CatFangs806 said:
Didn't the first game sell better on 360? |
no
CatFangs806 said:
Didn't the first game sell better on 360? |
no


I really liked L4D, but quickly grew tired of it. There really isn't a lot of depth to it. There really isn't a single player campaign, it's more of a premise than anything. Of course the gameplay is fun, but it doesn't have the replay value of other full-title releases. I think L4D2 will just be more of the same.
By the way, it is a f#$king crime that Uncharted is less than 90 on metacritic.
Thanks for the input, Jeff.
| Machina-AX said: You complain when I don't reply so.... It's on my list. Happy? :p |
Depends if I beat you in achievements on L4D2 ^^
| Machina-AX said: Not happening. |
Pssh, we came close. This is going to be my only full game this christmas so I'll be playing it like mad 
Because the game is more like Left4Dead-redux. To be honest, it feels like it's what Left4Dead should've been in the first place, but with the first all we got was a couple of (cool) game modes that didn't even work across all maps, requiring major patches after release.
They barely fixed the first game before rushing out a sequel. The first game should've been FINISHED upon release, with anything coming out after that fact being DLC that actually added to the gameplay. Instead they rushed out the first, promised massive support for it post-launch, then rushed out a sequel. This is totally uncharacteristic of Valve's behavior.
Hell, this makes Activision look good. At least the Call of Duty games are finished upon release, with DLC usually just adding more maps. Of course, each Call of Duty title actually has a two year dev time.
| Skeeuk said: its because its just a coop game. had it had a fully fleshed out campain i guess it would be much more looked forward to, i expect it to sell very well though. |
Exactly! Just like LBP was for me. Man, that game was fun for a few hours, but that was the quickest rental return my gamefly account had ever seen.
I expected it to sell very well though.
As for L4D, I do like playing it locally, but I'm not that into online, so it's not a huge game for me.
That said, I'm sure it will be one of the best reviewed games this Xmas, and sell very well, so why care? The reason it doesn't get mentioned a lot is because it's a 360 exclusive, and this site, along with many, many, many others are largely inhabited by PS3 only owners who look for any chance to "forget" a 360 exclusive, and in doing so, marginalize it.
Guess who is doing that in this thread.
I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.
NO NO, NO NO NO.
| haxxiy said: Because it is, uh, four maps of co-op mindless zombie killing? No offense, but I'm afraid L4D will follow the example of GH and many other milked-to-death franchises. |
The reason your post is incorrect, is because you're talking about a Valve game. If you don't know who they are, look them up.
I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.
NO NO, NO NO NO.
Its my on my list. Valve has never made a bad game and this one will be great as-well.
The first game wasn't as hyped as its sales imply either, this will sell well regardless of how many people on a forum put it on their list of "most wanted" games.
| FootballFan said: ye, Ratchet and Clank is in the same boat, sinking before its set off..... ![]() |
L4D will sell assloads, Rachet won't.
I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.
NO NO, NO NO NO.