[E3 09] Left 4 Dead 2 Gameplay Footage

[DoctorFinger]

More footage from the floor of the E3 show. This time it's the polarizing Left 4 Dead 2. In this footage you can even see the new special infected: The Charger.

[bone_matrix]

I know this is a bit unpopular, but I cannot wait for this to come out. I will be torn between this and MW2.

[divinechaos]

I'm guessing this is the sequel that adds the better graphics and better hit detection?

[Wilkz07]

wow. looks... exactly the same.

[Libuke]

I wanted to slap that guy for reloading one shotgun shell then firing, then loading another.

On a even more negative point it did not look any different then the first game play wise.

[AbeLincoln]

Yeah, these gameplay videos make me mad for two reasons.
1. The people don't look like they know how to play an L4D game.
2. It really doesn't look like it's that much different from L4D...

Still I'm excited for this to come out, and I've decided the best way for me to get over my angry feelings about L4D's premature demise is to wait and buy this on sale. Because, I've been thinking that if I had bought L4D during one of the sales instead of at launch, I wouldn't be as frustrated as I am now.

[Narradisall]

I would hope Value would see some sense and perhaps offer a discount on this to all those that own L4D in order to sooth the savage beasts. Probably won't happen, but they aren't really going about this in a very Value like way.

Note: I don't actually own L4D

[Mason]

I am discouraged by footage like this. L4D is an infinitely replayable game, and so it's hard to envision myself purchasing it a second time in order to play some brightly-lit levels.

I have enough trust in Valve to not draw firm conclusions on the relative merits of L4D2. Maybe it will actually be worth the price, or maybe the price will be lower than we're expecting. Much of the problem isn't financial, though, but rather that I like the cast and setting of the first game, and find it disappointing that they're being abandoned so quickly.

[Narradisall]

I just had a thought, whats to stop some people using the new map developer for L4D1 and basically copying the sequel's levels?

[Jackel]

Originally Posted by Narradisall

I just had a thought, whats to stop some people using the new map developer for L4D1 and basically copying the sequel's levels?

They are making a bunch of changes to the developer that gives him even more control of different variables. Things such as dynamic levels based on skill level (Food Nipples dynamic pathway maps are based on randomness, rather than on perceieved difficult to a group). As well as weather effects.

So while we'll likely see these ones ported, they won't be nearly the same because the director isn't as powerful.

[Telefrog]

This is, in every way possible, a "Madden" sequel. It's the equivelent of a roster update and further texture polishing on the stadiums.

[DoctorFinger]

Originally Posted by Telefrog

This is, in every way possible, a "Madden" sequel. It's the equivelent of a roster update and further texture polishing on the stadiums.

5 new campaigns, 3 new special infected, 2 new classes of weapons (and I don't even know how many new weapons total) and a whole new game mode are a 'Madden' upgrade? I understand being annoyed with Valve about this, but aren't you taking it too far? Was Gears 2 a 'Madden' update because it only introduced a couple new weapons and one new game mode? I mean, they didn't include a flight sim or an RTS in the game, that means it's not a 'real' sequel, right?

[Telefrog]

Originally Posted by DoctorFinger

5 new campaigns, 3 new special infected, 2 new classes of weapons (and I don't even know how many new weapons total) and a whole new game mode are a 'Madden' upgrade? I understand being annoyed with Valve about this, but aren't you taking it too far? Was Gears 2 a 'Madden' update because it only introduced a couple new weapons and one new game mode? I mean, they didn't include a flight sim or an RTS in the game, that means it's not a 'real' sequel, right?

Gears 2 contained quite a bit of variety in gameplay over the first game, new weapons, new enemies, a whole new gamemode (Horde) that most people treat as a game by itself, new environments, and a new singleplayer campaign. Oh, and let's not forget that UE3 was advanced with quite a few refinements between the two games.

L4D2 contains new maps, new enemies, and new weapons. The Director is getting tweaks that add dynamic weather and variable pathing. Zombie AI is obviously the same. The Source engine is the same. The gameplay is the same.

Sorry, I've not seeing anything yet that looks like it just absolutely couldn't have been added to the first game.

[DoctorFinger]

Originally Posted by Telefrog

Gears 2 contained quite a bit of variety in gameplay over the first game, new weapons, new enemies, a whole new gamemode (Horde) that most people treat as a game by itself, new environments, and a new singleplayer campaign. Oh, and let's not forget that UE3 was advanced with quite a few refinements between the two games.

L4D2 contains new maps, new enemies, and new weapons. The Director is getting tweaks that add dynamic weather and variable pathing. Zombie AI is obviously the same. The Source engine is the same. The gameplay is the same.

Sorry, I've not seeing anything yet that looks like it just absolutely couldn't have been added to the first game.

But couldn't you say the same about the Gears 2 content? There's nothing in that game which couldn't be added to Gears 1 with a patch and some DLC?

I'm not arguing whether it should be brought to L4D1, but whether objectively speaking there's roughly the same amount of "new" content in L4D2 as the average, non-sports sequel? In my mind, yes. It's about the same content as you get in Gears 2, or Resistance 2.

[The Continental]

Originally Posted by DoctorFinger

But couldn't you say the same about the Gears 2 content? There's nothing in that game which couldn't be added to Gears 1 with a patch and some DLC?

I'm not arguing whether it should be brought to L4D1, but whether objectively speaking there's roughly the same amount of "new" content in L4D2 as the average, non-sports sequel? In my mind, yes. It's about the same content as you get in Gears 2, or Resistance 2.

The good Dr. is right. The only difference between L4D2 and any of the other sequels he mentioned is the time between original and sequel. L4D2 is going to be out on shelves a mere year after its predecessor, which is the only reason it's drawing the Madden comparisons/complaints. I'd wager that if L4D2 were released Fall of 2010 in the exact same state it is in now, it would be greeted with open arms.

I'm not saying I agree with Valve by any means, I think rapid sequels are terrible for the community and that L4D2 could've been released as a big chunk of paid DLC, but as Doc said, you can't fault L4D2 for lacking content. By any measure, there's plenty of new stuff there to merit the full fledged sequel designation.

[Jackel]

Originally Posted by Telefrog

Gears 2 contained quite a bit of variety in gameplay over the first game, new weapons, new enemies, a whole new gamemode (Horde) that most people treat as a game by itself, new environments, and a new singleplayer campaign. Oh, and let's not forget that UE3 was advanced with quite a few refinements between the two games.

L4D2 contains new maps, new enemies, and new weapons. The Director is getting tweaks that add dynamic weather and variable pathing. Zombie AI is obviously the same. The Source engine is the same. The gameplay is the same.

Sorry, I've not seeing anything yet that looks like it just absolutely couldn't have been added to the first game.

the Doc is right. Valve has already announced a new game mode (just nothing on it yet) that they'll be releasing.

Plus they're fixing up crescendo moments to stop camping which will significantly alter gameplay (no more closeting up for crescendo's).

The zombie AI has been changed significantly to allow for limb dismemberment.

And they're adding in a host of new weapons with more grenade types, melee weapons

Seems to me like quite a bit more than a simple roster update.

[H.Bogard]

Originally Posted by Telefrog

L4D2 contains new maps, new enemies, and new weapons. The Director is getting tweaks that add dynamic weather and variable pathing. Zombie AI is obviously the same. The Source engine is the same. The gameplay is the same.

Sorry, I've not seeing anything yet that looks like it just absolutely couldn't have been added to the first game.

Gears 2 had the same enemy AI and engine too.

All 5 of L4D2's campaigns will be versus-ready at launch, with the addition of randomized pathing, this is quite a huge leap in varied gameplay.

[boratika]

It's a good thing they have those flashlights.

[Telefrog]

Originally Posted by DoctorFinger

But couldn't you say the same about the Gears 2 content? There's nothing in that game which couldn't be added to Gears 1 with a patch and some DLC?

Sure, if that's the only metric used, then why not? Let's agree that Gears 2 could've been DLC'd into Gears 1. It still would've taken a good two years to do so because the amount of work that went into it was pretty substantial. As we can obviously see, that's not true for L4D.

Here's the thing, I know how ridiculously (relatively) easy it is to build a level for L4D because I'm doing so in the SDK. It's scads easier than an equivelent map in TF2 because there's literally no need to balance the level out. The Director really does do most of the job. (That's a compliment to the AI of the Director, by the way.) The level-builders work is cut down to decoration and brush construction. Some scripting can be done for the Panic Event sections, but that's still a pretty easy task once you get the hang of the operation.

As we've seen with the inclusion of the later Versus levels, not even Valve bothered to do much balancing or changing of the levels from SP to MP. They made good singleplayer levels first, then tweaked them to be used in Versus, and let the players "balance" the maps through figuring out new ways to counter each other.

It's obvious that all the hooks are there to make L4D a great platform for further development. (Hell, it's what they originally conceived for the project.) It's also obvious that someone at Valve woke up and realized that their "good guy" rep is nice to have, but money is even better.

That's fine. For me, it means that Valve is no longer one of the trusted dev/publishers, and is now going in the same pile as EA, Ubisoft, and Activision. Caveat emptor and all that jazz.

[Crowe]

I'm not keen on such a fast sequel but I'd give them a pass for one game, Valve have been quality for a very long time so I trust that this will be a one off occurrence. They will hopefully keep their word this time round, that is that L4D 2 will be platform for expansion that L4D1 was supposed to be.

I definitely wouldn't go calling them out and saying they are no longer to be trusted, unless they made this a habit.