L4D1 is now completely obsolete, since even the old gameplay is emulated with the mutations. Not sure if theres any point in buying it now.
[QUOTE=Bazsil;41303362]L4D1 is now completely obsolete, since even the old gameplay is emulated with the mutations. Not sure if theres any point in buying it now.[/QUOTE]
They did promise it wouldn't be obsolete, but in light of recent revelations about the company that came out they probably didn't care about L4D1 after 2 and back peddled when people complained.
I'd like to see more on Holdout
[editline]3rd July 2013[/editline]
just played Holdout, holy shit is it a cool gamemode on it's own right- maybe if they announced it better and the Mutations system wasn't ridiculous to set up more people would be playing L4D2 atm
That mutation where if you get incapped you die, is a fucking adrenaline simulator. I can't see myself playing the normal campaign anymore.
I'm personal friends with the maker of Boomer Peril, Vicious Infected and Stranded. He's an amazing guy and his work in coding is amazing. Glad to see his work is seeing a little reputation.
Why shouldn't L4D1 be obsolete, isn't it a good thing that the series is progressing?
[QUOTE=Bazsil;41303362]L4D1 is now completely obsolete, since even the old gameplay is emulated with the mutations. Not sure if theres any point in buying it now.[/QUOTE]
I still want the L4D1 survival maps.
[QUOTE=zombojoe;41308646]Why shouldn't L4D1 be obsolete, isn't it a good thing that the series is progressing?[/QUOTE]
Because L4D1 had a certain sort of simplistic charm to it.
When the game first came out, it was universally acclaimed because Valve pretty much showed the gaming world that you can have a shitload of fun with very minimal, simple gameplay. As long as your game is extremely well executed, you can have a blast with the social and dynamic aspects of stress in a survival situation. L4D1 hit the nail on the end, which was why it was so well received during release. L4D2 took that simplicity, and tried too hard to expand on it. The narrative became bigger, when it didn't need to. The characters became more realistic, when they should've stayed simplistic. Valve started expanding the L4D2 universe, and tried to make the series into something much greater than it should've been. I mean, love it or hate it, "The Sacrifice" comic doesn't quite capture the Left 4 Dead 1 survivors. The series was never suppose to be about military conspiracies and moral ambiguity; it was always about a.) a zombie apocalypse, with b.) your friends.
Plus, there was this perfect balance between fast-paced and slow-paced levels in the original. Virtually every crescendo involved staying in one place and waiting for your pathway to ready up, then recuperating and trying to move on. It created a culture within the game where you needed to stand your ground, study entrances/exits, and know where your supplies are ahead of time. That sort of tactical focus is much more dynamic than L4D2, which sacrifices L4D1's barricade-esque finales for rushing, huge levels, and, overall, improvisation.
I think L4D1 really encouraged players to be careful and remain tactical. L4D2 focuses on rushing around and getting from Point A to Point B before things get any worse. I'm confident L4D3 will merge the best of both worlds, but I think it's pretty sad that L4D1 was a strong game that completely died once L4D2 tried to bridge the gap. And don't get me wrong, I love L4D2. And I don't think Valve ever meant to kill L4D1. But there were some pretty clear mistakes made in L4D2 that changed the entire dynamic of the L4D series, which is why it's taken Valve a long time to finally iron out another sequel.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
