Left 4 Dead!

[senjuro]

You never know, i'm not against Left for Dead completely you know, i just think it could be much better.

Games can ALWAYS be better. Just the improvements you're suggesting are not the ones I would think to add. To me, L4D doesn't need more guns...it needs more maps! And the AI needs to use pipe bombs/molotovs

No, but i did say "I THINK" therefore highylighting my chain of thought based on little or no fact. However, if that wasn't enough for you Senjuro then i apologise.

No, I apologize for that one. I came off like an ass there. I'm sorry.

Well frankly i have so many games and so little gaming time that i hardly find it repetitive at all. Maybe it is for you, seeing as you're probably a faster and better gamer then me but for me if i ever feel like it's getting reptitive or boring, i switch games.

Ya got me there. I do have an abundance of free time and spend that vast majority of it gaming. I do tend to plow through non-RPG titles pretty quickly. Unless it provided a really fun experience for me to go through (like Dead Rising), I probably won't play through it many more times, if at all (like Assassin's Creed).

I respect that, and you're right there will be alot of video game title sequels. But how is this a problem? the sequals are likely to be better then the originals, and new games like Halo:ODST and Diablo 3 are coming out so whats changed?

You can only milk a franchise for so long until it ceases being profitable, as Nintendo is discovering. :p Franchises and genres need to be revamped every so often before they become stale. Platformers and fighting games became 3D; FPS games became multiplayer; RPG's became MMO's. Everything is always changing. We're just kind of in limbo until that next big revolutionary change happens. (Guess what, Nintendo? The Wii was NOT that big revolutionary change we were hoping for...)

Also, could you give me some examples of FPS that romanticise conflicts or other events that you find to be a waste of money? i only ask so i can just verify your statement about us not sharing the same interests in video games.

For example, the Medal of Honor games. They take the premise of, say, WWI, and borrow some of the events from it. Then you play through a series of extremely important moments during that conflict, as one person, changing the course of events. The whole "one person changing the world" thing is part of the reason why I'm so disenchanted with RPGs right now. Call it me being a jaded 25 year old, but 6 kids going up against an empire and successfully taking it down is too ludicrous for me to stomach. Similarly, one super soldier, no matter how super, cannot possibly hope to bring down an entire race/faction of enemies. And yet they do...every time.

My problem with the genre is more how formulaic they all are, in both thematic material and in gameplay. It's always one person against the world, coming out victorious in the end.

Part of what I enjoyed so much of L4D was that feeling of, "Okay...so I escaped. But what am I escaping to?" I win, I beat the game, yes. But did the victory accomplish anything? Not really. That's what I like about it. The game offers no delusions of grandeur. It's refreshing.