Left 4 Dead 2

 PC
User Score
8.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 3585 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,880 out of 3585
  2. Mixed: 495 out of 3585
  3. Negative: 210 out of 3585

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. RichardS
    Jan 6, 2010
    0
    Expansion/DLC @ a Full Game price. I haven't seen Valve pull something this shady b4. This is almost EA style game production and licensing methodology 101. The graphics marginal improvements, uninspired new zombies, function less melee weapons replace your dual weldable pistols, i mean come on did they even think or did they just run a clone machine from the first, hell even the new Expansion/DLC @ a Full Game price. I haven't seen Valve pull something this shady b4. This is almost EA style game production and licensing methodology 101. The graphics marginal improvements, uninspired new zombies, function less melee weapons replace your dual weldable pistols, i mean come on did they even think or did they just run a clone machine from the first, hell even the new characters are insipid and at times down-right annoying. This game deserves to be shelved and sold for maybe $10. If this had been sold as an expansion instead of a new game, it would have strengthened the L4D1 community rather than divide it.… Expand
  2. KarstenT
    Nov 17, 2009
    4
    First of all, my english is not the best :P Valve sells a game for 50
  3. AlexB
    Nov 30, 2009
    2
    I've done all of this before in the previous game... more then enough times. Additionally, the game feels almost unplayable, all the servers i join are laggy, and there's major performance issues compared to the first L4D. It's the same as the first game, but worse.
  4. DarrylC
    Dec 31, 2009
    0
    This game is the worst I've bought in a long time. Metacritic ahs lost any respect I've ever had for them. This game could have been written by anyone 10 year's ago and it would still have been dreadful. And Valve is done in my book. HL2 and then this stinking pile of dung.
  5. GazMan
    Apr 8, 2010
    2
    The game itself is meh... I agree with others saying the game is "dumbed down. The level design isnt that great and I personally dont like the characters. L4D2 just doesnt play well nor does it have a good feeling about it. Most people I speak with are leaving the L4D / L4D2 community as not much is going on regarding competitive gaming either which is a real shame as the teamwork aspects The game itself is meh... I agree with others saying the game is "dumbed down. The level design isnt that great and I personally dont like the characters. L4D2 just doesnt play well nor does it have a good feeling about it. Most people I speak with are leaving the L4D / L4D2 community as not much is going on regarding competitive gaming either which is a real shame as the teamwork aspects could make it such a great platform. The original L4D was a fantastic idea and had some real promise but sadly it was never supported properly by Valve and I think most players think the same is going to happen this sequel. Once bitten twice shy, twice bitten... game over.… Expand
  6. DickS
    Dec 18, 2009
    0
    This expansion is horribly overpriced and obviously rushed. I got sick of seeing the same zombie model over and over again, I barely noticed the uncommon common, the level design is atrocious, and the AI is pants on head retarded. I had my full team of AI players stand next to me and watch a hunter rip me from 80 health to dead. You can no longer enjoy the environments on anything above This expansion is horribly overpriced and obviously rushed. I got sick of seeing the same zombie model over and over again, I barely noticed the uncommon common, the level design is atrocious, and the AI is pants on head retarded. I had my full team of AI players stand next to me and watch a hunter rip me from 80 health to dead. You can no longer enjoy the environments on anything above easy because the game spawns the mini hordes like the Director is having a seizure on his spawn button. While small, the posters don't show your player names on them like the old one. All of the new items are stuff that you can get in the first one with a simple script set. YES the first one has incindiary ammo, lazer sights, ect. The extra guns are just different designs with no difference. All melee weapons do the same thing and could have easily been a dlc into the first one. The worse part of all is that its near impossible to navigate on half the levels. I got stuck on every other friggin stage because the level design sucks. I didn't go into this game expecting to hate it, but after playing it I cant stand it. It doesnt even have the same feel as the first game. It's too goofy and not dark like the first one.… Expand
  7. FetzL
    Feb 19, 2010
    1
    Certainly NOT worth the $50 they are asking for. Basically we get 5 campaigns which were not as atmospheric and indulging as the originals, an overhyped AI Director 2.0 (dynamic pathing? - oh lol I'll just seal up this door please take the other one 3 feet ahead instead, dynamic weather? -More or less the same storm at the same spot everytime in Hard Rain, not to mention AI in Certainly NOT worth the $50 they are asking for. Basically we get 5 campaigns which were not as atmospheric and indulging as the originals, an overhyped AI Director 2.0 (dynamic pathing? - oh lol I'll just seal up this door please take the other one 3 feet ahead instead, dynamic weather? -More or less the same storm at the same spot everytime in Hard Rain, not to mention AI in general is WORSE than ever!) and new bland and boring characters. Props to them for getting rid of some gameplay exploits and bugs from the first game (still unfixed BTW) by introducing new special infected to counter corner camping (which were based on community ideas intended for L4D1), weapons balancing (how about changing a few variables to make the hunting rifle in the first game viable just like in L4D2? And nerfing the autoshotgun?), more weapon varieties, and the new (a bit overdone) gore system. L4D could have been a great game many would still be playing 4 years down the road if Valve had built on it instead of making this "sequel". Now I'm not saying L4D2 should be free. I'm saying it should have been an expansion pack for L4D1, $30 at most. So to conclude, I highly recommend AGAINST buying L4D2 at full price, get it during the inevitable half-off sales at $25, or $7.50 in the month before the release of L4D3 should it come this November.… Expand
  8. MikeS.
    Feb 9, 2010
    0
    i bought both L4D's and was not happy. Valve said "Oh this new stuff is too big to put in a patch! lets make a new game!" it wasn't that much stuff really... some new guns, new maps/storys and a few new zombies. and oh did i menchen they now only have one witch per story? GG Valve GG. Are you wiping you behinds with our money now? *get's his money back with brown stains on i bought both L4D's and was not happy. Valve said "Oh this new stuff is too big to put in a patch! lets make a new game!" it wasn't that much stuff really... some new guns, new maps/storys and a few new zombies. and oh did i menchen they now only have one witch per story? GG Valve GG. Are you wiping you behinds with our money now? *get's his money back with brown stains on the bills* appernty your are....... they could have patched it in one mega patch like Killing Floor did when they had a FREE expation! But then again the devs for killing floor have a free update/ expation pollicey! so yeah. and i feel even sorryer for the people on the consoles (yes im a PC gamer.) because the xbox 360 people have to PAY there mircosoft points to update! PS3 last i herd that was free, Wii? nintendo would have a heart attack if it wasnt a resident evil game or one of there own and was M on there console as they have become too family friendy it makes me feel like i live with a nabor from 50 years ago... But what can i say? Way to go VALVE for taking more of our hard earned cash and using it as toliet paper! really! I think even the idiots who made the market crash of the great depression could have done better. and thats saying something! Good Fight Valve Good Fight and Good Game! Now if you dont mind im going to have to look at your adds in your games that run on your steam platfourm that is needed to play ANY of your games that wont let me play just about any game offline! even when i installed it VIA CD/DVD like my moderen Warfair 2! well at least i know i wont be buying anymore L4D games even tho im a Die hard Zombie fan since Killing floor is better and CHEAPER! want my advice? save $20-$30 bucks on L4D2 and even L4D1 and get killing floor. Better game + better custom map support did i menchen that you cant use cheats in L4D2 like you can in #1? if u want to it is a pain in the butt to do so! If i could i would drop Valve on it's head for this poor excuse of a game. I swear tho they did a heck of a PR Bliz made me want to buy it! uh sue for false advertisement anyone? more like false statements they actully said in an interview that this was too big to put in a patch! I Say there full of there selfs and want easy money. It was way too short of a time between the games to even say they werent plaining on making a 2nd! i think they planed this from the get go!… Expand
  9. RSR_SC
    Jan 5, 2012
    3
    It's the same Left 4 Dead! Why deceive people? Why create a CLONE? The creation of games - the art! The art does not make money! If, nevertheless, the game discuss, in the first place there begins to annoy (for some reason, can only me) music (Soundtrack: HL2 - best, L4D2 - fail).
  10. RomanO
    Jan 8, 2010
    1
    Well what can I say all the new stuff is kinda great BUT 38 Euros is too much for the same game. Yes I heard and seen how much Valve improved L4D. However I don't think it is enough. Look at TF2. Tons of new stuff: maps, weapons, game modes and everything for free. It is obvious that Valve is just trying to get more money. Also, I dislike how all those guys in Valve say that they Well what can I say all the new stuff is kinda great BUT 38 Euros is too much for the same game. Yes I heard and seen how much Valve improved L4D. However I don't think it is enough. Look at TF2. Tons of new stuff: maps, weapons, game modes and everything for free. It is obvious that Valve is just trying to get more money. Also, I dislike how all those guys in Valve say that they have been working on L4D2 very hard and that it would have been simply imposible to get the same results if they had just upgraded L4D. I can't say I believe that is true. Valve could have made a series of updates just like with TF2 and maybe not in year, but in two or three L4D would have been the same thing we now call L4D2. Speaking of years, they worked on L4D2 only one year, which is less than any HL2 episode and still neither of those cost that much. So why 38 Euros, Valve, why that much? I would have given it 10 if not the price which is too high for an update. Sad, but L4D2 has shown gamers that Valve the company that gave us so much and asked so little is gone. Lets hope HL2 EP3 won't cost us 40 Euros.… Expand
  11. MetalHeadCrab
    Oct 27, 2011
    0
    The addition of new weapons and a few of the maps is the only positive thing I can possibly say about this game. After Valve rushed this game without properly supporting the first Left 4 Dead, I told myself I would not purchase Left 4 Dead 2. I finally gave in and as the demo had suggested, this game sucked and continues to suck. No matter what hardware I've played on, the game willThe addition of new weapons and a few of the maps is the only positive thing I can possibly say about this game. After Valve rushed this game without properly supporting the first Left 4 Dead, I told myself I would not purchase Left 4 Dead 2. I finally gave in and as the demo had suggested, this game sucked and continues to suck. No matter what hardware I've played on, the game will randomly lag for 1 to 2 seconds (online and offline). The characters (survivors) are not very well developed, leaving your with boring dialogue, annoying voices with no way to relate to the characters. The old special infected look and sound really stupid. In general, I'm against DLC's, but I would much rather have paid 49.99 for an original L4D DLC that added all the new maps, weapons, and cool game types like Mutation, Scavenger etc... Gabe I am disappoint.… Expand
  12. Zachridw.
    Dec 2, 2009
    2
    At first of all, this game isn't bad, although my rating says otherwise. But the reason why I've gave this game a "2", is because of the price of ~60$ / ~50
  13. MikeJ.
    Nov 17, 2009
    2
    More of the same with little change. Additions like melee weapons and dynamic weather feel like cop outs in a full release that plays more like a map pack with new models. Disappointing.
  14. DonnieDarko
    Nov 20, 2009
    4
    I have to say that this game is incredibly overrated at the moment. It does add some interesting new zombies that the first game didn't have, but fails to deliver on other things. My main gripe is the levels, they feel very generic and boring. Even more so than in the first game. I mean a swamp? Come on. The objectives can also be very confusing as there's often very little I have to say that this game is incredibly overrated at the moment. It does add some interesting new zombies that the first game didn't have, but fails to deliver on other things. My main gripe is the levels, they feel very generic and boring. Even more so than in the first game. I mean a swamp? Come on. The objectives can also be very confusing as there's often very little reasoning behind why I should be collecting fuel for a car all of a sudden. Where as in the first game the levels themselves guided you forward in a much better way. The "story" is kind of uninspired and the levels don't tie into eachother as well as they did in the first game. They also don't look as good graphically. The characters are not as interesting as in the first game either. You never grow attached to any of them. They removed the "Zoey - Starred by XXXXXX" on the poster for the loading screen. I thought that was a disappointment, really liked that in the first. And last but not least, the matchmaking system is utter crap. I have a hard time believing there are only 7 game lobbys being hosted for a game mode at one time? And 9/10 times when you enter a game you end up with 200+ ping. I usually ping around 19-40 in games and this makes it generally unplayable. Add to that all the bugs that the original game had. Such as spawning into the level and finding all Zombies in T-pose. Or starting a versus game and ending up in a singleplayer game. It's a decent game, but I'd say the first one was slightly better. I'd give it 7/10 if it wasn't so overrated.… Expand
  15. TBONE
    Nov 28, 2009
    0
    Its all the DLC we were expecting in L4D1, for $50! I've played it. It's not that great. More stuff does make a game better. You know what makes it worse? Breaking your promise for content in L4D1. They gave the middle finger to PC gamers, now I'm giving them the middle finger right back.
  16. SteveH
    Dec 15, 2009
    4
    Ok so here is a sequal that was completely uneeded and just another way for valve to milk the gaming community for even more money. Dont get me wrong I love what steam has done for pc gaming, so i'm not a valve hater. However, I felt that L4D2 is a very expensive expansion pack, it does not warrant the price tag given. The new game includes new weapons, new special zombies ( and by Ok so here is a sequal that was completely uneeded and just another way for valve to milk the gaming community for even more money. Dont get me wrong I love what steam has done for pc gaming, so i'm not a valve hater. However, I felt that L4D2 is a very expensive expansion pack, it does not warrant the price tag given. The new game includes new weapons, new special zombies ( and by this i mean the old mechanics with new skins (lazy coding)). The old game was wonderful and L4D2 is still wonderful but I have to give it a bad score because, its an example of game developers trying to pass off DLC as a new game as is becomming far too common these days.… Expand
  17. StevenA
    Dec 26, 2009
    4
    I don`t underatood why can a game have 100%. This game have enough weakpoint. - The stupid A.I -The A.I can`t use Firebombs or Pipebombs or Boomber Liquit. At other games it is possible (resident Evil 5) -A.I can take things in a house, the are no possible to use for a player, because the A.I take it to the wall of the house. (Hard Rain Level) - If i throw a pipebombe the A.I shoot on the I don`t underatood why can a game have 100%. This game have enough weakpoint. - The stupid A.I -The A.I can`t use Firebombs or Pipebombs or Boomber Liquit. At other games it is possible (resident Evil 5) -A.I can take things in a house, the are no possible to use for a player, because the A.I take it to the wall of the house. (Hard Rain Level) - If i throw a pipebombe the A.I shoot on the Zombies by the pipebombe. On the Producter: IF you want a good game, let you time or to better nothing. The bad thing is a have by is for xbox and PC. A never pay me L4D… Expand
  18. LysanderS
    Dec 3, 2009
    0
    L4D1 all over again, but with *eugh* daylight... Nice how they've added weapons i've used countless times before in another, superior zombie game (KF). Still it's enjoyable to watch Valve sabaotage their own reputation from within.
  19. JackO
    Dec 3, 2009
    0
    Ok the performance is good, the NA version looks fun OK im going to buy it. I went ahead and got it and its terrible, i live in Australia so i have basically no blood, Security Guard special infected, corpses or dismemberment and on top of that i get kicked from 95% of the servers i join. What was Valve thinking when they edited this? The first L4d was fine here in Australia, why didnt Ok the performance is good, the NA version looks fun OK im going to buy it. I went ahead and got it and its terrible, i live in Australia so i have basically no blood, Security Guard special infected, corpses or dismemberment and on top of that i get kicked from 95% of the servers i join. What was Valve thinking when they edited this? The first L4d was fine here in Australia, why didnt they just change the skin for the Security Guard?! and cut back A LITTLE BIT on the gore not just cut it all out and make a Disney version of the game… Expand
  20. AkaneD
    Dec 7, 2009
    0
    Got it as a gift from a friend that wanted to relive some of the the fun we had in L4D1. It got boring in about 2 weeks (since it's basically just a 'prettier' version of L4D1 with a couple added gimmicks). He went back to TF2, I'm playing L4D1 again with addon maps. If you liked L4D1 but played it to death, you'll get bored really fast with L4D2. The nice thing Got it as a gift from a friend that wanted to relive some of the the fun we had in L4D1. It got boring in about 2 weeks (since it's basically just a 'prettier' version of L4D1 with a couple added gimmicks). He went back to TF2, I'm playing L4D1 again with addon maps. If you liked L4D1 but played it to death, you'll get bored really fast with L4D2. The nice thing is it seems most of the griefers moved to L4D2. Fine by me.… Expand
  21. TimotheeB
    Nov 22, 2009
    2
    Maybe there is new stuff, maybe there are new weapons, campaigns, characters, special infected and so on, but the greatest problem I can see in L4D2 is that the atmosphere of the first game is completely lost... Whereas in L4D first of name, there's always a bit of gloom, a sense of expectation and an environment in which you really need your torch and in which the witch's red Maybe there is new stuff, maybe there are new weapons, campaigns, characters, special infected and so on, but the greatest problem I can see in L4D2 is that the atmosphere of the first game is completely lost... Whereas in L4D first of name, there's always a bit of gloom, a sense of expectation and an environment in which you really need your torch and in which the witch's red eyes shine out from where she sits and weeps, in the second L4D, all of the tension is removed by the brightly coloured characters (look at all of their clothes...) and the fact that buildings look all nice and pretty. Yes, there are a few wrecks and broken windows, but Valve in this case has put too much emphasis on making a much lighter game that might be more fun for some people, but that loses the main reason you played the first one: tension in co-op, relying on your teammates when for example reloading (you can't see a thing most of the time when reloading), or anticipation as you hear a witch sobbing, turn your flashlight off and creep around looking for red eyes... I of course also think that valve should have given us the promised updates rather than packaging them into another game, but that's probably another issue altogether. All in all, I think that L4D2 does add a lot of content to the first L4D, but that it removes the essential elements that made the first L4D so brilliant to play.… Expand
  22. lukeg
    Dec 18, 2009
    3
    whats the point of this game if you dont like online gaming. there is no decent story and gameplay gets so repetative i was bored within 5 mins, levels are badly maped and AI are just a pain at times.
  23. ChrisP
    Dec 29, 2009
    4
    Ok im a die hard left 4 dead fan and i have spent countless hours playing l4d1. I was so excited about l4d2 that i had it pre-ordered and everything. once i got this sucker i was a little dissapointed on how its' just a plain knock-off of the first one. i was expecting a better feel, not some half-assed work that Valve has made. Valve has done better than this and they still are Ok im a die hard left 4 dead fan and i have spent countless hours playing l4d1. I was so excited about l4d2 that i had it pre-ordered and everything. once i got this sucker i was a little dissapointed on how its' just a plain knock-off of the first one. i was expecting a better feel, not some half-assed work that Valve has made. Valve has done better than this and they still are currently my favorite game designers but l4d2 was one of the games gone wrong… Expand
  24. SallyV.
    Apr 4, 2010
    0
    +10 because it's a sequel to the best co-op ever made and -10 because it's the SAME F*CKING GAME as the original. why did I buy it? I employed some wishful thinking, trying to convince myself that the sequel would be amazing. it's valve, and valve games are usually the best... but this one's just for the money. unfortunately i cant give my copy to someone else. avoid +10 because it's a sequel to the best co-op ever made and -10 because it's the SAME F*CKING GAME as the original. why did I buy it? I employed some wishful thinking, trying to convince myself that the sequel would be amazing. it's valve, and valve games are usually the best... but this one's just for the money. unfortunately i cant give my copy to someone else. avoid this game if you have part 1, but if you are like me and do have it, i will recommend the following style of play: join expert game-> kill teammates -> have fun hearing players rage.… Expand
  25. JayF.
    Apr 10, 2010
    4
    As an online play game, it's just average in my book. I'd rather play other recent games with better graphics. Solo play is a joke. There's no campaign so to speak. Rather, it's like playing online with yourself. I played this game for maybe 3 hours and then looked for another.
  26. VonCarlsson
    Oct 31, 2010
    4
    I was terribly disappointed when I realised that the hype was just a hype. This game qualifies as a mediocre, run-of-the-mill first person shooter, with the exception of the infected.

    The missions are quite challenging whilst playing online against well experience players, which unfortunately is the rare exception to the average player of this game. It is not unusual to find yourself    I was terribly disappointed when I realised that the hype was just a hype. This game qualifies as a mediocre, run-of-the-mill first person shooter, with the exception of the infected.

    The missions are quite challenging whilst playing online against well experience players, which unfortunately is the rare exception to the average player of this game. It is not unusual to find yourself yelling at your own team, for being generally terrible at the game.

    The maps are so few that you grow tired in less than a few hours. This goes for the characters as well. The survivors are all the same, they have no unique niche to them - except for models and voice acting.
    The infected work well together, but that is unfortunately all they do. One becomes terribly bored of them after just a few matches. Not to mention the linearity of them, but at least that makes them very intuitive.

    There is nothing upgradeable; no incentive of playing well.

    The single player is not worth mentioning since it's basically a multi-player map with bots instead of players.

    In conclusion.
    As long as this game cost what it does, roughly 19 euros, I for one would not make the mistake of buying it. If you for some inexplicable reason still is thinking about buying it, get your friends on the train, it is the only way of having any fun in this game.    … Expand
  27. MichaelN
    Jan 9, 2010
    4
    Great game, since it's just a port of the original great game with new character models, a few new guns, melee weapons which are largely useless for the most part, and a few new special zombies (both of which are fun, but we are talking an entirely new game here). L4D was light on depth, and it wasn't fixed here. Characters are still only models, and have no distinguishing Great game, since it's just a port of the original great game with new character models, a few new guns, melee weapons which are largely useless for the most part, and a few new special zombies (both of which are fun, but we are talking an entirely new game here). L4D was light on depth, and it wasn't fixed here. Characters are still only models, and have no distinguishing attributes. The graphics are exactly the same, the gameplay is exactly the same (still good, but not improved in any way). Slapping "2" on the end of a title should be more progressive for a company with Valve's pedigree. This was a glorified expansion pack (new maps, guns, and zombies... nothing else new, yes, that's what we call an expansion pack). Would be a higher rating, but the cost of this game is just beyond me. Hopefully all of this money is going to Episode 3, and maybe they'll actually incorporate some new things into L4D2 the way they've supported TF2. Sorry to the original L4D players, Valve is moving on.… Expand
  28. MichaelR.
    Mar 20, 2010
    3
    Okay, before the fanboys get angry with me, read the whole review. A)Director 2.0 - The "new" director isn't very new at all. I'm sure many people remember the "Crash Course" campaign for L4D. Remember how it had the "sort of the l4d2 director" functioning? That's because the L4D1 director and the L4D2 director are exactly the same besides the fact that there's a few Okay, before the fanboys get angry with me, read the whole review. A)Director 2.0 - The "new" director isn't very new at all. I'm sure many people remember the "Crash Course" campaign for L4D. Remember how it had the "sort of the l4d2 director" functioning? That's because the L4D1 director and the L4D2 director are exactly the same besides the fact that there's a few new items and weapons in L4D2. They guaranteed "random" item and gun positioning in L4D2 and it wasn't implemented correctly. The guns still appear in the same places nearly every time, just like L4D1. No improvement, barely any change. B) "New Zombies!" - L4D2 introduced 3 new special infected. The Spitter is really only useful in scavenger to destroy gas cans unless someone is already being beaten by another infected in campaign. The Jockey is a useful little guy on certain maps...and a total waste of space on others. His forte is dragging people off ledges, really. On about 9/10 of the maps there is no ledges to catch a survivor alone on. Then there's the Charger, he's a terrible terrible implementation of the "hallways aren't safe anymore" idea. The point of the charger as far as the commentary says was to scatter the survivors or hurt them if they're in a hallway. You cannot turn (Even Slightly) while charging, so unless they ARE in a hallway your chances of hitting more than one survivor are low. And if they ARE in a hallway they don't scatter anywhere. Charger does much lower damage than he needs to make him useful as he tends to die before he can slam a survivor once or twice into the ground. The only time Chargers are really useful is near cliffs and ledges, when there is only one or two survivors left or in situations like the Parish bridge finale when survivors don't want to go back for the teammate. C) "New Weapons" - L4D2 introduced a few new weapons to the just about complete set of L4D1. Melee weapons - Everyone says that melee weapons really changed the L4D gameplay, I disagree. It's not often you see people using melee weapons to attack special infected. Common infected die easily to begin with so I don't see the melee weapons being all that useful once you have an automatic weapon or a semi-auto shotgun. Aim for the head, people. Grenade Launcher - Friendly fire, friendly fire, friendly fire! The grenade launcher was made to loosen up hordes of common infected and make special infected stumble around and die. The broken thing about this weapon is the fact that special infected often don't die from one indirect hit from this weapon, the person using this weapon tends to hit his teammates around twenty more times than everyone else, and the person using this weapon tends to be an easy special infected target due to hunters, jockeys, smokers, and chargers being able to get in close and force them to switch to melee/pistol. Bile Bomb - "Throw this to attract the horde away from you, even onto a tank!" The problem is the only time anyone will use this is if there's a horde coming and they want to just run away from it. The only usefulness of the bile bomb is distraction, and in versus it's a waste to carry. Defibrillator - Over a medpack the chances someone takes one are around 30%. When someone takes one they usually happen to be the Rambo style person who runs at the hordes with a baseball bat out and they die, leaving the rest of the team to fend for themselves until they reach the body. All in all, medpack is better. New ammos - Make special infected stumble or burn. Imbalanced in versus. Thank god they're rare. New primary weapons are pretty much all slight changes to the old primaries. Pump shotgun(2, difference is a slight damage difference and chrome has tighter spread), auto shotgun(2, one wide spread, one tight spread I believe), SMGs(2, one is stronger, the other more accurate.), Assault rifle(3..only differences, clip size and one is burst fire, and the AK has higher damage and slower firing speed), sniper rifles(2, military fires faster, hunting reloads faster) D) New AI - Terrible Special infected AI even on expert. Even worse survivor AI, if you're being beaten by a charger an inch away they'll stand there a few seconds then turn slowly and shoot it, then help you up. I was diappointed.… Expand
  29. olol
    Nov 17, 2009
    3
    I know alot of L4D fans may disagree, but this game is not anything new or special. Yes there are a few new things, such as melee weapons, and new weapon models, but they feel the same as they did in L4D1. Furthermore, even with the new scavange mode and new campagins, this still gets boring REALLY INCREDIBLY quick for me. I would rather spend time on Half Life 2. User content was what I know alot of L4D fans may disagree, but this game is not anything new or special. Yes there are a few new things, such as melee weapons, and new weapon models, but they feel the same as they did in L4D1. Furthermore, even with the new scavange mode and new campagins, this still gets boring REALLY INCREDIBLY quick for me. I would rather spend time on Half Life 2. User content was what kept the first game alive, due to valve not releasing much content (which they initially promised), and therefore i was wary about purchasing this one, but now i pretty much regret it. It wasn't worth it at all in my opinion, and i doubt much interesting content will come to this either (although valve WILL deliver, because they know if they don't, they'll be losing alot of their audiance with this game). But i would give this game a 3, just because it's fun for the first hour or two, but gets very boring soon afterwards, whether you play online or not. Sooner or later, there will be nothing to do other then join a game and teamkill, because that's what a majority of players did in L4D1 after a short time.… Expand
  30. AlexD
    Dec 27, 2009
    4
    I don't think it deserves paying 50$ given the fact it's just a DLC content promised for L4D1. I spent a lot of time playing the first part, I really enjoyed the atmosphere and the characters were adorable but this time both of these aspects are ruined. I personally believe that other zombie games have better weapons, for example KF is TEN times better in this aspect, and they I don't think it deserves paying 50$ given the fact it's just a DLC content promised for L4D1. I spent a lot of time playing the first part, I really enjoyed the atmosphere and the characters were adorable but this time both of these aspects are ruined. I personally believe that other zombie games have better weapons, for example KF is TEN times better in this aspect, and they are upgrading the game constantly just for free! I'm afraid I'll wait until it price falls to 20$… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

6
#6 Best PC Game of 2009
5
#5 Most Discussed PC Game of 2009
3
#3 Most Shared PC Game of 2009

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
89

Generally favorable reviews - based on 55 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 55 out of 55
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 55
  3. Negative: 0 out of 55
  1. 1UP
    100
    L4D2 delivers multiple improvements over its predecessor, and I get to keep all my fingers and toes.
    Read full review
  2. IGN
    90
    It remains one of the most distinctive co-operative titles out there, and allows for some of the most nerve-searing team-based multiplayer gaming on the market.
    Read full review
  3. Eurogamer
    90
    Whereas once we treated Left 4 Dead as a stopgap between Half-Lifes, this is no longer a weird little side project with modest expectations, and Valve is confident enough to play around with it, safe in the knowledge that you can trust your players. Left 4 Dead proved it. And whereas that game had a personality, this one is overflowing with it.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »