besides all the new weapons, weapon types, enemy classes (which you get to play as, don't forget), all new strategies brought into the MP, etc we get Scavenge mode which is good enough to be an entire game on its own, and fixes the biggest complaint most L4D1 fans had (minimum 1 hour plus just to do one multiplayer match, with no option for shorter ones).
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:01PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I play MW2 online, which is all I need. See, unlike these strange casuals that need multiplayer in every game, I realize that there's no point having deathmatch in every game when it's the same thing. So 1 great online game is all I need.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:05PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Obviously every game doesn't need "deathmatch", but it's idiotic to say that because you like one multiplayer game no other game should have it. There is all kinds of different multiplayer gaming out there, and what you're saying is no less ignorant than me saying "I have Mass Effect and that's enough, there's no need for every other game out there to have single player".

Even just within shooters there are all kinds of different types, and they're all very different. MW is a ton of fun, but a lot of people don't like the campiness of it. L4D is more edge of your seat intense, Gears is more laid back, have a beer with your friends style. They're all different, and they all bring unique experiences.

But really, how the hell can you say that L4D2 is too similar to L4D1 and then go on and on about MW2? MW2 is exactly 1,467 times more similar to MW1 than L4D2 is to L4D1. And that's not to say anything bad about MW2, because I love it also, but to complain that L4D2 is too evolutionary and then talk about how much you like MW2 is beyond hypocritical.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:08PM kojo87 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"I play MW2 online, which is all I need"

well now it all makes sense.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:09PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
"MW2 is exactly 1,467 times more similar to MW1 than L4D2 is to L4D1"

faaaaaalse. That is the most false statement I've read this year. The multiplayer alone has more new stuff added to it than the entirety of L4D2's "additions". They cranked out a rehashed sequel literally less than a year. They're only getting a pass because people slober all over Valve for some reason.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:23PM Vcize said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Give me a break dude. I've played hours upon hours of both of them, and love them both. You've played only 1, never played the other, and clearly have a bias towards it before it was even released.

MW2 is a great game. I love it. But to say that it's more different from MW1 than L4D2 is from L4D1 is one of the most outrageous statements I've ever seen you make.

MW2 didn't even fix the annoying little things that people complained about (party leader backing out doesn't back out the whole party, match settings reset after every map in private MP matches, etc).

MW2 has more in common with R6V2 than L4D2 in terms of how much it evolved from its predecessor. That's not a bad thing, because MW1 was awesome and even the small changes in MW2 make it a lot better. It's not a bad thing, it's just the way it is.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:26PM Vcize said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And FWIW tmac, I don't like any other Valve games except for Portal, so this isn't just me getting on a loved developer's jock.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:38PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well I thought the competitive MP in MW2 was terrible if it's worth anything. I hated the first L4D with a passion and I wouldn't touch the sequel with a 10 foot pole. Charging $60 for a HL2 mod without a campaign or story is beyond belief in my book. Still, I can appreciate new ideas and concepts and L4D2 looks like what the original should have been from a content perspective. I'm primarily a campaign gamer but I can enjoy a good multiplayer mode as much as the next guy which is why I thought Horde Mode in Gears 2, Spec Ops in MW2 and Mercenaries in Uncharted 2 were all amazing ... the latter 2 being directly inspired from Horde mode which IMO has been the biggest improvement in multiplayer this generation. I would probably love firefight as well if I had the chance to play it.

Just because I don't like L4D doesn't mean the game sucks. Thats sort of the difference is I don't believe that I'm better than anyone else for liking certain games over others. I absolutely love the hell out of Burn Zombie Burn as it's one of the best games this entire generation yet 98% of gamers would scoff at that notion and have never played it.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 8:18PM Vegeta has a ps3 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Besides, sequels SHOULD be very similar to their originals. A sequel should be an evolutionary improvement over the 1st game. Take what made the 1st game good, expand on that, add new weapons/maps/story/enemies, fix the stuff that people complained about in the 1st one, and add a couple cool new features."

Agreed. I'm all for innovation when it's needed, not just done for the sake of it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a sequel being just that, a sequel.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:19PM StormX said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Kinda some poor journalistic integrity here folks.

Just cause you found the game to be very difficult, and you found some anecdotal support on twitter to support you, doesn't mean you need to get snarky because other people reviewed the game in a manner that doesn't exactly line up with yours.

I'm a BIG fan of the non-numeric review system, but no need to assume your word is the only correct one(especially on reviews which are inherently opinionated) and cast dispersion on anything that doesn't agree.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 3:42PM whymog said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For what it's worth, I sucked at Left 4 Dead 1 but got through all five campaigns in L4D2 with only maybe two full party wipes on normal. None of us are particularly great at the game, but to me it felt immensely better designed than the first. I think it's a shame the review glossed over that in favor of talking about how hard it was -- which is definitely a valid talking point in an opinion piece, but a full review needs more than just that.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 4:10PM WiNGSPANTT from TopTierTacticsco said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I agree. The Joystiq review was too obsessive and frankly not helpful to me as a reader. I normally really like the 'Stiq reviews because they seem more balanced and less rant-ish. That's what the AVGN is for.
Reply

Posted: Nov 20th 2009 7:38PM wicko said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yep, they should have just posted in the steam forums where all the other complaints are posted.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Shank 2 review: Refined brutality

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45AM

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW