Left 4 Dead vs Left 4 Dead 2

[zerocool84]

None of the modes are geared for random teams tbh.

Then they shouldn't have made the game at all.

 

[n7]

The second one might be "technically better", but i've barely played it.

I loved the first one.
The characters, the atmosphere, the infected.

While the guns are kewl in the second, i hate the characters, i hate the daylight maps (really doesn't have the great feel), & i dislike the infected, especially the inability to do strats like old 3+1, etc.

I look at my playtimes for games...it very accurately tells me what i like best.

 

[rudder]

Not really. Your argument makes no sense. In normal mode, people are actually notified when their friends are in trouble and are persuaded to help them. In realism, no one gives a flying fuck whether you're caught by smoker or getting pummeled by a charger.

Realism brings nothing to the table. It only takes things away. It's hard enough to find a game of competent players when they have the game telling them what to do. You're assuming that only good players play realism, which is not the case. You're just as likely to get into a game full of half brained two year olds as you would be in regular campaign mode, but now you don't have anything to help those half brained two year olds figure out that you're getting face fucked by a jockey while they wank off in the corner because they can't figure out what they should be doing.

Let's not forget the game is about a zombie apocalypse. None of the characters have ever met before. Getting random people makes the game fun. I like to look at it like regular mode is basically an arcade game. Realism mode moves the game more towards a role playing type game. The point of the game is not a body count. It is successfully getting to the end of a level.