Left 4 Dead Review - Horrifically Gripping and Satisfying... - Poland.US

M337ING - 399 days 21 hours ago

Me neither. This game is going to be huge! :D

Agree(8) | Disagree(2) | Report

blindfromthesun - 399 days 21 hours ago

I haven't heard the opposite was true, however both version are almost identical. The PC will always have a slight graphical advantage in resolution but the developers kept it even feature wise. Personally, I will never choose keyboard and mouse over controller.

If your planing on getting it for the PC, consider getting the $99 dollar ultra Valve deal. It has every Valve game ever made.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

Perjoss - 399 days 20 hours ago

am I the only one that feels that:

1. this just feels like a good mod, not really a full game title (pc gamers might know what i mean)

2. zombies are creepy 'cos they move slow and there are lots of them, not running at you at light speed.

Tried the demo and I was not all that impressed.

Agree(6) | Disagree(9) | Report

blindfromthesun - 399 days 20 hours ago

Not fair, you completely changed your comment. Your original comment spoke about how you were going to get L4D on your PC rather than 360...because it was the superior version. Why did you change your comment and decide you want it on PS3 instead of your PC? Sounds fishy to me.

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report

Kigmal - 399 days 20 hours ago

Damn it! I'm still on the fence for this game. I'm kind of broke right now but it's so good.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

funkysolo - 399 days 18 hours ago

If going by the demo of L4D, I can tell you that cod is the better game...You can play the whole campaign with 3 other friends and battle it out to see who gets most points..L4D is an okay game but I played the demo like 4 times and after a couple of times I don't see the game having alot of rep lay value..WAW has 4 player co-op and the multi..I would wait for the bargain bin

Agree(1) | Disagree(5) | Report

No Way - 399 days 17 hours ago

So, uhm, you think slow moving zombies are scarier then fast moving zombies? Sorry, but I beg to differ..

If a toddler threw a football at your face, it wouldn't be scary. But, if Tom Brady threw a football at your face, then that's down right scary.

See my point?

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Fanboi - 399 days 15 hours ago

Slow moving zombie is only scary if the controls sucks and you can't move while aiming. L4D isn't as scary as Dead Space, because your character can move around like a CS operative but it is a hell lot more fun. As an online game the formula works.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

Perjoss - 399 days 15 hours ago

i didn't use the word scary, big difference.

Agree(0) | Disagree(3) | Report

No Way - 399 days 14 hours ago

You're correct, you did not.

So, tell me.. what's the difference? Either way, I believe fast moving zombies are.. creepier than slow moving zombies.

And, plus, you also mention that they are creepy cause there are a lot of them. Uhm, go get spit on by a Boomer, and tell me there is not a lot of zombies in your face.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

N4PS3G - 399 days 21 hours ago

" On the 360, the game runs at a less-impressive clip of 30 FPS, suffering from some lower-quality textures and character models "

You should read the review again ...or maybe read it for the first time..not the actual score only

it clearly says that the game is not technically mind-blowing, but artistically strong and well-optimized

Agree(12) | Disagree(3) | Report

thor - 399 days 21 hours ago

This game is going to get a free pass despite the facts:
It's ONLY a co-op mode, effectively. That's less content than most games out there.
The graphics are dated (and have issues on 360? That's pretty shocking considering they are bad to start with; I'd have thought the 360 could handle it easily)

Whereas games with better graphics and more content are panned.

How many reviews were there of Mirror's Edge criticising it because it was a short game?
R2's abundance of content was overlooked by many so they could nitpick the graphics and SP campaign.

Agree(9) | Disagree(6) | Report

GWAVE - 399 days 21 hours ago

@ N4PS3G

Perhaps you should read my post again. I mentioned that the 9.5/10 for graphics is a travesty. The fact that the author said "On the 360, the game runs at a less-impressive clip of 30 FPS, suffering from some lower-quality textures and character models" and yet still gave the graphics a 9.5/10 is only further proof that I am correct.

I have nothing against L4D. I am thoroughly enjoying the demo and I'd say that it's going to be a lot of fun. However, the graphics deserve no excuse whatsoever. The graphics are bad and that's all there is to it.

Agree(7) | Disagree(7) | Report

SL1M DADDY - 399 days 21 hours ago

They are all over the place in terms of grading scale that it shows a great level of one of two things, either bias or idiocity. I figure both are not what I need to be listening to when picking my games so I pick for myself and rent then buy the ones I like enough to drop the bucks for.

Agree(3) | Disagree(4) | Report

Dmitry Orlov - 399 days 21 hours ago

I think problems with 360 could come up only in case of poor optimisation. You said it yourself - the graphics are dated.

Agree(4) | Disagree(3) | Report

Cenobia - 399 days 21 hours ago

I also feel this game won't age well on the 360. It's basically just the same game played over and over but with friends (as far as I know, I only played the PC demo). It's fun, but without the new levels and mods like the PC version will get, I'm not sure it will last very long.

Maybe being a zombie will add some longevity to it, I don't know. I only played the demo level and half a co-op game (I have no idea why, but I couldn't connect to any game). I guess I just wish the demo gave us a better taste of what the full game was.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

thor - 399 days 21 hours ago

GWAVE you're right about the graphics. How on earth can they give a 9.5 to the graphics? That means that the graphics cannot be improved by much.. but I've played L4D on PC at max settings and there are a LOT of console games that look better. If the 360 version suffers from some problems as well then 9.5 is waaay too high.

Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report

GWAVE - 399 days 21 hours ago

@ thor

It's true, but look at all the disagrees you and I are getting. :^D

It seems some fanboys have good enough eyesight to point out a random jaggie in a random pre-alpha Killzone 2 screenshot, yet their eyesight isn't good enough to see a cardboard box magically appear 5 feet in front of them while they play L4D. It's so sad.

As I have said, I really enjoy L4D. The co-op is a blast. However, as a GAMER, I'm not going to give concessions to a game that has poor graphics. Will I play it? Heck yeah. Will I praise the graphics or be impressed by them? Heck no, and any true gamer should be honest enough with himself/herself to accept that L4D is severely lacking in the graphical department.

A 9.5/10 for graphics is a blatant "free pass".

(Oh, and before anyone mentions "art direction", art direction is a matter of opinion and should be a very minor factor when scoring graphics. Art direction - no matter how excellent - doesn't make a bad texture look good nor a choppy framerate look smooth. Good art direction does not equal good graphics, unless you're willing to admit that Okami has better "graphics" than Gears of War due to the stronger art direction...)

Agree(5) | Disagree(3) | Report

M337ING - 399 days 20 hours ago

You could argue that Okami was more pleasing to the eye. I understand that Gears 2 has the more advanced engine, but the amount of aliasing and flaws present on a large HD tv just made it somewhat of an eyesore to look at...

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

GWAVE - 399 days 18 hours ago

@ Maxned

Why does it deserve AAA? If it's not a AAA game, why give it a AAA score? If the game isn't AAA, will it reduce your enjoyment of it? I don't think a game should get AAA just because it can be fun. Plenty of games are fun and I can recommend a huge list of non-AAA games that I think are worth playing.

But a game should be rated fairly. Graphics are a part of that rating. Bad graphics shouldn't get a free pass. It reminds me of GTA4 reviews where -- despite mediocre textures, pop-in, framerate drops, etc -- it got 10/10 for graphics from most reviewers because....uh....um....did they even give a reasonable explanation?

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

thewhoopimen - 399 days 18 hours ago

Personally i view it as a very solid fun game that's great to play and exciting but not in the 9 territory b/c it doesn't push any envelopes.
- 3D engine is dated/ Graphics are par/subpar for this generation
- Scope is very focused but very limited
- Coop/Vs mode only(It's not even considered a complete game... how does it get full AAA scores).
- Music/Sound is average (Typical FPS fare

8.5 maybe 8.9... but it is not a AAA more like a A/B+

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

No Way - 399 days 14 hours ago

The graphics are not THAT bad.. Sure, they are not great, but they are good.
There are far more games out there that look worse than Left 4 Dead.

I don't think I will ever understand why so many people pay sooooo much attention to graphics nowadays.. And, reviews.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Traveler - 399 days 13 hours ago

I agree that the game does not deserve a 9.5 in the graphics department. But the problem I have with your comments is that you are exaggerating how bad the game looks. It makes you sound like someone with a bias that just wants to hate on it. The graphics are not the best I have ever seen, but they aren't bad at all. It has a real-time lighting engine, tons of enemies on screen at once and decent textures and effects. All things told, I would put it about on par with Resistance 2. Do you think Resistance 2's graphics are "severely lacking in the graphical department"?

The biggest problem I saw with the demo was the aliasing. I don't like aliasing. But other than that it looks great.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

ceedubya9 - 399 days 21 hours ago

That's cold man! But I feel you. My gaming needs are going to be met, even if someone else has to suffer a bit for Christmas.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

ceedubya9 - 399 days 21 hours ago

Hopefully the demo was only an early look, and it will seem much more polished for the full game. Even still, its lots of fun and you never know what you'll run into for every new playthrough.

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

Jinxstar - 399 days 21 hours ago

Yeah I already have it preloaded via steam. Great demo. Can't wait for more myself.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

LeonSKennedy4Life - 399 days 21 hours ago

Not true.

Anyone with a PC can run this game. The specs are extremely low. I seriously doubt someone with a PS3 doesn't have a PC...especially one that can't run Left4Dead.

Also, why play this when we already have the zombie counter strike mods???

Agree(3) | Disagree(11) | Report

N4PS3G - 399 days 21 hours ago

Stop hating LeonSkenndy

I have a macbook ..and it can't even run spore ...soo ..i don't think everyone's pc is going to run this

so sit down

enjoy an awesome console exclusive on the xbox 360 :)

Agree(7) | Disagree(4) | Report

Jinxstar - 399 days 21 hours ago

Well I traded in my 360 to upgrade my PC because I want to play Diablo 3. I can run L4D just fine and loved the demo. Spore fyi has incredibly high specs especially for a lap top. not everyone can play it but I myself like all the options i get and the cheaper price and free online and everything else... In the end it made much more sense for me to do it...

Just to clarify it is not a 360 exclusive like most other games on 360. Anyone with a good PC can play all the games... Maybe at a later release date but with superior graphics, dedicated servers and not pay to play... Steam also has much cheaper games then the store...

Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report

GWAVE - 399 days 21 hours ago

Yet due to some sort of arcane magical formula, I'm SOMEHOW playing this 360 exclusive on my PC! Oh my!

Oh wait. I forgot. 360 fanboys only care about "beating" the PS3. They don't care about the video game industry as a whole.

Agree(4) | Disagree(4) | Report

Fanboi - 399 days 15 hours ago

This 360 "exclusive" will be getting patches months after they appear on the PC. This 360 "exclusive" will force it's owners to pay $15 for official DLC content that will be completely free on the PC. This 360 "exclusive" will be the last to get new maps because user created maps and content will only appear on the PC.

Finally like all 360 games, this 360 "exclusive" look and play best on the PC.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

Traveler - 399 days 13 hours ago

LOL. Yes we know, every PS3 owner just happens to own a game-capable PC, right? Puhleese. Out of all my friends only about two of them own a PC capable of running most modern games and even those guys play most of their games on consoles. You only have to look at software sales between PCs and consoles to see that consoles are far more popular these days. And yet, we're supposed to believe that all PS3 gamers have a gaming rig? I'm sorry, but that is ridiculous. Most off the shelf PCs wouldn't even run this game or even if they did it would look like crap. Just because someone has a computer to get on the internet, doesn't mean they can play most modern games. The laptop I am writing this on, for example, couldn't even begin to run Left 4 Dead to a degree that would be worth playing.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Jinxstar - 399 days 20 hours ago

Ok... First define AAA. Second tell me how many. Third understand that it's all opinion. Opinion in that some may like Fable 2 and some might not. Others may love LBP some wont. Lastly please realize that your ignorance is astounding in a comment like that. Love your 360 all you want but realize that almost every decent game that has come to the 360 this year will also be on PC if not right now soon enough but you need to realize that LBP, KZ2, GOW3, Infamous and many others will remain exclusive to the PS3 and not be "Console exclusives" Like many 360 games...

Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report

funkysolo - 399 days 18 hours ago

.The graphics are outdated, almost looks like a xbox1 game. I played the demo and it's okay, but if you haven't got COD5, why would you buy this? COD has 4 player campaign, mulitplayer, zombie mode..The 4 player competitive co-op is alot better than L4D..I think L4D should be a market place download for like $30..$60 just seems like a ripoff. The demo didn't have any WOW factor's in it...but hey enjoy this AAA game, that can only be AAA on 360 because if it was a PS3 exclusive it would get a 5/10..

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

Yoma - 399 days 21 hours ago

if they give this game 10/10 , they can give whatthefckever game a 100/10. I played it and it was.. nothing special

Agree(1) | Disagree(9) | Report

M337ING - 399 days 21 hours ago

Except they didn't, they gave it a 97... :/

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

JohnnyChimpo - 399 days 20 hours ago

Ok these ratings are getting way out of hand, it seems that every game that drops now is getting a 9 or better, not every game is as good as a 9. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Left for Dead is good, I'm saying in general. If a game gets a rating of nine or higher......scratch that a 8.5 or higher, then I expect absolutley no day one patches. No glitches, no bugs, etc. I want a masterpeice. The only games that desrve these high ratings this year is MGS4, Uncharted, and Gears2.

These ratings are getting way out of hand, and we soak it up like it was black tar heroin. Why are we as gamers giving these tards satisfaction and allowing them to continue to give faulty ratings to games just to ignite another fanboy war. It's not MS fanboys and it's not Sony fanboys, it's reviewrs, editors, journalists that blow a game completely out of the water and say it's the best thing since slice bread. Then you get home and what do you know, a patch, or better yet DLC!? What you couldn't just give the consumer a bang for his/her buck and add the DLC into the game as general content.

All in all, metacritic and all other review sites need to be picketed by all fanboys, stating that we as people deserve an accurate rating, we as consumers and gamers don't care what some 40yr old man thought of a game just be3cause he played the first level and scored the game a 9 or 10. A score needs to be based on gameplay, visuals, story, replay value, and construction.

Down with Metacritic and all other reviewers.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

GWAVE - 399 days 20 hours ago

Yes, and it runs pretty smoothly. Obviously, having four TVs and four 360s is the ideal situation, but it works. You can also go online while playing splitscreen, so it's the best of both worlds.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Johnny Rotten - 399 days 20 hours ago

thanks, I'll most likely try it out after Tomb Raider.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

air1 - 399 days 16 hours ago

you are so lame, it got a great review and here comes a pair of sony balls bouncing around. screaming "pc"..

thats right bro, "pc" and " 360" sh!t all over the ps3 in software sales :P

Agree(6) | Disagree(0) | Report

Kleptic - 399 days 6 hours ago

I did the same thing...and found it simply ok...not bad by any means, but nothing for me to get too excited about it...I have a PC perfectly able to run it (as any PC from 2003 or newer could without breaking a sweat...har har)...but couldn't find one thing about it that seemed so great...

it reminds me a lot of times like Resistance 2's co-op...as in its just you and some other people having hordes of enemies coming at you...its pretty engaging at first, but runs out of steam relatively quickly...

I know some will love it...some won't...I need the entire package at this point though...Killzone 2's beta is giving me all the gameplay AND visual insanity i can handle...so I guess for me killzone 2's 'demo' is my game that I have been enjoying more than most full releases...to each their own...

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report