Left 4 Dead nearly half-price this weekend News

So I spend all my money on someones birthday, then everything I've ever wanted all get reduced in price. Bah!

Bargain though, anyone who can run this that doesn't have it needs it.

It's still pretty expensive... I've been wanting to buy it since it came out but I think I'll wait.

£16.19 isn't expensive! I would say trust me, but don't. Try it for free today! No excuse not to at all, unless you forgot to pre-load it or didn't read the article yesterday saying it'd be free.

When I say that's not expensive, I don't mean I disregard that as an amount of money. It's just a good price for a great game :)

@Zaltan:

A few people in my work have said it's still "too expensive" too, they seem to consider it a multiplayer-only game that you won't play very much. I paid £24.99 and find it great fun playing with friends, but cruically the Versus mode is pretty fun with randoms as well so you don't NEED friends to play with.

Try the trial if you haven't already :)

And the Shopto net advert on this article is selling Left4Dead for £13.95 ;D Not exactly a bargain, eh?

Never noticed that Chrono-Kun. You're right, it's not the cheapest thing ever. Is still alright though, considering Shopto have sold out.

I picked it up for £20 at launch and so far it's worked out at just over 9p per hour of play. At that price it's a pretty damn good bargain. It's even cheaper now and some people still think it's expensive!

A ridiculously good price for the best multiplayer game of last year and probably this year too.

Might be better getting it on Xbox though as the EG community seems to be stronger.

"It's still pretty expensive"

No it bloody isn't. L4D is one of the best games of the last few years, and an absolute steal at £16. It might be cheaper elsewhere, but that is even MORE of a bargain.

The AI is good enough that you can enjoy playing this by yourself, but playing with friends really makes the game. That said, word is that most of the strangers you meet playing it and reasonably civil. Maybe tossers don't like co-op?

Is this game worth playing at all in singleplayer mode, or isn't it worth bothering unless you've got friends you can play it with in co-op?

Singleplayer is fun, but probably doesn't have legs... It really is about multiplayer - friends or otherwise...

L4D Tournament of Elitist Destruction?

More than worth it at five times the price.

I wish the 360 version was this cheap :(

One of the worst games i've played in a long time. If you want multiplayer Zombie mayhem then simply download the free mods for Counter-Strike: Source. Perhaps, because none of my friends own L4D, i'm missing out on the true multiplayer experience of L4D; but there's nothing fun in joining a group of French teenagers who monopolise all of the explosives and simply speed-run through the levels. It gets very boring, very quickly. There's virtually no sense of group-mentality. CS:S, on the other hand, requires banding together to succeed as it's very difficult to fight off a horde of Zombies by oneself.

Don't be ridiculous. Those mods don't come anywhere near the polish of Left 4 Dead. Nowhere near.

Oh, breaking news, co-op based game doesn't work very well when playing with a group of random, French-speaking (and I assume you don't speak French) strangers.

There's every sense of group-mentality because, without it, you don't get anywhere in L4D. I defy you to get anywhere on any of the three game modes without working with the other players.

What game were you playing, because it certainly was not L4D.

£13 shopto.net vs £16 for a dload of the extended edition. Sold on the £16 imho.

@Burzum

a) If you don't have any friends with Left 4 Dead then you may not enjoy it as much, that said you WILL find a game with good random team players, not everyone playing it is a selfish dickhead. Same with ANY other game online.

b) You say the zombies are too weak to pose any threat? I take it you're playing on normal or easy then. Crank it up to advanced or even expert then see how long you survive.

c) Yeah, we get it, you love CS. Clearly other game devs can only aspire to it's awesomeness.

Well, if you can guide me to a server where everyone plays as a group and not 'every man for himself' then maybe I will begin to enjoy the game. I just gave it another try a few moments ago, and I just can't help but find it thoroughly boring. Start game. Someone from the group will then immediately race as fast as they can to the safehouse. The rest of the group tries to keep up. Confronted by zombies. Spray and pray. Zombies die with 2-3 shots. More running. More zombies who die after a few shots. 'Leader' gets vomited on by fat Zombie. Spray and pray the next batch of zombies. Run. Get to safehouse. Next level begins. Rinse and repeat. There's virtually no tension as the zombies are too weak to pose much of a threat. There's no sense of dread as one person could easily kill a group of zombies.

In CS:S there's a real battle against the zombies because they can take shit-loads of damage, they are player-controlled and they only have to hit you once to infect you with the 'zombie virus'. Also, the fact that all the players on the server start off as humans, and then one randomly spawns as a zombie, creates paranoia. That buddy who just joined you behind your 'safe' barracade could in fact suddenly spawn into a zombie and infect you too. The thrill of defending yourself up on a high ledge against a horde of player-controlled zombies surpasses anything L4D can offer. I'm sorry, I really wanted to enjoy L4D, but it only managed to deliver a superficial, empty multiplayer experience.

Firstly, maybe part of the problem is that you're not making any attempt to organize your sessions? How successful do you think a co-op game is going to be, any co-op game, with strangers or foreign-speaking strangers? Here's what I did, I played online for a while and when I had a great time with a particular player I added them to my friends list. As I went online more and more, the games i'd play would include these people, which means i'm playing with people who know how to play and don't fuck about so much. You're generalising the entire L4D playerbase based on random pickup games, which is nonsense.

You also don't make any mention of what difficulty level you're playing on, or what Campaign. If you think zombies are 'weak' i'd suggest letting just a few of them have a go at you on Expert mode and see how much health you have left after a second or two.

Also, it seems that youre 100% fixated on the Campaign. Have you even tried Versus or, even better, Survival? Do you know how much Survival differs to the original game-modes? Its an entirely new experience, with no concept of speed-running through the levels. You've not experienced tension or dread quite like what Survival L4D offers, in any other game, when you're 8 mins into a Survival level, with ammo on your Tier 2 weapon running low and an unrelenting horde of zombies doing their best to prevent you from getting away from a handful of Hunters, two Tanks and Smokers that keep pulling survivors out of their defending point. To be backed up against a wall, desperately pushing them away, trying to get a reload done. Its the kind of gameplay that gets your heart going like nothing else i've been gaming for the best part of 25 years.

And, if you think speed-running through Campaign isn't a challenge, why don't you try against player controlled Infected, in Versus mode? Again, its an entirely different ball game.

The stuff you go on about afterwards, with CS:S, is just wishful thinking. Does L4D offer absolutely everything it possibly can? No, it doesn't. I'd also like to see survior bites become infected, turning players when they've been offed. I'd LOVE to see the Source engine allow me to build barricades with objects, allowing groups of players to co-ordinate to lift fridges and sofas to provide more solid defence against zombies breaking through doors. But the point is, all that is fluff on top. Nice fluff, but nothing that takes away from what L4D offers.

Its a sublime product. Polished to the nth degree, with graphics to die for and an atmosphere to go with. That the Survival mode was free is amazing to me. I'd have happily paid 20 quid to buy that single game mode on its own.

Comes down to this. Its a co-op game at heart and as we all know, co-op games are best enjoyed with a group of competent players, preferably on voice comms speaking the same language, who are also friends. I enjoy L4D so much, i've even setup my own dedicated server on a second machine, purely so my friends and I can enjoy it whenever we like without having to use the auto-server select Lobby system (and one of us not being forced to host on the local machine).

There is no "Extended" edition, the DLC is free to everyone, the two versions are the same when both patched up.
The difference is purely £13 for a retail version, or £16 for an immediate download.

^ Also, ShopTo are currently sold out.

@ Burzum09

You really do need to play the campaign mode on Expert. Once you have you'll never go back! One hit from a zombie and you're down 10-20 health. It means you have to work together and watch each others' backs if you're gonna succeed.

@ Miths

It's only worth buying if you'll be playing multiplayer although I wouldn't worry about not having friends to play with. When I started playing I had no-one on my Steam friends list but quickly built up 40-odd people to play with.

TBH, he kinda comes across like a disgruntled PS3 owner. His posting history is almost entirely, game-wise, regards PS3 and since we're not going to see L4D on the PS3...

So, unhappy PS3 owner who can't run L4D on his ageing PC (which can still run the older Source titles)? I can't think of any other reason for the apparent hatred of the game. It has critical and gamer acclaim almost everywhere you look and yet his view is that its 'shit for all the reasons you can square at any online co-op game.

Quite bizarre.

psychokitten - thx for the clarification. Not sold on the download then!!

amv,

Shop To have been out of stock for absolutely ages and its very, very doubtful you'll see retail elsewhere for 13 quid. Get it from Steam for 16 while you have the chance.

See, you are acting like a cock-nosed arrogant prick by directly insulting me simply because I do not share your opinion on L4D. I can run L4D on High graphics with no problems (4GB of RAM, Quad-core etc), and I genuinely couldn't give a shit if L4D was a free download for PS3. I simply don't enjoy the game. The reason most of my recent game purchases are for PS3 is due to the simple fact that most of my friends own PS3s, so it would be foolish to buy CoD: WaW etc on the PC when my friends will only be playing the PS3 version.

I judge games on the experience they offer, and not on whether my opinion conforms to the general consesus of other gamers. I simply find the game vapid, linear and shallow. The addition of enemies such as the Tank and the Hunter tragically undermine the whole 'Zombie Apocalypse' atmosphere I was hoping the game would convey. I hoped that the Survivor mode would deliver that very experience, but it falls flat when juxtaposed with the tense, impending dread that Nazi Zombies offers.

Well, except it's not just my opinion, its popular opinion backed up by critical acclaim, right across the board.

Also, why would you so suddenly switch to commenting on a 6 month old PC game, a format you don't actively buy multiplayer games for any more? A game that you think, and I quote, is "shit" because random online games don't work well with co-op gameplay. A criticism that's levelled at every single co-op game launched to date .

/shrug

All your dislike for the game, prior to your last post, focused purely on one flaw of one game mode. That flaw being that some players like to speed-run Campaign levels. A flaw that's a relatively hot topic on some forums. One might say that you've never played the game and are simply using examples of less-than-stellar tactics to paint an ugly picture of the game.

You still haven't made any comment on the Versus mode and that's because it renders the above completely moot. Try speed-running when you have four player-controlled infected setting up traps. Get. Nowhere. Fast.

You admit that you've no clue what difficulty level you've played it on, thereby rendering all your comments on how 'easy' it is to take on swathes of zombies complete and utter crap and then then you attempt to trash the Survival game mode by saying it doesn't have Nazi Zombies in it. No comment on the various maps, no comment on the various different strategies required, no comment at all on the game itself.

Instead you skirt around it, flapping about superficial stuff that just doesn't matter, like how Nazi Zombies are scarier than 'regular' zombies. Tell me, how many varieties of Nazi Zombies were there in this CS:S mod? What level of model damage was apparent? Could you blast their heads, arms and legs off? Did they have the same level of animation as L4D? Could you clip a Nazi Zombie in the arm and still see it stagger towards you? Did Nazi Zombies prevent you from running away when they were on you? Were you able to push Nazi Zombies away and see them stagger backwards, giving you precious seconds to reload? Did Nazi Zombies put you on the ground then stamp, kick, and claw you to death all the while you being there looking up, desperately trying to get headshots with pistols, giving your fellow player chance to pull you back to your feet? Did Nazi Zombies, when they didn't see you, stagger around fighting amongst themselves, vomiting and moaning and acting all Nazi Zombie like? Could Nazi Zombies tear through walls and doors, seeing well laid plans crashing to the ground? Could Nazi Zombies climb the environment? Could Nazi Zombies be set on fire with well placed gas can traps? Could Nazi Zombies do even a 5th of what the zombies in L4D can do?

Did you have any goals in this CS:S mod? I mean, did you get ranked for how long you lasted for? Was there a global achievement system with some well crafted and devious achievements to gain?

Nope. Didn't think so.

Let me guess. This CS:S mod was nothing more than a variant on the AVP2 Aliens vs Marines game, where all the Marines start out, one of them gets turned into an Alien and the rest of the Marines have to survive for as long as possible but when they get taken down they turn into an Alien as well. Good game, mind. Great game in fact. But no AI and nothing to pad the experience out beyond each game session. In short, nothing at all like L4D.

You comment on the Tank, Hunter, Boomer, Smoker and Witch undermining the whole zombie apocolypse thing, yet you clearly haven't invested any time in researching any of it because there's an option to turn them off, leaving only the zombies to deal with. The entire game is replete with server commands that can radically change the way the game plays. You can tune down Tank damage, you can enable a mode that allows downed survivors to crawl around, you can enable a mode that only allows zombies to be fully taken down with headshots, and on and on it goes. There are people out there, right now, changing L4D into an even more tense, gritty, hectic Romeroified game. What you may have seen (and I still don't believe you've even played the game) so far is the very tip of the iceberg.

When the modders get their heads around the SDK and server variables, we'll be seeing some crazy shit released and I, for one, can't wait to see L4D to go from strength to strength.

you two that are arguing sound like a pair of dickheads. Thank god you aren't playing in the xbox mashups

That is where your argument stumbles, Burzum. They're not zombies in the traditional sense in L4D, they're 'infected'. So yes, kicking and stomping on their prey is probably what they would do. :P

@ Burzum09 - They key to finding a good game is to use the server browser in game (can be enabled with a command line startup string) then join a game in progress with a number of people from the same clan in there. If theyre good and chatty, add as friends, and when they next start a game they might invite. I've got a large number of regular players who are all chatty and friendly now; never a bad game with randoms again

Hey, it was a retort to your comment that you don't agree with my opinion. I was simply saying that its not just my opinion and in actual reality, a hell of a lot of other people agree with me, gamers and reviewers alike.

/shrug

LOL! Survival mode throws everything at you from the offset and doesn't escalate as it progresses? And theres no management of weaponry?! With those single statements, you've just invalidated any claim that you have any clue what you're talking about.

Enjoy your Nazi Zombies, sir. I actually already have a Steam friends list full of people who know what they're doing on L4D, because i've actually made the effort to pick and choose who I can rely on. As opposed to dumbly hitting the Lobby and landing with randoms, then complaining co-op isn't very co-operative...

you two that are arguing sound like a pair of dickheads. Thank god you aren't playing in the xbox mashups

Fuck me. If that's not the kettle calling the pot black, I don't know what is.

At least we're having a discussion that doesn't boil down to shouting "GHEY GHEY GHEY" down the mic.....

I think the problem lies as thus: Burzum's not played the game enough, and Roper's played it too much. Now STFU.

I think the problem lies as thus: Burzum's not played the game enough, and Roper's played it too much. Now STFU.

More like he's not played it at all.

How can anyone who's actually done Survival not know that the waves get more and more horrific as time progresses?

How can anyone who's actually done Survival not know that its vital to place traps using cans and canisters, and conserve ammo on primary weapons/molotovs/piplebombs until later down the line?

He came in here with ulterior motives. By his own admission he doesn't do multiplayer on PC because PS3 is where all his friends are at. So why then drop into a PC thread, 6 months after game launch, to throw shit at everyone? Just because I happened to chime in and not let him ruin the comments on one of the best games this side of the year, that doesn't mean i've played it 'too much'.

Haha, everyone who plays L4D, irrespective of platform, is looking at your "its just a spray and pray game" comment and laughing their arses off.

Oops, i'm on Ignore now. I lose =(

Its too expensive IMO because I've no money at all!

That's some sound too expensive logic Zaltan :) Indeed, if even Cost > What You Have, it's too much. Time to hit the freeware!

I did enjoy the free Friday though, but I prefer a pad for L4D.

We might as well close all threads on Left 4 Dead. All we're ever doing is trying to make PS3 fanboys jealous apparantly. We couldn't possibly enjoy the game. Oh no. SNORE.

Burzums talking pish, this game is absolute quality.

/ loves L4D, makes jealous PS3 owners cry in the process, offers soul to Valve as thanks, plays more L4D....

That interchange between Burzum and George Roper has to be one of the most retarded things I've seen in a while, with the source of retardation being quite apparent from Burzum. The "insecure 360 owner" comment, and placing somebody who disagrees with him on ignore kinda seals it.

/is in danger of getting sucked into a flame war.

If this is the most retarded thing you've seen in a while, you should(n't) really hang around other comment threads. They both presented themselves at least somewhat reasonably, not just purely retarded fanboy shit like in 99% of these comment threads. From what I've played (admittedly not too much), I'd have to agree with both of them a bit - I do think L4D is overrated. But saying it should have been a "Free mod. At best." is a bit much...

I haven't played L4D much though despite purchasing it ages ago. Mainly because like Burzum, I don't know anyone who'd play it with me on the PC, and I have absolutely no intention of playing it on a console. I'm sure it would be approximately 10,000 times better if I wasn't to join a server with a bunch of idiot kids who jump down your throat for any little mistake (making it difficult for a new player like myself), etc. Shame there don't seem to be too many PC gamers on EG, and the few there are don't really play together. Ah well.

EG posters use the ignore button, or threat of ignore way too often. What do you honestly expect to gain from ignoring a fellow member?

Then posting to say you have ignored them, childish is the only way to describe it.

My opinion:

Singleplayer - boring after you've played online, the PC AI all waits around for you to take the lead so it feels a bit forced
Co-op - wonderful, just wonderful. I've had a small scattering of games with rush tactics players, but the rest have players who have 'unwritten rules' burnt into their brains and know to play tactically and as a team to win. I've got faith in randoms, I've played with great battles of people on Warhawk so know people can get it together to play properly. Stepping up to Advanced gives the game a real kick. The only game I've played with actual co-ordinated people is on Killzone 2.
Versus - the novelty of playing as infected wore off rapidly, I wouldn't play this again. As the survivors, its a bit cack when all that comes at you is a load of hunter spam.
Survival - not tried yet as every time I logged on recently, Steam was having a hissy. Plus I want a new graphics card before I touch anything PC wise, new monitor, new resolution = moar power!

I love the game purely for that co-op mode. I can see people booting the thing up wishing to have something story driven, cinematic etc being disappointed. Refreshing niche in the multiplayer world. However, I do see this as being a HL2 mod like CounterStrike and DoD:S. As such, the £13 or so it was a while back from Steam, was just about the right price. Full game price? No.