Hmmm... Should I get Left 4 Dead or Far Cry 2?

I wrote this in Murdock Sampson's thread debating on whether he should get Far Cry 2, or WaW. This is my response on Far Cry, I'll post my L4D after this.

Trust me on this one. If you get FC2 you'll be disappointed on the lack of online play, and the uninteresting story line. Only thing good about the game is the Map Editor, but its only for one person, so you can't make maps with your friends. When you join a custom match you must download the map being played to be able to play! You can delete it after wards, but it still takes alot away. Driving is so bland. You accelerate for about a second or 2, and have the same max speed your entire venture. Weapons are bland too, and theres not enticing moment about killing someone. You never hit someone with a grenade, let alone trying to pitch a Molotov at a moving target. Though the fire spread is very intriguing, but some times it will end up killing you. The healing method is what should I say, new? When you get shot you can pull the bullet out (Depending where you got shot), if you fell of a building you can break your arm back into place, and so forth. Though it doesn't add to game play it just adds to your personal enjoyment. And even after retrieving a bullet out of your organs, miraculously you gain full health, even while you have an open wound. Aiming isn't sufficient, and unreliable. Theres some weird affect that even as you move your bullets spray with your movement, which makes accuracy even harder than it is. Instead of money in the story, you are subjected to find diamonds, which is the currency in the game. Finding diamonds is so god damned frustrating. What happens is you open up your GPS, and have a green blinking light. As you're closer in the vicinity of the diamonds the green light starts blinking faster and as you get farther it blinks slower. So you're basically playing a Hot and Cold game, while theres trees, bushes, and brush surrounding your sight.

Sorry for that wall, I'm to tired to order everything. Now heres my take on the map editor.

Ubisoft basically took how they made the maps and handed it to you. You can seriously make anything. Your given a huge blank field to work with. You can change time, weather, elevation, water level, weapons, spawns, buildings, boats, para gliders, cars, jeeps, buggies, trees, brush, etc. Anything you think of you got it. Its truly a remarkable function in the game.

Now as I said earlier, the download system is flawed, Marjory. To even play a game on xbox live you first must be matched up with the host, then download there map whilst it taking up space on your HD. You're obliged to wait the time it takes depending on the size of the map, then you can play. Many times I just finish downloading the map, and the game ends abruptly leaving me angry faced at Ubisoft, You're given the option to keep the map, or delete it, which is good I suppose, but it still doesn't make up for the loss of interest.

Though the things you can create are endless. People have made Helms Deep, Titanic, Iwojima, Jumbo Jets, War of the Worlds, you name it you got it. Now theres a download map section where you can look at the highest rated maps, and the most popular ones, which is a nifty tool. But really, theres no point to it seeing you're really not going to hive the time to actually play it with your friends. Rather you just do a run through, and quit out 10 minutes in.

Though if you're into making hardcore maps its definitely up your alley.

Now despite the pros of FC2, I really don't think they make up for the ones in WaW.

First off WaW has a stable online play, unlike far cry. Game play is fun, and it actually feels you're fighting in WW2. A big factor of WaW is **** Zombies. Its got to be the coolest feature of a game I've seen in a while.

And heres my take on L4D

Definitely Left 4 Dead if you're suggesting it.

Valve has to be the first, or the most renown, to make a successful co-op experience. The main focus of the game is your allies, which increases the on line play by 100%. You feel like you're that character, you're that person who is accompanied by 3 other people to outlast the un-dead.

Especially with Valve's smooth graphics, and complex campaign, this game is a must. Not only will you find your self screaming and yelling with your friends, but also being intrigued by the story line.

Valve also wanted to pull of a remarkable inquisition that proved to work. They wanted to make the game feel like a movie. For every opening scene you see a movie cover with the players name as the actor of that character. So Valve even combined all you're favorite Zombie-movie scenes into one game.

Now the theme is fun as hell to say the least. I really can't remember a successful, or a good zombie game to date. This totally blew the competition out the water, and revolutionized the way we play. You can spend hours upon hours playing one single campaign level due to the AI director. Every single play will be different, and not one predictable. The game also incorporates a fair threshold. Say you're in the vicinity of a Tank spawn (The big hulk zombie), but all of you're friends have less than 50% health, then guess what? Say hello to your average horde. Thats what makes it so efficient, is that you're player is fit for every battle, every fight.

Now not only that, but they are actually zombies. They won't miraculously see you behind a corner, or in a building, like in other games, but they have quite the normal attributes as we see in theaters. Say you're a sly guy, well then expect not to get into to too much rubble. But if your a run and gun, then expect what you want. The game delivers multiple playing variation, all for different gamers.

So I really suggest you purchase this game for the un-willingly fun you will experience.

 

Well I've never played dead risings besides knowing its about a guy in a quarantined mall.

Versus mode is a great feature. If you're unaware of what it is, its basically letting the players control the game. 4 players are the normal humans, while the other 4 are selected as the special infected, which range from smoker, hunter, and boomer. Now who doesn't want to play as a zombie?

 

It's nothing like Dead Rising.

As Zoey always says in that elevator ride, it's Zombie Bullshit how they run so fast and are so strong.

I didn't read what Playahata said but I have both games and the only thing I've enjoyed in Far Cry 2 is the boats and the PoV when your driving vehicles. Other then that, the game has some of the most retarded ideas ever (Like putting ammo just about everywhere).

Anyway, get Left 4 Dead. It's made by Valve and is one of the only games that actually tracks your progress towards achievements and they actually put effort in their achievements, unlike some people. I know, I know, achievements, what could they possibly do to add to gameplay? They make you try weird stuff that ends up being funny.

Also, Playa said everything that needed to be said.

 

Did you know that if you're looking directly at the diamond the light will stop blinking and stay a solid green?

And downloading maps takes a second, and your going to wait a bit to play anyway. I do not like the Far Cry 2 lobby system, but then again L4D has the same system.

I was not disappointed with Far Cry 2, in fact I think it's very fun.



Left 4 Dead is also a very fun game, if you like a game to be completely single player. I say this because even if you are playing versus mode, you'll find yourself in a deja vu, playing the same campaign over and over, just as a different character/zombie. I also don't like how you have to become a tank at a certain time in the level.



I have both and I love both, so I'm torn over deciding on just one. Far Cry 2provides an RPG experience, in a very sophisticated FPS, while L4d provides zombie shooting mayhem with your friends. You decide.

 

Left 4 Dead.

 

I actually am facing the same question, Left 4 Dead or Far Cry 2? They are both amazing games, and totally different.

Left 4 Dead is the ultimate co-op game. I still play the damn demo, the same levels, and have fun. I can only imagine that x4 (actually, even more than that). For a game so small and simple, it has immense replay. It only has 4 scenarios, a handful of guns, the same zombies, but it is never the same experience. However, it's greatest strength is it's greatest weakness, and that is playing with friends. Playing with the friendly AI is no fun, since you can't tell them what to do, and they mostly just follow you around, so no strategy can really be executed. On the same note, playing with random people isn't fun either, since you don't know them. If you are to get this game, I'd make sure you have at least 1-2 friends who have it and play it, but 3 friends is the main goal.

As for Far Cry 2, don't listen to these people man about how gameplay sucks, multiplayer is garbage, and the only good thing is the Map Editor. Most people say that cause they were expecting something that would dethrone Halo 3 Forge and stuff, but obviously it can't. I only got to play this on PS3 so far, but I have heard so many stories from my good friend chrst, that I want this game now. Despite shitty PS3 controllers, single player was truly fun. The graphics are quite good, (amazing in HD) and the multiplayer is BALANCED. Do not listen to those who argue it is not, because they are the ones who think COD WaW is a great multiplayer game. Not to mention, most people who think online suck say that because they play the playlists that consist of player made content, where you do not get your guns, and start off with default everything. True ranked MM in that game, on the other hand, is great. You have a similar experience ranking system like COD 4, but better. It is truly hard to get experience, and takes alot of time and patience. Also, unlike COD, you can unlock the strongest guns in your class by level 4, unlike COD where only the highest levels get the good guns. This results in level 5's being able to beat level 15's. The leveling up has a sort of RPG-ish feel to it, where you have to choose what you want to go with, and stick with it, or else you will get mediocre weapons, but not any truly powerful ones.

Yes, long respawn times suck, but keep in mind, this is not COD. I am sorry I keep referencing the game, but those who hate FC2's gameplay often refer to how it tried to be COD. Back on topic, the point of hte game is to not die. COD 4 you can run out, die, respawn, die, respawn, die. Rushing would work in that game, and it was a big mess. In this game, though, you don't rush. You sneak, you snipe, you move forward into enemy territory as your snipers clear the path ahead, you take cover and heal yourself, you have to watch your ammo, and sneak to ammo boxes undetected before the other team discovers that you are out, and shoot the ammo resulting in it exploding in your face. The game is highly strategic. It has a learning curve, and as you get your leveling diamonds in the beginning to get better weapons, it can be hard, but the game rewards you for your patience.

So, hopefully that cleared some stuff up, but I remain undecided about what I want.

 

for the hilarilols
you can bargain hunt and probably find l4d for £35
far cry is a let down
but not as much as fable though lol
i ****ing despise fable

 

I could agree with most of what you said until this. I only rented the game because I heard the Single Player was good, but the multiplayer wasn't spectacular. And spectacular it wasn't. I would literally use more than one magazine to kill an enemy with even the strongest Assault Rifle. Not to mention a level 1 with no good guns can easily get matched up with a level 20 who has most of their guns maxed out, and can outclass you with any gun you choose. Not to mention the final sniper rifle. Oh-ho. It's a .50 caliber sniper rifle with a nice scope, but the kicker is that it's one hit kill essentially everywhere, AND it's semi-automatic. And since every map (except maybe a couple) are more than big enough for a sniper rifle, it outclasses every gun. I only played enough to get the Paratrooper and .50 cal. Once I got that to make sure that every time I died by one it wasn't due to them being really lucky and headshotting me, I returned the game.

Far Cry 2 multiplayer is far from balanced.

 

It takes nearly a clip of an AR in halo to kill someone, your argument is invalid. By making it so it takes more shots than usual to kill someone, it gives that other person the opportunity to come back and kill you. The problem with 1 shot 1 kill is the fact that who ever pulls the trigger first typically wins. Also, aiming for the head helps alot, I wouldn't start pumping rounds in spray and pray fashion.
As for the sniper, it is balanced. It is the ultimate kill weapon, no doubt, however, limited ammo kills you. It means that you have to get up, out of your sniping perch, go fetch some ammo, then run back and hope no one saw you. Also, your luck comment about head shotting makes no sense. Since when was more than one head shot luck? Either way, you need to look at the wider scope of things. I'd like to hear what would make it more balanced.

Yes, I know I have not played the game much, though I have been trying to rent it forever now, and I do trust what I read and hear.

 

Fable 2 is ****ing awesome.

 

left 4 dead, it has an engine in it which it wont allow zombies to spawn in the same place, so its different each play. Although campaign is very short, the story-line is fantastic. this game is a must.

 

Plus, Valve has already said they would like to release DLC every few months, giving us more campaigns, more weapons, more zombies, and more maps to play in versus.

 

My argument isn't invalid. It takes more than one clip to kill with the paratrooper and quite a bit more with the G3. Not to mention they can round a corner, pull out a bullet and they're at full health again.

Also, the comment about head shots was just that I didn't think the sniper rifle would kill in one shot anywhere in a game where it takes 45 bullets with another gun to kill someone. I meant that I had to make sure that everyone in the game wasn't just getting really lucky and getting a headshot on me every time.

It has 15 bullets standard. That's 5-10 kills easily, which in my experience is about all you can get in one game with any gun anyways. Besides that, nearly every map has ammo within 10 feet of where you go.

The problem with 45 shot 1 kill for ARs and 1 shot 1 kill is the fact that the sniper takes 1 bullet.

What would make it more balanced is if all the snipers were like the first one, where it takes more than one bullet to kill, and if some of the other guns did more damage. Because the way it was for me, is that everyone had a Halo SMG who wasn't sniping, and anyone sniping had a Godstick that kills as long as it hits.

Even in Call of Duty 4, where most guns take 3-4 bullets to kill, not every sniper rifle is a one shot kill anywhere. Although the M40 ACOG'd is one shot anywhere, the sway and decreased zoom balance it out.

 

/thread

 

I have both the games. Personally I liked Farcry 2 more. Sometimes L4D gets a little boring. There isn't anything new once you played a couple of times. With Farcry, you have the map editor and it's like you'll never play the same map twice, plus there are people with a lot of creativity that makes some really good maps!

 

You are stuck between two amazing games. I have both, and I switch between them and GoW2 depending on my mood.

Far Cry 2 has an amazing story and supremely fun online multiplayer with extremely creative maps. The only problem is the slightly flawed gunplay.

Left 4 Dead allows you to play online as the zombie, and makes for cooperative, strategic gameplay.

I really think it is a draw, so it depends on your opinion. If price is an issue though, I would go with Far Cry 2.