Comments on: L4D2: All The ComicCon Footage, And Some

By: Chaloopa

Chaloopa — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:54:38 +0000

really i hope there playing on easy cause a charger does not need to die with one hit with a frying pan

By: Jetsetlemming

Jetsetlemming — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:59:39 +0000

Man, the effect for the spitter spit is neat. Bright and obvious, cool looking boiling oil effect that clearly lets you know “get the fuck out of this area here”. Shame that apparently nobody playing got that.
Also digging the new gore system, it’s a nice contrast to Soldier of Fortune which I’ve been replaying recently. L4D2 looks WAY more detailed in that way.
Awesome gore system, bunch of new zombies to mix up the game, bunch of new weapons so not everyone’s running for the same thing over and over, and more procedural events? I’m completely sold.

By: sigma83

sigma83 — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:11:59 +0000

That 1+3 strategy sounds interesting. I may give that a go next time we’re out shooting zombies.

Also, what do vegetarian zombies eat? Graaaaaains

By: reaper47

reaper47 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:36:45 +0000

It’s a discussion about a game on a gaming site. A PC-gaming site that is, so everything Valve-related is double-relevant. Sure, discussing gameplay is more fun, but I don’t think that DRM, pricing or corporate philosophy are irrelevant topics, either.

L4D2 looks like a meager title to justify the status of a true sequel. But I only played the L4D free weekends so far, so who am I to judge? Felt like I could play everything I could out of that game in a session of 8 hours or so, which is the reason I never got it. So the argument about lacking content seems to be quite accurate…

By: MeanCoffeeBean

MeanCoffeeBean — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:27:51 +0000

I really don’t get the boycott proponents. It’s just a game. Claims that the sky is falling in the Valve Studios seem to be a bit of an overreaction. It’s not even done yet, no one has seen the final price point, yet preemptive zealotry is running rampant. Some perspective would be nice.

I thoroughly enjoyed the first L4D, and never even once played Multiplayer. I always ran single-player campaigns for fun. The idea of being assigned to a group of random strangers and being forced to hear their ravings and profanity just did nothing for me. In single-player there was a lot more tactics involved since your AI buddies only provide marginal support. I suspect this has made my gameplay perspective slightly different than most others’. Working through a campaign on Expert in single-player is a case-study in vantage points, moving from cover to cover, and working with limited ammunition.

By: JoeDuck

JoeDuck — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:19:28 +0000

Oh, one thing I would do if i were at Valve (yeah ,right…)
would be to apply difficulty levels also to the audio cues.
As it stands now, we know a long time before that there’s a tank, a hunter or specially a boomer and a good team reacts to that automatically.
In L4D, audio is so important but at the end, but so much of a giveaway of what’s going to happen that I think it would be great if the “superexpert” difficulty had audio cues that were more difficult to recognize.
The obvious thing would be lowering the volume of the boomers, hunters, etc.
Ideally, this difficulty should scale gradually from easy to expert as with the hit points and all the rest…

By: oceanclub

oceanclub — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:25:38 +0000

Funnily enough, because of this thread, I decided to revisit L4D after many months and had a great old time in Survivor mode, with some people who weren’t twats and even got a Silver medal. Chalk an accidental -1 up for the boycott.

By: JoeDuck

JoeDuck — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:20:13 +0000

@Tei:
Yes, because the zombies in Versus are “normal” level zombies. :-)
Each “expert” zombie hits for 20 points of damage out of your 100 and friendly fire in expert can easily kill you in one shot.
Running in expert is quite fun… and short.
What we are doing in expert now and quite succesfully I must say, is having one runner go ahead and the other 3 a small distance after him so the zombies get shot from behind as they run towards the first guy. The problem is that it’s very, very difficult to stay in formation and keep the proper distance between the members. If the runner goes too fast, he dies under a hunter. If he goes too slow, he gets attacked from behind and is in the line of fire of the rest of the group. Also, if one of the “slow” 3 gets bogged down, the communication has to be smooth or the first guy will run on, alone and technically dead…
So basically we don’t rush all the way, we do sprints to safe spots, regroup, sprint in 1+3 formation, regroup, etc.
Works very well in open, long levels.

By: sigma83

sigma83 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:33:06 +0000

THe game doesn’t need to be harder per se, just needs to emphasis tactics more imo

By: Tei

Tei — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:53:17 +0000

1) Theres a infinite stream of zombies
2) The director is slow to spawn zombies.
3) If you are playing versus, the zombie players are slow to spawn.

As a result, If you can rush, in a versus game, you eat the other team alive. By the time the zombie team “feel” how the game is, your team is already more than half the level away.

Its probably a bad idea for Coop/Hard, but for versus is a ***DESTROYER*** strategy.

By: Psychopomp

Psychopomp — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:33:50 +0000

Why is that in quotes?

By: Psychopomp

Psychopomp — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:31:31 +0000

“The worst part of the game is the fact the strongest way to play is rushing. Cause that is exactly what would get you killed in zombie horror movies. But not in L4D.”

“SOMEONES” never played on Expert