A lot has been said around Talking about Games (TAG) about Left 4 Dead 2 (L4D2) recently, from the review by Patrick to the discussion on the Talking about Gamers Game of the Year discussion (Episode 27). Many negative things have been said about the game, particularly in respect to the original Left 4 Dead. This review will respond to those criticisms, in many cases offering an alternative perspective.

Let me start by acknowledging that both Patrick, Robbie, and Forgetfool (didn't play much with the other members of the Talking about Gamers podcast so I'm not sure about their time with L4D) put a lot of time into L4D so their opinions can in no way be described as uninformed. However, I don't agree with many of their opinions so this will serve as a response from someone else who has spent a lot of time with L4D and L4D2.

(Did Valve let it all go south with Left 4 Dead 2?)

In his review Patrick acknowledges some improvements with L4D2. But even within that acknowledgement there are hints of discontent with the increased gore and "too much 'new'" content. But the first direct complaint is with the design of the levels, noting that they "are essentially a series of gimmicks" citing several elements as examples including "the new crescendo events . . . designed to keep players moving forward." 

In one sense I cannot disagree with his statements. Yes, the new crescendo events that require a sprint to turn off an alarm are a gimmick. The finale of Dead Center is a gimmick to introduce you to scavenge mode. Multiple wandering witches in Heavy Rain are a gimmick to show how difficult it can be when the witch isn't simply sitting in one location. My problem is how is this different from the original L4D (or any other video game). The crescendo events in the original video game were a gimmick to prepare you for the last stand. Tanks are a gimmick to prevent you from sprinting through levels. 

In contrast to Patrick's opinion, I find the new material in L4D2 to be welcome additions. The new crescendo events provide some needed variety to what was becoming a routine exercise. Even in the original L4D many people would trigger the crescendo event in No Mercy 3 (the scissor lift) and then sprint back past the gas station or forward to the warehouse. The difference was that once they reached a location they would corner up the same as if they were by the elevator. The running for an alarm through a significant portion of the rush does increase the difficulty but also provides additional excitement. It also requires a more thought out approach for the higher difficulties and better resource management. Items like jars of boomer bile are critical assets in these situations and therefore should not be used for normal rushes.

With respect to Patrick's complaints about controlling the Spitter and the Charger in versus mode I understand the frustration with the Charger. Nearly everyone I have talked to struggled with learning to use the Charger. However, once learned the Charger is a satisfying choice in the special infected. The Spitter seems odd since many people are complaining that the Spitter is over-powered for versus mode. Someone using the Spitter effectively can really wreck havoc if the survivors are fighting a horde or someone has been incapacitated. For me personally the Jockey, the one new special infected that Patrick seems to like, is the most frustrating.

What this says to me is that Valve did a good job designing the new specials. Much like the original three players of different styles will find themselves preferring a particular one of the specials. I still do not care much for the hunter but I know others who seem to love playing as a hunter. I'm not overly fond of the boomer and love playing as a smoker. Other people I know absolutely love playing as a boomer. Likewise I suspect those who like the Jockey may not care much for the Spitter, and vice versa. This opens the game up to players of different styles.

(A hint of scavenge mode in the campaign)

Without going into a lot of detail on most of his other statements, my response would be similar. He says that the magnum is a clear choice. I know others who feel similar and while I like the magnum, for me personally it is not worth giving up a good melee  weapon (a bat, axe, katana) for the magnum. Sure doing so, especially at the start of Dead Center where there is no primary weapon, means you are dependent on your teammates to take out boomers and other infected that you do not want to get in close. But that's the point of L4D and L4D2. This is a true cooperative experience. I take a melee and you take the magnum - I have to fight off the hordes and you take out long range targets. A similar balance with the other two players and we are in good shape.

The discussion in the Talking about Gamers podcast starts at about the 35 minute mark. Robbie's initial comment is that it is not fun and one thing I can't disagree with is whether or not someone finds a game fun. The difficulty has been increased over L4D. The changes that make it so were intentional. But as Robbie noted it is not impossible. Some levels are long and perhaps a break point somewhere in these levels would be beneficial.

What's interesting about the complaints is that before the game came out everyone was concerned about the game would not be different enough and the complaints now is that it is too different. I think both complaints are too extreme. The game still feels like L4D to me. The specials have always come in groups of three. The difference is in the original you knew a boomer, hunter, and smoker would come. Now you might get a spitter, hunter, and charger. You might even get two smokers and a boomer or two jockeys and hunter.

But here's the big thing, aside from Forgetfool, for a game was voted #5 by TAG members for Game of the Year it sounded like it was voted #1 for most disappointing game of the year. I understand that only three people had played the game but it just seemed odd that the primary talk was negative for the TAG community #5 game of the year so hopefully this has added some balance.

(I wonder what's waiting around that corner?)

Also, there will be more posts about L4D2 including some Tips & Tricks posts. There are some definite changes in strategies from L4D that will be helpful to go over but many basic techniques remain the same. Balance in weapon choices and sticking together will get you far. 

So the  game is better than a C-. It is at least as good if not superior to L4D. If it has a problem it is that it may not be as accessible as the original because most new players will not start on easy which could be wise. But even for someone who has never played L4D I think L4D2 will be an enjoyable gaming experience. If you need people to play with, there are a few regular players here so feel free to hit us up. We're generally on around 9:00 EST and I'll be glad to hop on earlier if you want to play.