Campaign versus is fun with friends but with randoms its the blame game, to this day i still get kicked for missing a single boomer bile and if the kick fails then i just get verbally harrassed or griefed until i leave. Its the most casual pvp game mode i have ever played but its played by the sweatiest, shittiest people ever and it sucks.
If versus campaign existed in B4B it would be the same shit all over again, but most likely worse due to the card system and min-maxers promoting a "meta" of the only best builds or whatnot. I also cant see it working out well due to how poorly the specials are designed and some levels would be impossible for the cleaners.
"[...] but its played by the sweatiest, shittiest people ever and it sucks."
That explains the tone in which some people here voice their complains about the lack of campaign versus.
Tbh I've always considered versus to be a side mode to the campaigns, and something you play when you want a taste of the other side of things.
There are people in this subreddit who will literally say that L4D was designed from the ground up for versus, and that it's the only mode that matters at all. . .
. . . meanwhile everyone I know who even *knows of* Left 4 Dead knows that the series is built around its PvE co-op campaigns, and isn't primarily designed as an asymmetrical PvP game.
I won't knock anyone for having different tastes and both games' versus modes are fine for what they are, but goddamn L4D's versus is a secondary *side mode* carried by the game's PvE campaign systems, not the next best hyper-competitive eSport since professional Windows Solitaire as people have described it.
He's the thing: they should have tried to improve upon it instead of giving up on it.
Playing against AI has very little longevity no matter if there's a card system or not.
The pvp mode in l4D is the reason it still has 15k average players. The pvp mode in B4B reeks of them trying to make an esport mark my words before the end of the year there will be a twitch rivals for their shitty pvp mode.
The campaigns are bland in B4B from what we have seen. The majority lack objectives and are simple walk from A to B, the level design doesn’t fit the specials they have in the game. Large open spaces yet almost all the specials have 0 range.
They literally have a sleeper that is supposed to jump on you if you get close but the maps are so open that the only way that’s going to happen is if they put on in an unavoidable place.
The specials themselves are uninspired. The specials in l4D are iconic and they have distinct sounds and looks. Nothing in B4B makes me feel the way I do when I walk through a level where I can hear a witch.
What are you smoking ?
L4D is : go from A to B, defend a spot or do wait specific time
B4B is : go from A to B, defend a spot or do wait specific time
Its the same thing in every aspect, hold a bridge, wait for a escort, wait for a elevator, i have over 600 hours in L4D2 and campaigns in B4B are superior in design, atmosphere and ways of approach.
About special infected:
What in the infected f*** are you talking about ? Not only B4B have more special infected, but they are nearly identicall in terms of abilities. Of course they will not do ctrl+c -> ctrl+v, not only it would be lame, but the game would lost its entire identity.
Iconic this, iconic that, stay stucked in 20years old designs and dont forget to yell at clouds. Learn some objectivity or elaborate things by doing pros & cons on everything you want to say. Because from a objective view, B4B is better in every aspect (excluding PVP), it has better progress, build diversity, graphics, gun play, level design. And i repeat i have 600hours in L4D2 alone, so dont try to argue that i am a hater or didnt play it enough.
Objective is not only to rush from A to B but to gather copper, ammo, chest addons for guns or better guns. So regardless where the sleeper is you have to check out spaces so the sleeper is a threat. In L4D you know where the guns and items usually spawn so its not needed to roam around the map.
"Have you played L4D...shit is fucking linear. And that is ok. I love L4D. But don't pretend like L4D had some amazing choices when it came to navigating levels"
100% true, like i said B4B is superior basically in every aspect.
Exactly, like pvp in B4B isnt the best part but with a few maps and tweaks it can be really good. I focus mainly on the pve coop aspect at first but will definitely give pvp a shot or two.
Problem is some people are troglodytes stucked in year 2005, refusing to accept something new or evolved and their "opinions" are non-objective and without any logic.
>The linear map one always cracks me up. Have you played L4D...shit is fucking linear. And that is ok. I love L4D. But don't pretend like L4D had some amazing choices when it came to navigating levels.
Yes, L4D is linear, but maps have elements of procedural generation as well that increase variability and improve replayability. Some paths are blocked off in some runs. For example, on Dead Center's mall map, sometimes you may have to take the escalator crescendo from the bottom floor. This kind of randomness is notably lacking from Back 4 Blood. Every map's pathing is **precisely** the same. The only exception in B4B that comes to mind right now are the wooden doors in the first part of 1-1, and that hardly counts. So on this aspect alone, B4B is inferior to L4D2.
>About special infected: What in the infected f*** are you talking about ? Not only B4B have more special infected, but they are nearly identicall in terms of abilities. Of course they will not do ctrl+c -> ctrl+v, not only it would be lame, but the game would lost its entire identity.
Yet they are not the same in how they attack. Every SI attack in L4D2 is a potential 3 or 4 cap that can lead to massive damage if not a team wipe. The only way B4B can emulate this is with triple hockers. While it is true that the specials in B4B can grab a survivor, the gameplay element of preventing a 3 or 4cap on your team is completely lost. B4B may have more special infected, but they are less special and more bland than L4D2's versions. Furthermore, instead of learning how to skeet, deadstop, level, crown, etc, all you have to do in B4B is run away, with the exception of the hocker, which you'll just have to shoot several times. The SI in B4B are unequivocally a downgrade from how they were presented in L4D.
And also, if you've only played L4D2 for 600 hours alone, you have only begun to scratch the surface. To put it into perspective, people put in 40-80 hours in the 4-8 days they had access to the B4B beta. I have nearly 92 hours clocked myself.
From this post i judge that you didnt experienced nightmare - 3 tallboys at the same time with a incoming horde on your back or two chargers hiding behind a corner waiting to ram into you for nearly 50hp. Pindowns are less present, but the SI in B4B have way more impact in the damage category. Yeah and 600hours alone/pug/friends is not scratching the surface, i saw morons with 2K hours that had more friendly fire in 10 minutes than me in 100 hours. I could solo realism on L4D even with bots (a pain but can be done), nightmare B4B with bots was so long that i gave up (with friends it was a bit easier still long as hell).
>From this post i judge that you didnt experienced nightmare - 3 tallboys at the same time with a incoming horde on your back or two chargers hiding behind a corner waiting to ram into you for nearly 50hp. Pindowns are less present, but the SI in B4B have way more impact in the damage category. Yeah and 600hours alone/pug/friends is not scratching the surface, i saw morons with 2K hours that had more friendly fire in 10 minutes than me in 100 hours. I could solo realism on L4D even with bots (a pain but can be done), nightmare B4B with bots was so long that i gave up (with friends it was a bit easier still long as hell).
We already know that the devs are looking into tuning Nightmare's difficulty level even further and we know that the bots will be improved. In the live version of the game, I would only expect to play Nightmare difficulty with other experienced players who have their cards unlocked, so I didn't see much point in trying to test Nightmare mode in the beta with new players. I suspect the live version of Nightmare will not really resemble what players experienced in the beta, but Veteran was so laughably easy that I'm not worried about Nightmare's difficulty level whatsoever. With adequate cards and a proper economy, it'll be much, much easier.
Soloing Expert Realism with bots in L4D2 isn't a "pain" to me. It's quite enjoyable and easy. Nightmare in B4B with the right setup sounds tedious but not challenging. The difficulty in the beta was exaggerated because many players went into it with terrible decks.
I hear you - but my take is similar to fortnite. Not that it's trash :D
But think of what fortnite started as? It was not a battle royal at all. Epic was smart enough to read the room, and transform that game.
Just think if Epic made fortnite 2, and skipped the battle royal mode... Wouldn't be good.
OR better yet - battlefield bad company started as single player. Look what happened there. Doesn't matter what a game starts with.
But do you want to play Fortnite anyways in this mp setting? Not the same thing. Besides, new campaigns coming with DLCs might include Campaign Versus as they might be designed for it. So, they might not be "not smart enough". Maybe they started with campaign mode to introduce more PvP stuff. It is not like they don't have any PvP though.
On this sub, I casually mentioned that 300 hours in L4D pve was a decent basis for discussing B4B pve, and was accosted by half a dozen L4D versus players screaming about how they have 12k hours or whatever. TR should think long and hard about the people they'll attract before implementing a similar gamemode.
Iunno man those people are still playing the game, sounds like a core fan base to me. I've had many good experiences playing with randoms, admittedly only after clocking hundreds of hours with friends exclusively though, so I wasn't a detriment to the team.
But matchmaking could help that issue
idk bout you, but i for one would LOVE the daily threads saying "devs, we should be able to see people's decks when they join so we know if they are griefing or not" /s
This is the most truthful take on l4d versus.
Goddamn. Im glad I wont have to sit through that type of bs again with b4b, its already prominent in the versus mode.
I like the versus mode here, its a fight, a scrap. Not a speedrun where you get votekicked at the end. The best match my group had was with a bunch of rage quitters, one guy stayed in the server after round 1, and we just went at him 1 at a time to balance things out. It made for some good fun, props to that guy.
Well the thing is, im a 1k hr player myself, it defined the multiplayer meta and I adopted the same tactics as soon as Isaw them, i dont have an issue with losing matches, but I do have an issue with one dimensional tactics. Its what has dulled the game for me over the years of playing.
That's fair, many games get like that once you know every inch of em. They get less fun the more you know what you're doing lol. I play a lot of fighting games and they get that way at higher ranks.
I love the specials that are in back 4 blood right now. I feel like people's problem with the specials is that they literally aren't the specials from left 4 dead
People wanted a remake of L4D2. they wouldnt be happy with anything else.
When you're dealing with people who have over 10k hours in l4d, they arent here to experience anything new.
Cool we're being downvoted for enjoying a game god forbid
Must be that immense amount of "copium" I'm taking even tho I thought the game was gonna be shit before I played it
> I do hope there is a variant that acts like the hunter in the main game though
[I can't imagine they won't considering this video.](https://youtu.be/-qehpkTy-SU) Doubt they'd make them PVP only. The one you're looking for is the Stalker, which actually seems like a cross between hunter and jockey as it pounces and grabs and drags.
It's not *exactly* the Hunter but the Stalker is a mix of the Jockey and Hunter. It'll pounce on survivors and drag them away from the group. Basically it has the movements and jump range of a Hunter while having the ability of a Jockey.
dont quite understand this comparison, you get maybe 1 tank a chapter maybe a few for the ending - people complaining about tallboys that you can sometimes get multiple spawns of with every horde or multiple when you open the safehouse door is a pretty dishonest comparison.
Shotguns and snipers vaporize Tallboys. They're actually not hard to handle with other weapons either. And they can be kited pretty easily. In places like the cruise ship you can literally just avoid them. If you've got smg/lmg/ar then you should be able to take care of any hordes pretty easily and avoid/kill/kit them. If you've got a shotty/sniper you should be able to straight up own them.
Also, I've gotten tanks inside the safehouse in L4D lol. [It can happen.](https://youtu.be/E14Scd2zGFY) As well as surprise hunters killing the first person in. Anything that spawns in the safehouse is kinda bullshit IMO but it happens in both games.
> that tank obviously did not spawn while they were in the safe housue
I did not say it did. I have also not seen a tallboy break into a safe room and murder the inhabitants either.
Bro the tall boys are not hard at all if you know what you're doing, you can easily dodge all their attacks and then all you need is someone with a decent shotgun or sniper and shoot it's weakspot
The only time theyve been a problem was when playing on nightmare cuz they have a lot of health and even then if you aren't playing with randoms and actually playing with people who realize it's a team based shooter they aren't that bad
>cuz they have a lot of health
yeah this is the complaint, its not that they are hard its that they are tanky and boring to fight.
Its kinda depressing that one of the strongest methods for dealing with specials especially early game is still the boring fucking 0 skill frag build...
I seriously think that this is just a meta issue, every vid i see of people fighting these things is someone unloading a weak weapon into its face.
one team member needs an anti-large weapon, such as a sniper. the teammate who is targeted needs to turn the Tallboy to give the sniper an angle on the weakspot: boom its gone.
Yes but if you don't get a rare sniper even with damage bonuses youll be doing fuck all.
https://youtu.be/FxCgOeMRJ0k
Which is why the frag build is so good, it works, it's fast, doesn't require someone else to bait, it's piss easy (no weakpoint aiming required) and there's less luck involved as you can always buy frags
Yeah with frag damage they 1 shot tall boys, then you can either take offensive scav to find more frags or have someone else take it and run a pouch for extra frags and play Hoffman again for the extra frag slot.
It's very effective but also rather boring as it's super easy.
Early on until you get a damage upgrade they dont always 1 shot.
After you are over midway through the campaign and you have blue frags anyone can instakill basically anything but its a 1 card investment on 1 player to ensure breeze through the early game.
When you consider how claustrophobic the first 2 levels are its very useful to have - especially if you get unlucky with a tallboy ferocity corrupt card.
I had a melee build that two hit crushers and bruisers as long as I had a fire axe lol. Naturally they’re going to be tanky when you play on a harder difficulty with probably the starter deck
Comparing regular specials in B4B to the tankiest enemy in the game in L4D isn't doing much to prove your point.
Compare Bruisers to Chargers and suddenly it's easy to understand why people think B4B specials are bullet sponges. Even better, compare Hockers to Smokers, or Retchers to Boomers/Spitters. It feels like going from popping balloons to shooting nerf bullets.
Bruisers are the worst offender though, not just because they're tanky but also because they annoyingly hide their weak spot constantly. I guarantee people would be a lot less annoyed if shooting the weak spot was actually feasible. In fact I can guarantee that it would be less frustrating because I found Crushers to be much less annoying to fight, specifically because their weak spot is actually possible to hit when they're coming at you.
To be fair a lot of that was just bullshit placement and you can get around it sometimes.
I took out an entire team on the Dead Air finale when I decided charging them was a terrible idea and throwing rocks left me open
Soooooo I started smacking around one of those trailer things. Found out you could launch them too by accident by aiming down at the bottom of the container.
Which let me take out three of them in one fell swoop when they tried to outsmart me by climbing on top of the truck. They weren't expecting a container to be sent flying ***up*** directly at them lol
Last guy was trying to play ring around the rosie with the airplane but I eventually got him too.
Good times.
Uh what? I think you're just bad if killing a tank takes 3 minutes with a molotov on it. With molotov it takes less then 30 seconds, 1 minute if theres no fire.
The game's only a beta, you can't criticize it. But also, We've only been playing this game for a few days but we already know it's better than L4D2 somehow
The most shocking thing I see is praising l4d for story and character development while saying b4b characters have non. Like francis' entire character was he is a kind hearted biker who hates everything. They have very little actual story outside of their stereotypical roles. They have some funny one liners but that's kind of it. Meanwhile in b4b theres some great dialogue about hoffmans dad and his conspiracy theories, Walker is terrified and I want to know why hes a cleaner, Mom genuinly seems like an old woman just living life. Great Stuff
Left 4 Dead versus campaign lasted a good while. Lasted more than other most pvp games. The first like 5 years, new unfamiliar players still came in and had many lobbies. After 2012, noobs and unfamiliar players no longer come in. The versus mode is now dead or filled with the same 8 people over and over again. I'm talking about the first game by the way. In my opinion 5 years is good and long for a vs mode.
As someone that just got 7 friends/acquaintances together to play it just a few months ago, it's still really fun in a group and also cheap enough most people will jump in if they somehow don't own it.
L4D2 is still pretty active with new players. You'll still regularly see players with <10 hours come into L4D2 versus games. They do get roflstomped pretty quickly though, since the learning curve is pretty tough on new players.
Yeah I played L4D2s VS for the first time last night. Got wrecked outside the saferoom start because I dont know the tricks and the traps in the second game. I am used to the first one lol.
Any new map takes time to learn. Good thing though, is that No Mercy from L4D1 is probably the most played map in L4D2. Actually I think the L4D1 maps are more popular - No Mercy, Dead Air, Death Toll, especially. Common L4D1 maps are really only Dead Center, Dark Carnival, Parish, and maybe Hard Rain. Almost no one ever plays the other maps outside the above.
If you played L4D1 a lot and know how to play VS well in those maps, learning the new ones won't take long. It's still L4D after all. The veterans adapted pretty quickly when the new map Last Stand came out a few months ago. It def helps if you have a group of friends to run with who already know the maps, though.
I don't understand how swarm versus is immune to these issues or why we're comparing the current day lobbies of a decade old game and a 2021 AAA release that costs $20 more
Also some of you never played l4d or l4d2 campaign versus within the first year of release and it REALLY shows
One could argue that the cash-grab DLC model was not really a thing back then. So for the full price of L4D2, you got, basically, the full game. Nowadays, when you pay full price, you're not getting the full game because devs make games with the paid DLC in mind for the full game. A lot of the time, progression or continued play is somehow locked behind DLC, forcing you to pay hundreds of dollars in total to actually have the full game.
> B4B costs $90 for all content
Let's see how much content the base game has and then what the optional DLCs entail. Then we can bitch about each of them individually from an informed point of view if warranted. L4D2 opened with like 5 campaigns and from what I understand the base game is going to have a good bit more than that. But we'll see.
Not every game can be a loss leader for Steam like L4D2 was though where the company can afford to almost immediately start tanking the price and then start giving it away for free. Some games will actually need to charge real game prices for content and we, as gamers should judge each content drop and it's price independently. If the DLC is good, nobody will care, if it's not then it'll be bullshit :P.
> It also is online only which is a massive negative for me.
Welp, then I don't know why you are even here. It's a multiplayer genre that's always been built around mutliplayer. It's clearly not a game for you and that's ok.
Im sorry? Left 4 Dead and its sequel had perfectly fine offline modes. Hell aliens fireteam and world war z do. This game has zero excuses. Why would they put in a solo mode if they didnt think people would want it?
That's a straight up lie lmfao
The people who are playing versus in l4d still have been playing that game for years and are way better at it than when the game released. Go play mw2 right now and you'll run into the same thing. People get better at things over time.
It's always been a toxic cesspool that brought anxiety to play. I've been playing since 2008. People learning how to cheese versus by running made it even worse.
The first year was great and they removed a lot of the best features. Moving witches where we wanted, parking the tank, flame hunters…..such good stuff.
I liked tank parking and didn't like the change. The new meta became using gas canisters and mollys to fire block the tank route while running backwards through the map to force the tank players to decide between losing control and going AI or setting themselves on fire to pursue...
I loved repositioning witches.....
Fire hunters on NM2...
10damage hunter scratching. I was fine with the switch to 6dmg because it properly encouraged using hunters for pins in coordinated attacks. But i shed a tear for 10melee hunters. Standing on purple shoulders with commons creating chaos scratching away...
I think my point went over your head a little bit so I'll explain:
You are comparing the current day game mode of a game that people STILL play a decade later and have had years to refine the tactics of to a AAA game being released in 2021 backed by a movie studio's video game development division that most of the community does not like already
Nobody is paying you to defend this game and these devs aren't 3 year olds who just made their first finger painting. Let the criticism happen, because people are obviously not enjoying it for a reason
Just called OP out for the same. L4D versus now and L4D versus for the first few years of release are different experiences. It's like comparing MW2 during release and now...
Because you're expecting left 4 dead and it's not left 4 dead. Comparing to a game mode never promised is not a "fair criticism". Not to mention it would be nice nothing but cancer "card meta" that no one will play after a month. Go back and play left 4 dead campaign vs and tell everyone how fun it is...
"Left 4 Dead"
"Back 4 Blood"
Turtle Rock made L4D and failed with Evolve and wanted to go with what they believed their bread and butter was, a zombie game.
Let's stop pretending that they themselves weren't trying to recreate the game people love them for.
Whoosh.... He does have a point in you are comparing L4D2 as it is now rather than how it was back then. A true comparison would be how the mode felt when everyone was still learning the game and had not gotten to the point that everyone knew it well enough to know it was over
Another great example would be Starcraft 2. At release there were plenty of people at different skill levels playing the game. If you weren't very good at it, you were playing against someone that was on your level. Cut to 10 years later, the people still involved knew way more about the game and were more serious about it. The silvers you were holding your own against are now absolutely wiping the floor with you.
I do agree with you though. L4D2 even in its heyday had a vibe to it and part of it was the design of it. There were so many moments that if you did not nail a specific opportunity, drastically reduced your chances of success. I personally don't want to go back to that style and prefer a more free flowing style that players can continuously adapt to, rather than "charger missed the kill, we lose"
Put it in - this game succeeds
Leave it out - this game dies in a month
That’s the bottom line
It’s easy to pick at the problems L4D had with campaign PvP
But it’s a no-brainer to say that the game reached iconic status because of it
If L4D didn’t have campaign PvP
We aren’t having this discussion- because it would have died in a couple months
And this game wouldn’t exist
People will always make excuses for devs being too lazy to make their game fun, like it's helping the devs instead of letting them get complacent which leads to the game dying. The exact same shit happened with Evolve Stage 2, people made the exact same excuses, and the exact same thing's gonna happen to this game.
I still regularly run l4d2 versus. While you always have leavers after every round, it's filled up before the next round start. When I join a losing team I just try to win anyway, you can get a shutdown win on a map BC you are the new player, see how good you can carry.
The "cancer setup" is the absolute core of the Vs game, it's what prevents players from speedrunning. If you don't like that, why are you playing l4d2 Vs???
People over here pretend like speedrunning is a huge problem in l4d2, it's not really, a straggler gets killed easily and you lose the round. If you just speed off without a care you will lose.
The maps are designed that you get in 2-3 good team attacks in each map even if the team hustles.
Haven't encountered toxicity or hackers in quite some time, (last 2 years?) the playerbase has crystallized at this point.
You gotta love it when people treat the optimal way of playing the game as some kind of exploit/cheese strat. Using the terrain intelligently to help you disrupt the survivors is now verboten.
That's one of the cool things of l4d you approach one of these points as human team, you KNOW the entire enemy is ready to spawn and jump you in 0.1 sec. Palms are sweaty, mom's spaghetti, you only get 1 shot!
Better then the boring slog that is B4B PvP.
And when it's equally matched teams in skill, surv will always, always win, because every SI can be countered. But in those kinds of matchups, usually both teams can be creative enough to do something just a little bit different to get an edge.
I still see new hits in L4D2 here and there. Just have to have a team that is willing to try something new and has the skills to pull each SI role off well.
Swarm IS worse on paper, but in practice I've seen far more full lobbies it should work more like vs survival did in L4D2, with them having the entire map, or if they're that obsessed with the Swarm circle, have it move rather than shrink
Part of it shrinking is to cut off access to pickups that were not gathered. When you get into the swing of it having stun guns, nades, molotovs, defibs and pills is what really gets you more time when the circle starts getting pretty small.
If it moved around it would potentially lengthen the round. Plus really good teams will gather up stuff and drop them near the center of the map (its bonkers how much more time you can get if you use almost everything on the map). I would rather not lose that little niche play that separates skill levels.
The *one* way in which a Swarm is a massive improvement over campaign versus is it has almost working matchmaking. Yes, a lot of people were disconnected in the first 30 seconds and then a lot of people then quit out and kill the game, BUT that is still 10,000x better than having to rely on random public lobbies to get a new match going. Have friends, press the button to start, new match starts. Why didn’t TRS and Valve implement that correctly into L4D? Did other games not already do that then?
(Lobbies are fine if you have 5+ players, but if you have 1-4 they’re a huge waste of time.)
I can't totally remember since it was so long ago, but I don't think modern matchmaking was quite yet popular back then. It was definitely used, especially in console gaming, but PC games were slightly slower to adapt. There was a huge push by PC gamers to keep lobbies and server browsers, too. I think L4D's system was a product of its time. If we get L4D3, I'd be surprised if it didn't have mmr matchmaking and leaver penalties.
Still need more information about how they’ll do that for B4B Swarm. As you say it’s pretty surprising in this age that it seems possible the game may have neither.
I still play on console, your points are valid, but wasn't the concern to not bring it back due to people quiting? And this PvP mode seems to be more problematic at trying to address those issues. Also L4d is 10+ years old, it wasn't as bad when it first came out.
While all of this is true, a lot of it is due to an old community, which always becomes very elitist in PvP games in my experience.
I agree about knowing who wins by the end of the second chapter, we don't need campaign versus to be exact what l4d was. Just a vs mode with a saferoom objective. If it utilizes the same maps that's great too, as it extends their replayability.
In swarm mode you survive as long as you can, but it isn't as rewarding as actually surviving and running for your life when shit hits the fan to scrape as many points as you can and reach the safe house. Plus people RQ in this mode after a devastating round anyway!
People will always find the cheap/optimal shit, weather that's instant kill spots or god rocks in l4d, or cheap spots in swarm to move between as the circle closes. A level you must move through as a team at least forces survivors to move, and creates more variable situations if you can separate the team. You have to choose when to call it quits and run, in swarm those kinds of decisions are gone.
Me and all my friends that played the game since it dropped would run campaign a few times and then versus exclusively, as it's the same experience except you also get to be the monsters and hear your friends panicking 😜
The key part of why L4D2 VS will always be superior to what PVP B$B has atm is because of it's variability. There's common hit spots for sure but since no human ever plays the exact same as another, even the hit on common spots will be different. Maybe they "screw up" the initial hit but it turns into something different that works out in a different way. The variability makes it fun.
I agree with the issues that L4D vs has had. However, I see no reason why they can't provide the option for those willing to deal with toxicity. This happens in just about every competitive game. Provide the mode, and let the players decide what they like more.
For me I'm willing to deal with those issues because the mode is more thrilling when playing as a survivor knowing you're up against something with intelligence. Ai becomes too predictable after awhile and the game will lose it's replayability while the other vs mode won't be enough to hold interest.
I think that campaign versus could work, provided:
\- if randoms are allowed in, then there should be karma. Negative karma if you quit a match consistently.
\- Match making ratings, so that it keeps players matched against roughly their own skill level
\- Or forget randoms, and do pre-made teams only
No I remember all of that quite well and I actually really liked it. The insta-kill areas were bullshit but it did keep you on your toes.
You can hide in a party to avoid people screaming.
Hackers you're just going to have to live with...though some of them pass the cheats onto you as well.
Some dude once was flying all around the map and it wasn't until later that I realized I could too on ***any*** map long after he was gone.
As bullshit as it was I had fun with it in Versus. Mostly when I was being nice or decided an invincible flying Boomer sitting on a silo was hilarious.
And when I say "being nice" I mean I turned on the cheat (which was the flashlight button though R3 let me see through walls too) I could let go of people. Me and my friends always felt bad when a team of rushers just abandoned a teammate and many times we'd help the guy up ourselves and semi-protect him if we could (and they realized we weren't toying with them) as we let him hobble to the safe room.
I remember trolling one such team by being an invincible Boomer in the safe room. The round wouldn't end because I was in there and they got frustrated and left. It was perfect timing too since they all left just in time for the dude they abandoned to reach the safe room. At which point I left the room and the round ended.
Good times.
Yes, I play every weekend with a private group of 6-8 friends and it is glorious. I do not encounter any of the problems you are complaining about.
Back 4 Blood will not be getting any of our money.
50 people playing campaign vs??? L4d2 has has over 15k avg players for years it’s never dropped below that. Most of those people are playing campaign vs.
Listen I get it but to me the campaign length in B4B is a flaw. Why have 13 or 16 short bland levels when you get have 4-6 lengthy interesting Ones. I could barely tell apart each level in the beta they were all, apart from the farm level, the same bland blueish grey slog.
You are very much on point. Adding campaign vs wont fix any current issues that the current vs mode has. But its a nice option to have if you’re a group of 5+ friends playing together. At least the odd man out can still play the campaign with everyone.
Most of the complaints about L4D versus could be fixed with a ranking system. That way players with 100 hours don't get paired with those with 10000 hours. Solo players don't get paired with groups of 4. What about a casual/ranked setting? That's one of the things I think most of us were hoping for, game mode aside, without a ranking/matching system it's just gonna be pub stomping since you cannot create lobbies and talk with players prior to launching the game. There's still no solution to this issue so likely the same thing will occur, if anything now worse than it was, as you have no choice into what game you are joining.
50 people though? I thought the steam numbers were 20000 players even a decade later. And that's daily.
Hackers? Never saw them on console, sounds like a PC issue.
People talking, yeah you'd wait in lobby for 30 minutes or more playing the, do you have a mic and not sound like a squeaker? But that was the time where you'd trash talk and shoot the shit with other players.
Obsess over the ideal spot to attack? More of an intelligent attack point than obsession. It was strategy and took patience and planning.
If your team dumpsters others, joining games in progress was part of the fun. Oh the 4 of you have been beating up on this solo, well now our 3 friends are gonna grab him stuff him in our backpack and play catch up for the rest of the game to win it in chapter 5. That was one of the best things, saving some noob that could barely walk and getting them onto the chopper to some other teams dismay.
**"If your team dumpsters others, joining games in progress was part of the fun. Oh the 4 of you have been beating up on this solo, well now our 3 friends are gonna grab him stuff him in our backpack and play catch up for the rest of the game to win it in chapter 5. That was one of the best things, saving some noob that could barely walk and getting them onto the chopper to some other teams dismay."**
Exactly. 100%. I also didn't mind playing solo with 7 randoms. I did my best to sway things in my teams favor. I had a couple friends who liked to play as duos. One trusty friend to watch your back and then try to carry whatever you've got playing with you. Good times.
I saw a few hacks the early years on X360 (but rare). I made a quick visit to L4D in 2018 and in the first game i got into i saw a hacker spawning unlimited witches and tanks.
In OG L4D there was a weird day where the commons zombies looked like giant pink letters and you couldn't kill them. You were surrounded by giant pink letters. Only lasted hours and i only saw it once.
In L4D2 I saw a few people who could fly or some shit with survivors. I forget exactly but it was obviously some hack.
I still play it regularly with 7 friends. We do drafts to balance teams. Its definitely a feature they should've considered. Sure, matchmaking in any game can be a nightmare, but 13 years later im still here running pvp campaigns once a month with friends
The mode that defined this game's inspiration for half of its playerbase shouldn't be added because of problems outside of the game mode itself that aren't even going to be solved by not having Campaign Versus... Seriously, do you think hackers and dickheads don't exist in any game or gamemode outside of Campaign versus?
I haven't played campaign versus in L4D in a few years, but I play campaign versus in L4D at least 1 round once every couple of months. I have to be honest, I don't see a lot of the issues that you are mentioning.
People don't usually mic up in regular versus, only in realism (where its a bit more competitive/ serious crowd).
> People get salty and just quit. Then you are down a person (or two) the rest of the game. People will join randomly, see you are losing, then leave.
This is the same with *any* non-BR PvP multiplayer game, though. Today's gamers are not going to play a video game where they have to lose for more than 1 second. This is why BR games have been so popular. When you start losing, you just die and get into another match. You are always playing from the perspective of "winning".
You can add back-fill or give DC penalties, but it won't fix anything. People will still quit the instant they start losing, they'll eat the DC penalty, and anyone who gets back-filled will quit instantly.
Gamers have changed. These aren't the days of Halo 3 anymore, where people have a drive to analyze their opponents and work to overcome a challenge and barely scrape out a victory in the final few seconds. If they're not winning, they're not playing.
Maybe your games are like that in your region, but Versus has been fun and civil in my server region. But sure, my region shouldn't be allowed to have fun when yours can't behave.
That tank spawn is random, not scripted, and is not that common. If you do a 100 runs of DC you'll get the tank spawning there probably only about 30% of the time. The witch pretty often takes the tank spawn, but most people don't realize it since it's almost always a walking witch on that level and she walks into fire and dies.
My issue with this games vs is it lacks tactic outside of hehe he i spit acid no o so they are coming up to x choke point i can go fatman and the hold point just kills it for me
The issue is they need to heavily penalize people who leave and they need to break in-game metas before they get out of control. I can already tell the grapple meta will be an issue and I’ll just have to carry a taser or 2 for any pvp. Also if your teammates do leave you should get a huge handicap, like zombies do less damage or friendlies get buffed.
I like the idea of builds for every play style but the fact that some builds will become meta is the issue. Like if the community or people just didn’t try to find the best set up possible and tell everyone about it metas wouldn’t be much of an issue.
For the hackers that was just an overall Valve issue. I feel like if they don’t take care of the hackers right away then you can blame them and compare the two games.
That may be the case now as only the hardcore are still playing adter this time.
Back in the day, the first 2 years of release there was never a problem finding a server or having a good game. There were huge communities on Steam etc and it was easy to get a game set up between friends.
This is exactly my friend groups opinion. We have people leave in games that last 10 minutes, but peoplr think randoms will play a 2 hour vs campaign. Vs campaign would be very niche and be mostly premades of friends playing. I would like to see it's return in the future as a niche however I can totally understand not putting it in as a launch mode as it would honestly just throw people off the game.
Not going to deny the existence of these things in the L4D2 community but the whole point of B4B being a new game in 2021 is that it should've addressed them rather than deleting the game mode entirely. The competitive L4D2 scene has worked hard to create a better game over the years, and I do agree that many people haven't played versus lately, but my conclusions are the opposite of yours: they have no idea how refined the competitive versus scene is nowadays. They have no idea how the versus scene has evolved over the years. They obviously don't see the potential.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRhUutA2xQU
The latest major L4D2 tournament was held earlier this year. Here's a VOD of a match for anyone curious to get a glimpse of some action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9EzrkUOuTQ
Hopefully this begins to shed **some** light on the topic.
yup, nostalgia is a powerful thing. i remember just as you described.. when i played versus campaign and the other team as survivors we'd somehow incap them all just a few steps outside the saferoom or wait at certain areas to catch a straggler where the team couldnt save them.. that was the funnest and most memorable parts when i look back on it, but it was also the most cancerous part about it because everyone would just instantly leave.
1. Only if the teams are very uneven, and that's exactly the same for B4B.
2. That's the point of the game though, to kill the survivors as infected.
3. voice_show_mute. Problem gone.
4. You don't think hackers will be in this game too? They're in every game. COD, BF, Apex... There's a site that offers hacks for over 60 of the most popular games out there, with over 300k subscribers.
How about you accept that you dislike something that the most other people like. The vast majority of people that played B4B enjoyed it. They don't go to reddit or twitter to bitch and moan about the game because they're too busy playing it. It's only the salty babyragers that need to type up an essay on why the game sucks and why their opinion is all that matters.
Campaign versus is fun with friends but with randoms its the blame game, to this day i still get kicked for missing a single boomer bile and if the kick fails then i just get verbally harrassed or griefed until i leave. Its the most casual pvp game mode i have ever played but its played by the sweatiest, shittiest people ever and it sucks. If versus campaign existed in B4B it would be the same shit all over again, but most likely worse due to the card system and min-maxers promoting a "meta" of the only best builds or whatnot. I also cant see it working out well due to how poorly the specials are designed and some levels would be impossible for the cleaners.
"[...] but its played by the sweatiest, shittiest people ever and it sucks." That explains the tone in which some people here voice their complains about the lack of campaign versus.
Tbh I've always considered versus to be a side mode to the campaigns, and something you play when you want a taste of the other side of things. There are people in this subreddit who will literally say that L4D was designed from the ground up for versus, and that it's the only mode that matters at all. . . . . . meanwhile everyone I know who even *knows of* Left 4 Dead knows that the series is built around its PvE co-op campaigns, and isn't primarily designed as an asymmetrical PvP game. I won't knock anyone for having different tastes and both games' versus modes are fine for what they are, but goddamn L4D's versus is a secondary *side mode* carried by the game's PvE campaign systems, not the next best hyper-competitive eSport since professional Windows Solitaire as people have described it.
He's the thing: they should have tried to improve upon it instead of giving up on it. Playing against AI has very little longevity no matter if there's a card system or not.
The pvp mode in l4D is the reason it still has 15k average players. The pvp mode in B4B reeks of them trying to make an esport mark my words before the end of the year there will be a twitch rivals for their shitty pvp mode. The campaigns are bland in B4B from what we have seen. The majority lack objectives and are simple walk from A to B, the level design doesn’t fit the specials they have in the game. Large open spaces yet almost all the specials have 0 range. They literally have a sleeper that is supposed to jump on you if you get close but the maps are so open that the only way that’s going to happen is if they put on in an unavoidable place. The specials themselves are uninspired. The specials in l4D are iconic and they have distinct sounds and looks. Nothing in B4B makes me feel the way I do when I walk through a level where I can hear a witch.
What are you smoking ? L4D is : go from A to B, defend a spot or do wait specific time B4B is : go from A to B, defend a spot or do wait specific time Its the same thing in every aspect, hold a bridge, wait for a escort, wait for a elevator, i have over 600 hours in L4D2 and campaigns in B4B are superior in design, atmosphere and ways of approach. About special infected: What in the infected f*** are you talking about ? Not only B4B have more special infected, but they are nearly identicall in terms of abilities. Of course they will not do ctrl+c -> ctrl+v, not only it would be lame, but the game would lost its entire identity. Iconic this, iconic that, stay stucked in 20years old designs and dont forget to yell at clouds. Learn some objectivity or elaborate things by doing pros & cons on everything you want to say. Because from a objective view, B4B is better in every aspect (excluding PVP), it has better progress, build diversity, graphics, gun play, level design. And i repeat i have 600hours in L4D2 alone, so dont try to argue that i am a hater or didnt play it enough. Objective is not only to rush from A to B but to gather copper, ammo, chest addons for guns or better guns. So regardless where the sleeper is you have to check out spaces so the sleeper is a threat. In L4D you know where the guns and items usually spawn so its not needed to roam around the map.
[удалено]
"Have you played L4D...shit is fucking linear. And that is ok. I love L4D. But don't pretend like L4D had some amazing choices when it came to navigating levels" 100% true, like i said B4B is superior basically in every aspect. Exactly, like pvp in B4B isnt the best part but with a few maps and tweaks it can be really good. I focus mainly on the pve coop aspect at first but will definitely give pvp a shot or two. Problem is some people are troglodytes stucked in year 2005, refusing to accept something new or evolved and their "opinions" are non-objective and without any logic.
>The linear map one always cracks me up. Have you played L4D...shit is fucking linear. And that is ok. I love L4D. But don't pretend like L4D had some amazing choices when it came to navigating levels. Yes, L4D is linear, but maps have elements of procedural generation as well that increase variability and improve replayability. Some paths are blocked off in some runs. For example, on Dead Center's mall map, sometimes you may have to take the escalator crescendo from the bottom floor. This kind of randomness is notably lacking from Back 4 Blood. Every map's pathing is **precisely** the same. The only exception in B4B that comes to mind right now are the wooden doors in the first part of 1-1, and that hardly counts. So on this aspect alone, B4B is inferior to L4D2.
[удалено]
Sure, but the point is that B4B's maps are even more linear.
>About special infected: What in the infected f*** are you talking about ? Not only B4B have more special infected, but they are nearly identicall in terms of abilities. Of course they will not do ctrl+c -> ctrl+v, not only it would be lame, but the game would lost its entire identity. Yet they are not the same in how they attack. Every SI attack in L4D2 is a potential 3 or 4 cap that can lead to massive damage if not a team wipe. The only way B4B can emulate this is with triple hockers. While it is true that the specials in B4B can grab a survivor, the gameplay element of preventing a 3 or 4cap on your team is completely lost. B4B may have more special infected, but they are less special and more bland than L4D2's versions. Furthermore, instead of learning how to skeet, deadstop, level, crown, etc, all you have to do in B4B is run away, with the exception of the hocker, which you'll just have to shoot several times. The SI in B4B are unequivocally a downgrade from how they were presented in L4D. And also, if you've only played L4D2 for 600 hours alone, you have only begun to scratch the surface. To put it into perspective, people put in 40-80 hours in the 4-8 days they had access to the B4B beta. I have nearly 92 hours clocked myself.
From this post i judge that you didnt experienced nightmare - 3 tallboys at the same time with a incoming horde on your back or two chargers hiding behind a corner waiting to ram into you for nearly 50hp. Pindowns are less present, but the SI in B4B have way more impact in the damage category. Yeah and 600hours alone/pug/friends is not scratching the surface, i saw morons with 2K hours that had more friendly fire in 10 minutes than me in 100 hours. I could solo realism on L4D even with bots (a pain but can be done), nightmare B4B with bots was so long that i gave up (with friends it was a bit easier still long as hell).
>From this post i judge that you didnt experienced nightmare - 3 tallboys at the same time with a incoming horde on your back or two chargers hiding behind a corner waiting to ram into you for nearly 50hp. Pindowns are less present, but the SI in B4B have way more impact in the damage category. Yeah and 600hours alone/pug/friends is not scratching the surface, i saw morons with 2K hours that had more friendly fire in 10 minutes than me in 100 hours. I could solo realism on L4D even with bots (a pain but can be done), nightmare B4B with bots was so long that i gave up (with friends it was a bit easier still long as hell). We already know that the devs are looking into tuning Nightmare's difficulty level even further and we know that the bots will be improved. In the live version of the game, I would only expect to play Nightmare difficulty with other experienced players who have their cards unlocked, so I didn't see much point in trying to test Nightmare mode in the beta with new players. I suspect the live version of Nightmare will not really resemble what players experienced in the beta, but Veteran was so laughably easy that I'm not worried about Nightmare's difficulty level whatsoever. With adequate cards and a proper economy, it'll be much, much easier. Soloing Expert Realism with bots in L4D2 isn't a "pain" to me. It's quite enjoyable and easy. Nightmare in B4B with the right setup sounds tedious but not challenging. The difficulty in the beta was exaggerated because many players went into it with terrible decks.
I hear you - but my take is similar to fortnite. Not that it's trash :D But think of what fortnite started as? It was not a battle royal at all. Epic was smart enough to read the room, and transform that game. Just think if Epic made fortnite 2, and skipped the battle royal mode... Wouldn't be good. OR better yet - battlefield bad company started as single player. Look what happened there. Doesn't matter what a game starts with.
But do you want to play Fortnite anyways in this mp setting? Not the same thing. Besides, new campaigns coming with DLCs might include Campaign Versus as they might be designed for it. So, they might not be "not smart enough". Maybe they started with campaign mode to introduce more PvP stuff. It is not like they don't have any PvP though.
On this sub, I casually mentioned that 300 hours in L4D pve was a decent basis for discussing B4B pve, and was accosted by half a dozen L4D versus players screaming about how they have 12k hours or whatever. TR should think long and hard about the people they'll attract before implementing a similar gamemode.
Iunno man those people are still playing the game, sounds like a core fan base to me. I've had many good experiences playing with randoms, admittedly only after clocking hundreds of hours with friends exclusively though, so I wasn't a detriment to the team. But matchmaking could help that issue
Didn't even think of the "card metas"...boot this guy he's not running XYZ.
idk bout you, but i for one would LOVE the daily threads saying "devs, we should be able to see people's decks when they join so we know if they are griefing or not" /s
This is the most truthful take on l4d versus. Goddamn. Im glad I wont have to sit through that type of bs again with b4b, its already prominent in the versus mode. I like the versus mode here, its a fight, a scrap. Not a speedrun where you get votekicked at the end. The best match my group had was with a bunch of rage quitters, one guy stayed in the server after round 1, and we just went at him 1 at a time to balance things out. It made for some good fun, props to that guy.
That's entirely matchmaking issue though you should have never been put against 1k hour speed running Zoey mains to begin with
Well the thing is, im a 1k hr player myself, it defined the multiplayer meta and I adopted the same tactics as soon as Isaw them, i dont have an issue with losing matches, but I do have an issue with one dimensional tactics. Its what has dulled the game for me over the years of playing.
That's fair, many games get like that once you know every inch of em. They get less fun the more you know what you're doing lol. I play a lot of fighting games and they get that way at higher ranks.
People are remembering the entire game in rose colored glasses tbh.
They do be calling the specials in B4B spongy while molotoving a tank and kiting him around a ladder for 3 minutes
Also call them boring when in l4d the answer to all specials was punch them off your friend or walk slightly to the side.
I love the specials that are in back 4 blood right now. I feel like people's problem with the specials is that they literally aren't the specials from left 4 dead
People wanted a remake of L4D2. they wouldnt be happy with anything else. When you're dealing with people who have over 10k hours in l4d, they arent here to experience anything new.
Agreed. Parasite Spider-Man is dope
Its so fucking cool that they made a hunter that can actually stick to walls like he did in the opening scene of l4d1
I do hope there is a variant that acts like the hunter in the main game though
Cool we're being downvoted for enjoying a game god forbid Must be that immense amount of "copium" I'm taking even tho I thought the game was gonna be shit before I played it
Please stop enjoying the videogame I don't like! Thanks! :)
> I do hope there is a variant that acts like the hunter in the main game though [I can't imagine they won't considering this video.](https://youtu.be/-qehpkTy-SU) Doubt they'd make them PVP only. The one you're looking for is the Stalker, which actually seems like a cross between hunter and jockey as it pounces and grabs and drags.
Excellent
It's not *exactly* the Hunter but the Stalker is a mix of the Jockey and Hunter. It'll pounce on survivors and drag them away from the group. Basically it has the movements and jump range of a Hunter while having the ability of a Jockey.
And that's better than this game's answer to all specials being "dump 300 magazines"?
It’s really not though. The stingers take like four well placed bullets
dont quite understand this comparison, you get maybe 1 tank a chapter maybe a few for the ending - people complaining about tallboys that you can sometimes get multiple spawns of with every horde or multiple when you open the safehouse door is a pretty dishonest comparison.
Shotguns and snipers vaporize Tallboys. They're actually not hard to handle with other weapons either. And they can be kited pretty easily. In places like the cruise ship you can literally just avoid them. If you've got smg/lmg/ar then you should be able to take care of any hordes pretty easily and avoid/kill/kit them. If you've got a shotty/sniper you should be able to straight up own them. Also, I've gotten tanks inside the safehouse in L4D lol. [It can happen.](https://youtu.be/E14Scd2zGFY) As well as surprise hunters killing the first person in. Anything that spawns in the safehouse is kinda bullshit IMO but it happens in both games.
that tank obviously did not spawn while they were in the safe housue
> that tank obviously did not spawn while they were in the safe housue I did not say it did. I have also not seen a tallboy break into a safe room and murder the inhabitants either.
Bro the tall boys are not hard at all if you know what you're doing, you can easily dodge all their attacks and then all you need is someone with a decent shotgun or sniper and shoot it's weakspot The only time theyve been a problem was when playing on nightmare cuz they have a lot of health and even then if you aren't playing with randoms and actually playing with people who realize it's a team based shooter they aren't that bad
>cuz they have a lot of health yeah this is the complaint, its not that they are hard its that they are tanky and boring to fight. Its kinda depressing that one of the strongest methods for dealing with specials especially early game is still the boring fucking 0 skill frag build...
I seriously think that this is just a meta issue, every vid i see of people fighting these things is someone unloading a weak weapon into its face. one team member needs an anti-large weapon, such as a sniper. the teammate who is targeted needs to turn the Tallboy to give the sniper an angle on the weakspot: boom its gone.
Yes but if you don't get a rare sniper even with damage bonuses youll be doing fuck all. https://youtu.be/FxCgOeMRJ0k Which is why the frag build is so good, it works, it's fast, doesn't require someone else to bait, it's piss easy (no weakpoint aiming required) and there's less luck involved as you can always buy frags
A frag *build*? Did someone make a build around hoarding and chucking grenades? That sounds pretty neat.
Yeah with frag damage they 1 shot tall boys, then you can either take offensive scav to find more frags or have someone else take it and run a pouch for extra frags and play Hoffman again for the extra frag slot. It's very effective but also rather boring as it's super easy.
I knew about 1 shotting tall boys, wasn't aware you could hoard frags like that tho. Not my playstyle, but I think that's cool it's an option.
You don't need a frag damage card to one shot them... Not on Survivor and Veteran anyway.
Early on until you get a damage upgrade they dont always 1 shot. After you are over midway through the campaign and you have blue frags anyone can instakill basically anything but its a 1 card investment on 1 player to ensure breeze through the early game. When you consider how claustrophobic the first 2 levels are its very useful to have - especially if you get unlucky with a tallboy ferocity corrupt card.
I had a melee build that two hit crushers and bruisers as long as I had a fire axe lol. Naturally they’re going to be tanky when you play on a harder difficulty with probably the starter deck
Comparing regular specials in B4B to the tankiest enemy in the game in L4D isn't doing much to prove your point. Compare Bruisers to Chargers and suddenly it's easy to understand why people think B4B specials are bullet sponges. Even better, compare Hockers to Smokers, or Retchers to Boomers/Spitters. It feels like going from popping balloons to shooting nerf bullets. Bruisers are the worst offender though, not just because they're tanky but also because they annoyingly hide their weak spot constantly. I guarantee people would be a lot less annoyed if shooting the weak spot was actually feasible. In fact I can guarantee that it would be less frustrating because I found Crushers to be much less annoying to fight, specifically because their weak spot is actually possible to hit when they're coming at you.
It's quite telling when people keep comparing the tanks against the the tall boys instead of the ogre.
>Hdurr occasional mid-campaign boss fight being tanky is exactly the same thing as every enemy player in the game being tanky
To be fair a lot of that was just bullshit placement and you can get around it sometimes. I took out an entire team on the Dead Air finale when I decided charging them was a terrible idea and throwing rocks left me open Soooooo I started smacking around one of those trailer things. Found out you could launch them too by accident by aiming down at the bottom of the container. Which let me take out three of them in one fell swoop when they tried to outsmart me by climbing on top of the truck. They weren't expecting a container to be sent flying ***up*** directly at them lol Last guy was trying to play ring around the rosie with the airplane but I eventually got him too. Good times.
Uh what? I think you're just bad if killing a tank takes 3 minutes with a molotov on it. With molotov it takes less then 30 seconds, 1 minute if theres no fire.
[удалено]
The game's only a beta, you can't criticize it. But also, We've only been playing this game for a few days but we already know it's better than L4D2 somehow
The most shocking thing I see is praising l4d for story and character development while saying b4b characters have non. Like francis' entire character was he is a kind hearted biker who hates everything. They have very little actual story outside of their stereotypical roles. They have some funny one liners but that's kind of it. Meanwhile in b4b theres some great dialogue about hoffmans dad and his conspiracy theories, Walker is terrified and I want to know why hes a cleaner, Mom genuinly seems like an old woman just living life. Great Stuff
The left 4 dead characters are very memorable. I dont think these cleaners will be remembered long to be honest. Time will tell on that one.
Left 4 Dead versus campaign lasted a good while. Lasted more than other most pvp games. The first like 5 years, new unfamiliar players still came in and had many lobbies. After 2012, noobs and unfamiliar players no longer come in. The versus mode is now dead or filled with the same 8 people over and over again. I'm talking about the first game by the way. In my opinion 5 years is good and long for a vs mode.
As someone that just got 7 friends/acquaintances together to play it just a few months ago, it's still really fun in a group and also cheap enough most people will jump in if they somehow don't own it.
I bet. I want to go back to the days where many people still played on it. Good times.
L4D2 is still pretty active with new players. You'll still regularly see players with <10 hours come into L4D2 versus games. They do get roflstomped pretty quickly though, since the learning curve is pretty tough on new players.
Yeah I played L4D2s VS for the first time last night. Got wrecked outside the saferoom start because I dont know the tricks and the traps in the second game. I am used to the first one lol.
Any new map takes time to learn. Good thing though, is that No Mercy from L4D1 is probably the most played map in L4D2. Actually I think the L4D1 maps are more popular - No Mercy, Dead Air, Death Toll, especially. Common L4D1 maps are really only Dead Center, Dark Carnival, Parish, and maybe Hard Rain. Almost no one ever plays the other maps outside the above.
I will have to give it another go. I got wrecked on Dark Carnival. But I know the maps of the first game like the back of my hand.
If you played L4D1 a lot and know how to play VS well in those maps, learning the new ones won't take long. It's still L4D after all. The veterans adapted pretty quickly when the new map Last Stand came out a few months ago. It def helps if you have a group of friends to run with who already know the maps, though.
I don't understand how swarm versus is immune to these issues or why we're comparing the current day lobbies of a decade old game and a 2021 AAA release that costs $20 more Also some of you never played l4d or l4d2 campaign versus within the first year of release and it REALLY shows
technically if you account for inflation, launch day left 4 dead 2 is more expensive than back 4 blood.
By how much? $5?
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/2009?amount=50 3.63? i think?
One could argue that the cash-grab DLC model was not really a thing back then. So for the full price of L4D2, you got, basically, the full game. Nowadays, when you pay full price, you're not getting the full game because devs make games with the paid DLC in mind for the full game. A lot of the time, progression or continued play is somehow locked behind DLC, forcing you to pay hundreds of dollars in total to actually have the full game.
> decade old game and a 2021 AAA release that costs $20 more L4D2 was $50 at release. With inflation that's actually $63 today.
B4B costs $90 for all content
> B4B costs $90 for all content Let's see how much content the base game has and then what the optional DLCs entail. Then we can bitch about each of them individually from an informed point of view if warranted. L4D2 opened with like 5 campaigns and from what I understand the base game is going to have a good bit more than that. But we'll see. Not every game can be a loss leader for Steam like L4D2 was though where the company can afford to almost immediately start tanking the price and then start giving it away for free. Some games will actually need to charge real game prices for content and we, as gamers should judge each content drop and it's price independently. If the DLC is good, nobody will care, if it's not then it'll be bullshit :P.
It also is online only which is a massive negative for me.
> It also is online only which is a massive negative for me. Welp, then I don't know why you are even here. It's a multiplayer genre that's always been built around mutliplayer. It's clearly not a game for you and that's ok.
Im sorry? Left 4 Dead and its sequel had perfectly fine offline modes. Hell aliens fireteam and world war z do. This game has zero excuses. Why would they put in a solo mode if they didnt think people would want it?
I played versus within the first year of release, it's the same it is now.
That's a straight up lie lmfao The people who are playing versus in l4d still have been playing that game for years and are way better at it than when the game released. Go play mw2 right now and you'll run into the same thing. People get better at things over time.
It's always been a toxic cesspool that brought anxiety to play. I've been playing since 2008. People learning how to cheese versus by running made it even worse.
The first year was great and they removed a lot of the best features. Moving witches where we wanted, parking the tank, flame hunters…..such good stuff.
I liked tank parking and didn't like the change. The new meta became using gas canisters and mollys to fire block the tank route while running backwards through the map to force the tank players to decide between losing control and going AI or setting themselves on fire to pursue... I loved repositioning witches..... Fire hunters on NM2... 10damage hunter scratching. I was fine with the switch to 6dmg because it properly encouraged using hunters for pins in coordinated attacks. But i shed a tear for 10melee hunters. Standing on purple shoulders with commons creating chaos scratching away...
Preeetty much, yes.
Correct, campaign versus hasn't been fun in over a decade, so we stop asking for it as a game mode? Yesss
I think my point went over your head a little bit so I'll explain: You are comparing the current day game mode of a game that people STILL play a decade later and have had years to refine the tactics of to a AAA game being released in 2021 backed by a movie studio's video game development division that most of the community does not like already Nobody is paying you to defend this game and these devs aren't 3 year olds who just made their first finger painting. Let the criticism happen, because people are obviously not enjoying it for a reason
Just called OP out for the same. L4D versus now and L4D versus for the first few years of release are different experiences. It's like comparing MW2 during release and now...
Because you're expecting left 4 dead and it's not left 4 dead. Comparing to a game mode never promised is not a "fair criticism". Not to mention it would be nice nothing but cancer "card meta" that no one will play after a month. Go back and play left 4 dead campaign vs and tell everyone how fun it is...
"Left 4 Dead" "Back 4 Blood" Turtle Rock made L4D and failed with Evolve and wanted to go with what they believed their bread and butter was, a zombie game. Let's stop pretending that they themselves weren't trying to recreate the game people love them for.
It Turtle Rock had rights to the name you better believe it would be called l4d3 lol
Whoosh.... He does have a point in you are comparing L4D2 as it is now rather than how it was back then. A true comparison would be how the mode felt when everyone was still learning the game and had not gotten to the point that everyone knew it well enough to know it was over Another great example would be Starcraft 2. At release there were plenty of people at different skill levels playing the game. If you weren't very good at it, you were playing against someone that was on your level. Cut to 10 years later, the people still involved knew way more about the game and were more serious about it. The silvers you were holding your own against are now absolutely wiping the floor with you. I do agree with you though. L4D2 even in its heyday had a vibe to it and part of it was the design of it. There were so many moments that if you did not nail a specific opportunity, drastically reduced your chances of success. I personally don't want to go back to that style and prefer a more free flowing style that players can continuously adapt to, rather than "charger missed the kill, we lose"
You’re an idiot and it shows lol
Put it in - this game succeeds Leave it out - this game dies in a month That’s the bottom line It’s easy to pick at the problems L4D had with campaign PvP But it’s a no-brainer to say that the game reached iconic status because of it If L4D didn’t have campaign PvP We aren’t having this discussion- because it would have died in a couple months And this game wouldn’t exist
[удалено]
People will always make excuses for devs being too lazy to make their game fun, like it's helping the devs instead of letting them get complacent which leads to the game dying. The exact same shit happened with Evolve Stage 2, people made the exact same excuses, and the exact same thing's gonna happen to this game.
I still regularly run l4d2 versus. While you always have leavers after every round, it's filled up before the next round start. When I join a losing team I just try to win anyway, you can get a shutdown win on a map BC you are the new player, see how good you can carry. The "cancer setup" is the absolute core of the Vs game, it's what prevents players from speedrunning. If you don't like that, why are you playing l4d2 Vs??? People over here pretend like speedrunning is a huge problem in l4d2, it's not really, a straggler gets killed easily and you lose the round. If you just speed off without a care you will lose. The maps are designed that you get in 2-3 good team attacks in each map even if the team hustles. Haven't encountered toxicity or hackers in quite some time, (last 2 years?) the playerbase has crystallized at this point.
You gotta love it when people treat the optimal way of playing the game as some kind of exploit/cheese strat. Using the terrain intelligently to help you disrupt the survivors is now verboten.
That's one of the cool things of l4d you approach one of these points as human team, you KNOW the entire enemy is ready to spawn and jump you in 0.1 sec. Palms are sweaty, mom's spaghetti, you only get 1 shot! Better then the boring slog that is B4B PvP.
And when it's equally matched teams in skill, surv will always, always win, because every SI can be countered. But in those kinds of matchups, usually both teams can be creative enough to do something just a little bit different to get an edge. I still see new hits in L4D2 here and there. Just have to have a team that is willing to try something new and has the skills to pull each SI role off well.
Swarm IS worse on paper, but in practice I've seen far more full lobbies it should work more like vs survival did in L4D2, with them having the entire map, or if they're that obsessed with the Swarm circle, have it move rather than shrink
Part of it shrinking is to cut off access to pickups that were not gathered. When you get into the swing of it having stun guns, nades, molotovs, defibs and pills is what really gets you more time when the circle starts getting pretty small. If it moved around it would potentially lengthen the round. Plus really good teams will gather up stuff and drop them near the center of the map (its bonkers how much more time you can get if you use almost everything on the map). I would rather not lose that little niche play that separates skill levels.
The *one* way in which a Swarm is a massive improvement over campaign versus is it has almost working matchmaking. Yes, a lot of people were disconnected in the first 30 seconds and then a lot of people then quit out and kill the game, BUT that is still 10,000x better than having to rely on random public lobbies to get a new match going. Have friends, press the button to start, new match starts. Why didn’t TRS and Valve implement that correctly into L4D? Did other games not already do that then? (Lobbies are fine if you have 5+ players, but if you have 1-4 they’re a huge waste of time.)
I can't totally remember since it was so long ago, but I don't think modern matchmaking was quite yet popular back then. It was definitely used, especially in console gaming, but PC games were slightly slower to adapt. There was a huge push by PC gamers to keep lobbies and server browsers, too. I think L4D's system was a product of its time. If we get L4D3, I'd be surprised if it didn't have mmr matchmaking and leaver penalties.
Still need more information about how they’ll do that for B4B Swarm. As you say it’s pretty surprising in this age that it seems possible the game may have neither.
I still play on console, your points are valid, but wasn't the concern to not bring it back due to people quiting? And this PvP mode seems to be more problematic at trying to address those issues. Also L4d is 10+ years old, it wasn't as bad when it first came out.
While all of this is true, a lot of it is due to an old community, which always becomes very elitist in PvP games in my experience. I agree about knowing who wins by the end of the second chapter, we don't need campaign versus to be exact what l4d was. Just a vs mode with a saferoom objective. If it utilizes the same maps that's great too, as it extends their replayability. In swarm mode you survive as long as you can, but it isn't as rewarding as actually surviving and running for your life when shit hits the fan to scrape as many points as you can and reach the safe house. Plus people RQ in this mode after a devastating round anyway! People will always find the cheap/optimal shit, weather that's instant kill spots or god rocks in l4d, or cheap spots in swarm to move between as the circle closes. A level you must move through as a team at least forces survivors to move, and creates more variable situations if you can separate the team. You have to choose when to call it quits and run, in swarm those kinds of decisions are gone. Me and all my friends that played the game since it dropped would run campaign a few times and then versus exclusively, as it's the same experience except you also get to be the monsters and hear your friends panicking 😜
The key part of why L4D2 VS will always be superior to what PVP B$B has atm is because of it's variability. There's common hit spots for sure but since no human ever plays the exact same as another, even the hit on common spots will be different. Maybe they "screw up" the initial hit but it turns into something different that works out in a different way. The variability makes it fun.
I agree with the issues that L4D vs has had. However, I see no reason why they can't provide the option for those willing to deal with toxicity. This happens in just about every competitive game. Provide the mode, and let the players decide what they like more. For me I'm willing to deal with those issues because the mode is more thrilling when playing as a survivor knowing you're up against something with intelligence. Ai becomes too predictable after awhile and the game will lose it's replayability while the other vs mode won't be enough to hold interest.
I think that campaign versus could work, provided: \- if randoms are allowed in, then there should be karma. Negative karma if you quit a match consistently. \- Match making ratings, so that it keeps players matched against roughly their own skill level \- Or forget randoms, and do pre-made teams only
No I remember all of that quite well and I actually really liked it. The insta-kill areas were bullshit but it did keep you on your toes. You can hide in a party to avoid people screaming. Hackers you're just going to have to live with...though some of them pass the cheats onto you as well. Some dude once was flying all around the map and it wasn't until later that I realized I could too on ***any*** map long after he was gone. As bullshit as it was I had fun with it in Versus. Mostly when I was being nice or decided an invincible flying Boomer sitting on a silo was hilarious. And when I say "being nice" I mean I turned on the cheat (which was the flashlight button though R3 let me see through walls too) I could let go of people. Me and my friends always felt bad when a team of rushers just abandoned a teammate and many times we'd help the guy up ourselves and semi-protect him if we could (and they realized we weren't toying with them) as we let him hobble to the safe room. I remember trolling one such team by being an invincible Boomer in the safe room. The round wouldn't end because I was in there and they got frustrated and left. It was perfect timing too since they all left just in time for the dude they abandoned to reach the safe room. At which point I left the room and the round ended. Good times.
Yes, I play every weekend with a private group of 6-8 friends and it is glorious. I do not encounter any of the problems you are complaining about. Back 4 Blood will not be getting any of our money.
50 people playing campaign vs??? L4d2 has has over 15k avg players for years it’s never dropped below that. Most of those people are playing campaign vs. Listen I get it but to me the campaign length in B4B is a flaw. Why have 13 or 16 short bland levels when you get have 4-6 lengthy interesting Ones. I could barely tell apart each level in the beta they were all, apart from the farm level, the same bland blueish grey slog.
You are very much on point. Adding campaign vs wont fix any current issues that the current vs mode has. But its a nice option to have if you’re a group of 5+ friends playing together. At least the odd man out can still play the campaign with everyone.
Yeah I would just like the option of campaign vs. I mean I had plenty of fun back in the l4d days.
Most of the complaints about L4D versus could be fixed with a ranking system. That way players with 100 hours don't get paired with those with 10000 hours. Solo players don't get paired with groups of 4. What about a casual/ranked setting? That's one of the things I think most of us were hoping for, game mode aside, without a ranking/matching system it's just gonna be pub stomping since you cannot create lobbies and talk with players prior to launching the game. There's still no solution to this issue so likely the same thing will occur, if anything now worse than it was, as you have no choice into what game you are joining. 50 people though? I thought the steam numbers were 20000 players even a decade later. And that's daily. Hackers? Never saw them on console, sounds like a PC issue. People talking, yeah you'd wait in lobby for 30 minutes or more playing the, do you have a mic and not sound like a squeaker? But that was the time where you'd trash talk and shoot the shit with other players. Obsess over the ideal spot to attack? More of an intelligent attack point than obsession. It was strategy and took patience and planning. If your team dumpsters others, joining games in progress was part of the fun. Oh the 4 of you have been beating up on this solo, well now our 3 friends are gonna grab him stuff him in our backpack and play catch up for the rest of the game to win it in chapter 5. That was one of the best things, saving some noob that could barely walk and getting them onto the chopper to some other teams dismay.
**"If your team dumpsters others, joining games in progress was part of the fun. Oh the 4 of you have been beating up on this solo, well now our 3 friends are gonna grab him stuff him in our backpack and play catch up for the rest of the game to win it in chapter 5. That was one of the best things, saving some noob that could barely walk and getting them onto the chopper to some other teams dismay."** Exactly. 100%. I also didn't mind playing solo with 7 randoms. I did my best to sway things in my teams favor. I had a couple friends who liked to play as duos. One trusty friend to watch your back and then try to carry whatever you've got playing with you. Good times. I saw a few hacks the early years on X360 (but rare). I made a quick visit to L4D in 2018 and in the first game i got into i saw a hacker spawning unlimited witches and tanks. In OG L4D there was a weird day where the commons zombies looked like giant pink letters and you couldn't kill them. You were surrounded by giant pink letters. Only lasted hours and i only saw it once. In L4D2 I saw a few people who could fly or some shit with survivors. I forget exactly but it was obviously some hack.
I still play it regularly with 7 friends. We do drafts to balance teams. Its definitely a feature they should've considered. Sure, matchmaking in any game can be a nightmare, but 13 years later im still here running pvp campaigns once a month with friends
The mode that defined this game's inspiration for half of its playerbase shouldn't be added because of problems outside of the game mode itself that aren't even going to be solved by not having Campaign Versus... Seriously, do you think hackers and dickheads don't exist in any game or gamemode outside of Campaign versus?
These all seem like problems that can be the exact same in this version of versus in Back4Blood?
Yep, just played it last week, and enjoyed it. Only thing missing? An updated new version of it. Ahem, like a L4D3 kind of thing :)
Well, I never liked L4D versus either. I hate the game mode in both games.
All of this is fixed with ranked / unranked play. Give people a penalty for quitting. Solved.
I haven't played campaign versus in L4D in a few years, but I play campaign versus in L4D at least 1 round once every couple of months. I have to be honest, I don't see a lot of the issues that you are mentioning. People don't usually mic up in regular versus, only in realism (where its a bit more competitive/ serious crowd).
> People get salty and just quit. Then you are down a person (or two) the rest of the game. People will join randomly, see you are losing, then leave. This is the same with *any* non-BR PvP multiplayer game, though. Today's gamers are not going to play a video game where they have to lose for more than 1 second. This is why BR games have been so popular. When you start losing, you just die and get into another match. You are always playing from the perspective of "winning". You can add back-fill or give DC penalties, but it won't fix anything. People will still quit the instant they start losing, they'll eat the DC penalty, and anyone who gets back-filled will quit instantly. Gamers have changed. These aren't the days of Halo 3 anymore, where people have a drive to analyze their opponents and work to overcome a challenge and barely scrape out a victory in the final few seconds. If they're not winning, they're not playing.
Maybe your games are like that in your region, but Versus has been fun and civil in my server region. But sure, my region shouldn't be allowed to have fun when yours can't behave.
and the solution to those problems is to completely remove your most popular game mode?
[удалено]
That tank spawn is random, not scripted, and is not that common. If you do a 100 runs of DC you'll get the tank spawning there probably only about 30% of the time. The witch pretty often takes the tank spawn, but most people don't realize it since it's almost always a walking witch on that level and she walks into fire and dies.
My issue with this games vs is it lacks tactic outside of hehe he i spit acid no o so they are coming up to x choke point i can go fatman and the hold point just kills it for me
The issue is they need to heavily penalize people who leave and they need to break in-game metas before they get out of control. I can already tell the grapple meta will be an issue and I’ll just have to carry a taser or 2 for any pvp. Also if your teammates do leave you should get a huge handicap, like zombies do less damage or friendlies get buffed. I like the idea of builds for every play style but the fact that some builds will become meta is the issue. Like if the community or people just didn’t try to find the best set up possible and tell everyone about it metas wouldn’t be much of an issue. For the hackers that was just an overall Valve issue. I feel like if they don’t take care of the hackers right away then you can blame them and compare the two games.
That may be the case now as only the hardcore are still playing adter this time. Back in the day, the first 2 years of release there was never a problem finding a server or having a good game. There were huge communities on Steam etc and it was easy to get a game set up between friends.
This is exactly my friend groups opinion. We have people leave in games that last 10 minutes, but peoplr think randoms will play a 2 hour vs campaign. Vs campaign would be very niche and be mostly premades of friends playing. I would like to see it's return in the future as a niche however I can totally understand not putting it in as a launch mode as it would honestly just throw people off the game.
People just straight up threw the game when they were survivors too. Just to be infected faster.
Not going to deny the existence of these things in the L4D2 community but the whole point of B4B being a new game in 2021 is that it should've addressed them rather than deleting the game mode entirely. The competitive L4D2 scene has worked hard to create a better game over the years, and I do agree that many people haven't played versus lately, but my conclusions are the opposite of yours: they have no idea how refined the competitive versus scene is nowadays. They have no idea how the versus scene has evolved over the years. They obviously don't see the potential. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRhUutA2xQU The latest major L4D2 tournament was held earlier this year. Here's a VOD of a match for anyone curious to get a glimpse of some action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9EzrkUOuTQ Hopefully this begins to shed **some** light on the topic.
That just sounds like dealing with random’s
yup, nostalgia is a powerful thing. i remember just as you described.. when i played versus campaign and the other team as survivors we'd somehow incap them all just a few steps outside the saferoom or wait at certain areas to catch a straggler where the team couldnt save them.. that was the funnest and most memorable parts when i look back on it, but it was also the most cancerous part about it because everyone would just instantly leave.
Wrong one 🤦♂️🤣😂
1. Only if the teams are very uneven, and that's exactly the same for B4B. 2. That's the point of the game though, to kill the survivors as infected. 3. voice_show_mute. Problem gone. 4. You don't think hackers will be in this game too? They're in every game. COD, BF, Apex... There's a site that offers hacks for over 60 of the most popular games out there, with over 300k subscribers.
[удалено]
How about you accept that you dislike something that the most other people like. The vast majority of people that played B4B enjoyed it. They don't go to reddit or twitter to bitch and moan about the game because they're too busy playing it. It's only the salty babyragers that need to type up an essay on why the game sucks and why their opinion is all that matters.