Left 4 Dead 2 Discussion

Left 4 Dead 2 Trainer

Trainer Tools and Resources

Request More Trainer Options
0 option(s) for voting
Request Trainer Update
3 report(s) filed
Boost Trainer Update Priority for Left 4 Dead 2
Trainer Update NOT BOOSTED

Message Board for PC version

Signup   Message Boards Home   Newest Posts   My Favorite Boards   My Threads
Page 3 of 4   •  First Page  •  Previous Page  •   Next Page  •   Last Page
Signup or Login to Post
POLL: Was it worth it to you?
hustenzuckerl  posted on Apr 22, 2010 11:59:29 PM - Report post

Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.
Send a message to hustenzuckerl
bought it today for € 20,- so yes now its worth it
Prankster_911  posted on Apr 30, 2010 9:15:47 PM - Report post

Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.
Send a message to Prankster_911
originally posted by sanctionedforce

I vote no for several reasons.

Most of this is in defense of my opinion and directed at Zeth_Durron's difficult-to-swallow "argument" to the validity of releasing Left 4 Dead 2 as a separate game.

The look, feel, action, environment, goals, etc. are exactly the same as the first game. There are some differences; none of which could individually require a separate game to implement.

The idea that bugs are a valid reason for making l4d2 a new and separate game is silly. The elimination of bugs is the main reason for patching any application. (Why should a poorly implemented DLC capability be corrected when one can disguise a potential expansion as a completely separate game?) If you'll recall, the single player campaign is called a campaign (ironic isn't it). Some RTS's come with many campaigns; others, a few; still others, only one. Quite a few games offer the ability to add campaigns, via 3rd party mods, expansions, etc.

You referenced the DLC for Fallout, some of which didn't even (technically) happen in the same world as the original campaign (simulations, spaceships, et al), but they were still DLC and built on the core mechanics of the original game.

L4D2 is NO different. The director 2.0 you tout is no different than another set of scripts run when a level is played through. This is not a difficult task for a game designer to implement. This level automatically runs this set of scripts, plot data, actors, weapons, models, etc., etc.. Unless the designers were complete retards, it is no problem at all to change (with the original tools, of course) what set of scripts and resources are used in any given level.

Now if there needed to be significant engine changes in order to facilitate the depth of new features they planned for the new campaign, then they could easily have versioned up to a 1.5 or something to communicate the significant differences between the feature-set of the original and the updated in preparation for an expansion DLC.

Sure there are new weapons, and melee. Arguably these should have been in the first already. Why not patch this into the 1.5 as a bonus of getting the expansion? then customers could use new weapons in the original campaign, melee, etc.

Sure there are new locations, new gameplay types. Level differences and scripts. Absolutely not a reason for a new game.

A new UI, on the other hand, is pretty much required if you're going to make a new game. Mainly to address complaints and prevent confusion among players about which game they might be playing. It, in-and-of-itself, is no reason at all to make a new game. UI's go through several revisions during testing anyway. An expansion could change the UI, if only to signify it's presence or address problems with a prior one.

For the most part, Left 4 Dead is exactly the same as Left 4 Dead 2, except for a few superfluous differences: characters, locations, and features available to the player. Any expansion, DLC could add those differences. The plot is the same: zombie apocalypse. The mechanics are the same: kill zombies, using weapons and teamwork to survive. The universe is identical, save for different locations in the same country. There are new features in l4d2; this does not a new game make. New characters and locations do not make a new game, either. A new chapter or campaign, perhaps.

I can see doing it on the basis of extreme quality differences such as: 3x spoken dialog; higher-res textures and models on everything; 4x as many polys everywhere; new, more realistic, natural environment algorithms all around; use anything in the environment as a weapon, even the enemy. I would consider at least 2 of any of those necessary to qualify for a new game, versus an medium-larger expansion. Realistically, L4D2 didn't come close on any of those points.

I hold fast to the idea that Valve released it as a separate game simply to make more money. DLC could probably fetch $30 tops from customers, while a new game would go for $50. Less work for them, for more money in return. Let's call it greed—or capitalism, if you prefer.

Are you for real? If you think it’s so easy to patch a game, then you go do it. What do you think of CoD, Halo, God of War and Gears of War? All of these games have sequels that are very similar, but did they put it all into a massive bit of DLC? And what if the plot is similar? Does that mean that all except the modern warfare cods [which go together anyway] should be patches? How much room would that take anyway?

Even if it was DLC, how many other games charge more than that for expansions on PC? 'characters, locations, and features available to the player' sounds like a lot to me, you think different? You make a game and 2 completely different characters, try to put them together and see how you do, maybe then you wont bag the directors and the people who made the game so quickly.

Also, this kind of update would screw all of the original maps because of the director AI. Imagine a map where cars randomly pop-up and make the map impossible from the very start by blocking paths.

'they were still DLC and built on the core mechanics of the original game.'~~ works fine when the DLC doesn’t have to change the game mechanics.

[Edited by Prankster_911, 4/30/2010 9:17:09 PM]

Gen_Nukem  posted on Apr 30, 2010 11:27:14 PM - Report post

Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.
Send a message to Gen_Nukem
dont know yet for l4d2 but l4d 1 yes becouz some gave it to me
78stonewobble  posted on May 04, 2010 4:59:26 AM - Report post

Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.
Send a message to 78stonewobble
Now this is a very subjective question.

In my humble oppinion I think both Left 4 dead 1 and 2 were worth their original price (maybe a liiiitle lower than initial pricing in retrospect).

This is all down to the amount of fun playtime I've gotten out of both games. Even considering that 9 outta 10 people playing online are IDIOTS! (TM).

But looking at both games side by side L4D1 actually feels way more "polished" IMO. More streamlined with lesser weapons, graphics and SI. In that sence L4D2 feels more experimental and in a way "messy" with all the gore, melee and lots of SI.

Well back on the topic. L4D2 is too big as it is IMO to have been an addon to L4D1. If it were it would have been even smaller and even more "boring" with less playtime added.

After all I kinda like it the way it is.

Gen_Nukem  posted on May 22, 2010 3:57:45 PM - Report post

Current rank: 1 Star. Next Rank at 100 Posts.
Send a message to Gen_Nukem
as others haved sed you will have alot of bugs that they whould have to fix l4d has been out for over 1 hear and they have not fixed all the bugs in it if they tried to make l4d2 dlc for l4d with the new ai mite have coused someney bugs it mite have couesd l4d to crash so l4d2 shoud have been a seperte game they could have gave the optchtion to us the orignal servivers in l4d2
cliffro  posted on May 22, 2010 5:02:58 PM - Report post

Send a message to cliffro
I got the first for free when a friend bought a 4-Pack. I paid $29.99USD for L4D2 so the price was just fine.

[Edited by cliffro, 5/22/2010 5:03:33 PM]

Xavier_Price  posted on May 22, 2010 5:48:33 PM - Report post

Current rank: 1.5 Stars. Next Rank at 500 Posts.
Send a message to Xavier_Price
Yes, and a few points.

1: They put a lot of time and effort into the game, and money, thus they want a return on that investment, so they're going to charge a little more for it.

2: By making an all new game, they could change many of the engine and gameplay mechanics in ways that a simple DLC wouldn't without. And those that can might as well be a new game, because of reason 1.

3: There is a whole new story, and while it ties in to the first story, other than the zombies, it's more of a hat-tip to the first game.

4: New characters, new zombies, new missions, new maps, new modes of play, new weapons, including a whole new type of weapons (melee)

5: You just don't want to spend more money on a game than on a DLC, but they spent a lot of money trying, so you're going to have to just suck it up. The point of making a game and selling it isn't just to make entertainment, but to make money, and anyone thinking otherwise is a moron. The point of doing anything and charging for it is to make money. If you think it's too much money, then you should look into budgeting your own video game and company. It's pricey.

Summery: Yes, it is actually fun and worth the $30 (not 50) spent on it. It expands much of the gameplay, adds new weapons and play types, has a new story and new characters that aren't just rehashes of the old ones, and actually tries to deliver the fun of the old game while adding something new and initiative.

Does it all work? No, melee is strong, but a pistol is better in most cases. However, there is something cathartic to knocking a zombie's head off with an electric guitar.

SIL3NT-DE4TH  posted on May 22, 2010 5:48:50 PM - Report post

Current rank: 1.5 Stars. Next Rank at 500 Posts.
Send a message to SIL3NT-DE4TH
Not worth it. And never had l4d1

But i will say. THe engine is the same. its just brighter.
and if it is a different engine the changes in the VISUAL would be Very Slim due to the fact the hl2 Engine and the orange box engin at the time and when the game came out Was not that big of a difference.

Css = hl2 egin. Css-Beta = Orange Box Engin. both the Sorce engin. its jsut been updated. Thus because it took years for it to come out 2005 = hl2 - 2007 = Orange box

^ Css Beta.

[Edited by SIL3NT-DE4TH, 5/22/2010 5:51:11 PM]

Page 3 of 4   •  First Page  •  Previous Page  •   Next Page  •   Last Page
  Post Reply
Go to page: 1  2  3  4 
All times are (GMT -06:00) Central Time (US & Canada). Current time is 3:29:19 AM
Cheat Happens Premium
* Access PC trainers and exclusive content
* Updated game trainers and cheats daily
* Get notified when new cheats are added
* Request which games get new trainers
* Priority support with any problem
Game Review
Latest Trainer
Left 4 Dead 2 Trainer
• Unlimited Team Health
• No Reload
• Unlimited Ammo
+ 2 more options
  Show all Cheats & Trainers