What bothers me about L4D

[Zephirius]

I'm seriously laughing here at all the people going "fun > realism" What realism? We're talking about how Valve's fiction does not match traditional zombie fiction. Guess what, traditions are broken, it is their unavoidable fate.

Perhaps the infection has given the normal looking infected some sort of thickened or ossified tissue around the heart, thus taking more damage than a normal human? Maybe their clotting agents are now fantastically efficient, which means they need an awful lot more trauma to cause death than you. Perhaps they need less blood in their bodies now, due to some change in the metabolism of their cells... Maybe they have distributed hearts?

I salute your common sense.

 

[The Lyre]

To those who have been saying that the infected are not zombies "If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse and has a saddle on its back, its a horse". They are zombies.

No, they aren't.

They are infected humans - the difference being that they are alive, they do not have the desire to eat brains, and they seem to retain the same motor functions as...well, a psychotic, enraged human. That, and they attack each other, they seem to rapidly evolve, and they possess no supernatural 'flesh-detector' that your average zombie seems to have.

In the same way that 28 Days Later did not have zombies, neither does this.

I vaguely understand what you are trying to say, but I would say that your point of view is only the case if you played it firmly believing it was a zombie-shooter.

On that same note, I would say the OP's problems lie with their own preconceptions of the game, not the game itself. They were expecting this to be a zombie apocalypse, when it, well, isn't...at all.

 

[Avida]

To those who have been saying that the infected are not zombies "If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse and has a saddle on its back, its a horse". They are zombies.

No, they aren't.

They are infected humans - the difference being that they are alive, they do not have the desire to eat brains, and they seem to retain the same motor functions as...well, a psychotic, enraged human. That, and they attack each other, they seem to rapidly evolve, and they possess no supernatural 'flesh-detector' that your average zombie seems to have.

In the same way that 28 Days Later did not have zombies, neither does this.

I vaguely understand what you are trying to say, but I would say that your point of view is only the case if you played it firmly believing it was a zombie-shooter.

On that same note, I would say the OP's problems lie with their own preconceptions of the game, not the game itself. They were expecting this to be a zombie apocalypse, when it, well, isn't...at all.

You're right, but it'd be real difficult to play that game without the 'zombie-shooter' mindset, before it came out it was always talked about as a zombie game by everyone, including at least 1 developer in the only interview i watched. And after release in game they're reffered to as zombies - "I call zombie bullshit on that" - Zoe, i think during the lift in the hospital.

 

[Sensenmann]

Infact, in reality, since this is rabies and not reanimation/zombification and these are unarmoured, every shot should be a one hit kill/ incapacitation, that is, if we were to follow realism.

Shot to the chest kills if it hits the heart or punctures the lung, causing extreme discomfort and it would be ALOT harder to breathe (on top of that, tried breating with extreme pain on the chest? Hurts and its hard).

Then theres the rest of the normal hollywood/ common sense of, get shot, it hurts.

 

[Mr0llivand3r]

2) These are zombies. They should be EATING me. Not kicking me while I'm down like a bunch of angry gang bangers. In the movies, zombies eat people. That's their joi de vivre, their raison d'etre. So, why do these zombies live to kick me? it makes no goddamned sense.

Thoughts?

don't get me wrong, because i agree with you entirely,

but one could propose the idea that instead of the zombies actually being the dead that have come back, they are in a crazed state, sort of like a "super-rabies" sickness like the mutants from I Am Legend which causes them to attack and then kill later.

i haven't played the game all the way through (i play it on my friend's computer and havent finished it) so i don't know what is the actual CAUSE of the zombie apocalypse, or even if it's explained at all, but an explanation which is something other than classic "undead" could explain why the zombies not only eat human flesh but enjoy the thrill of the hunt and the kill.

 

[DirkGently]

To those who have been saying that the infected are not zombies "If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse and has a saddle on its back, its a horse". They are zombies. If you make a game with an original monster we would have no problem, but if you make a zombie game and slap a new name on afterwards it will still be a zombie game to us.

They're severely wounded looking dudes. Zombiesh, fine. They don't want your brains. Not zombies. They infect you, you become one of them. Zombie, depending on your set of zombie rules. They die from general infliction of damage via gunshot or molotov: Not zombies, because 'zombies' by and large require you to destroy the brain. They're frequently mutating. Not zombies, because zombies as we all know, are just reanimated dead, whether by virus (like RE or Max Brooks's Zombie Survival Guide/WWZ, or cosmic space radiation, like in Night of The Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, etc. (Interstingly enough, the zombie plague is not passed via bite, but rather death. Upon dying in said universe, the cosmic space radiation brought back to earth from a probe to Venus causes you to get up and start eating other, dead-back-to-life humans.))

tl:dr, they aren't that zombie-ish outside of their general appearance and numbers. Valve called them Infected because they weren't zombies. They're zombie-like. It gives off the atmosphere that you're alone aside from the other few protagonists who are pretty much the only humans alive who don't want to kill you and/or eat you.

Also, stop calling them 28 Days Later zombies. If they were, the game would be called 28 Days Later: The Video Game or something. The general infected are pretty damn similar, but they're not the same thing, y'know?

 

[guardian001]

1) don't play on easy. if you aren't, you should notice that after a while more and more zombies start showing up the longer you sit around.

2) These are zombies. They should be EATING me. Not kicking me while I'm down like a bunch of angry gang bangers. In the movies, zombies eat people. That's their joi de vivre, their raison d'etre. So, why do these zombies live to kick me? it makes no goddamned sense.

good thing this isn't a movie then. actually, come to think of it, not all movies involve "zombies" eating people. on the subject of zombies, you'll notice they're called "infected", not zombies. they may be incredibly similar to zombies, but that's the thing. they aren't.

"If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse and has a saddle on its back, its a horse".

and yet somehow if I were to put a saddle on a zebra, it would not be a horse. Things can be similar without being the same. You also mentioned how the story says it was mutated rabies. if you've ever seen an animal with rabies, they aren't going around mindlessly eating people. they're just really aggressive.

3) why shouldn't many body/leg/arm shot's stop them? I don't care if you can't actually kill them with anything but a headshot. In essence they are nothing more than humans, and no matter how resilient a human is, if you've torn all of their muscle tissue to shreds, they won't be attacking you anymore. It might not be dead, but it might as well be.

 

[The_Toe_Bighter98]

I think I should point this out, there are no zombies in Left 4 Dead. The infected are actually the rage "zombies" from 28 Days Later.

 

[Rajin Cajun]

They are Vampires...Francis said so on No Mercy in the Hospital Elevator.

 

[Puppeteer Putin]

Addressing point one. Yes, on expert it's a *****. But having the "zombie film experience" is inherently flawed, as the levels aren't randomized. There are nooks and crannies where you can hide, heal and blast hordes away without issue.

In zombie movies people act on their instinct, usually because they're in an unfamiliar environment. Once you've played a map through several times, and you know all the opportunities and threats of the map, then than "What's round the corner" feeling vanishes.

 

[Reep]

Addressing point one. Yes, on expert it's a *****. But having the "zombie film experience" is inherently flawed, as the levels aren't randomized. There are nooks and crannies where you can hide, heal and blast hordes away without issue.

In zombie movies people act on their instinct, usually because they're in an unfamiliar environment. Once you've played a map through several times, and you know all the opportunities and threats of the map, then than "What's round the corner" feeling vanishes.

Even with the wait and survive parts of the stories you expect and know that a horde will always come.
For example, with the No Mercy hospital level where you call the elevator, there is always a horde.

Maybe to remove the whats around the corner attitude where you know there will be a horde, the director could maybe not spawn the horde when you expect it. With the example, the director could spawn the horde in the elevator when it arrives, or on top of the elevator when you are in it, or even have a horde waiting for you outside the elevator.

 

[pantsoffdanceoff]

Well although I loved left 4 dead I had different expectations going in. It would open world-ish with 4 other dudes and a bunch of zombies. There would be no winning only surviving for as long as you can moving from safe haven to safe haven as your new found homes got overrun. But it feels like a much better implemented... GOW2. (except the enemies cant shoot you).

That being said this is the only game where losing is way more fun than winning.

 

[Datalord]

In No Mercy, the last section, when you go in the hallway just before the tank shows up, 9 out of 10 a hoard of zombies shows up from behind. The thing is, its a crowded hallway, so if you empty out a shotgun, they fall pretty fast. This game is overpowered, REALLY overpowered, and even though there is the AI director, after 2 or 3 times through each campaign, it becomes completely predictable. If it weren't for the versus mode, this game wouldn't be worth buying

 

[The Werebear]

1) Play on expert, or delay a little bit, or hang around in an open area for a minute or two. The periods of calmness and breath catching are there only to let your nerves unwind just enough to be rewound when you hear a boomer gurgle or a smoker cough.

2) Well, they can't eat you while you are still struggling. You are much easier to consume once you and your allies have been beaten to death and stop shooting them.

3) A)They are infected humans
We already know that the infection causes mutations. One of those caused in the standard horde zombie is an immunity to pain and decreased reliance on oxygen. This means that it takes several minutes for a zombie shot in the heart or lungs to actually die, especially when hyped on adrenaline. (Yes, I just made that completely up, but there's no reason it wouldn't work).
B) They are Zombies
Headshots kill them efficiently. If you are shooting them in the torso, the goal is to wreck them to the point where they just flop around rather than are able to actively kill you. Then, rather than cleaning up every flopping zombie, you hustle on through before more show up. Besides, it would be incredibly frustrating in a gameplay sense to have to headshot fast moving targets reliably to make kills, much less the amount you would have to kill to get all the way through the game. The average headshot percentage at the end of the game usually hovers between 8% and 12%.

 

[SonicMTD]

Me being a gamer.... I have but one problem with Left 4 Dead....

360....exclusive.... *facepalms* >_<

 

[DrummerM]

For the argument that says "zombies should be slow, undead and they should eat you, not beat you up": There is no unanimous agreement on what defines a zombie. The word "zombie" originated from use in voodoo, by which a zombie was a corpse that had been re-animated by a person. George Romero's portrayal of zombies in Night of The Living Dead became the most popular, (As shambling, somewhat stupid and flesh-hungry creatures) but that does not mean that this is the true zombie definition. 28 Days Later did away with the idea of the undead and used the "rage" zombies. Creatures that were fast, angry, and strived to beat the shit out of anyone who wasn't infected. Again, this isn't the true zombie definition, because there is no true zombie definition.

Left 4 Dead takes a similar approach to the 28 Days Later zombies. They're fast and aggressive, they aren't hungry for human flesh but nonetheless they are zombies. Get it yet?

For the argument that says a headshot should be the only sufficient way to kill a zombie: Once again, there is no rule that says this is necessary. Destroying the brain is the most popular method shown, but it depends on what your zombies are like. The Infected are just humans that have become infected with something, causing increased physical output and aggressiveness. They are still in a human body, and pumping a few bullets into their torso will do just as much damage as blowing off their head.

Is there something unrealistic about a sub-human creature being killed by shots to the arms or legs? Who gives a shit? Remember, not everything has to be realistic.

 

[The Werebear]

Is there something unrealistic about a sub-human creature being killed by shots to the arms or legs? Who gives a shit? Remember, not everything has to be realistic.

The hilarious thing is that humans going berserk with rage when infected with a strain of rabies is much more plausible than humans dying and coming back to life.

 

[Jack_the_Knife]

All right, opinion responses to initial points first...

1) I really guess this is a "beauty in the eye of the beholder" thing, and everyone has unique experiences.

2) I figure it's just so we don't have to suspend our disbelief too much. I mean, you get struck a few times, slashed at, your body will ache and you might be bleeding but some morphine or some adhesive medical strips will keep you going. But no amount of pills or bandages will hide the fact that you are missing a good deal of flesh, muscle and are bleeding profusely, not to mention that your bones could be broken, after having the force of a tireless human jaw go right through it.

And I doubt the developers wanted to saddle your allies with having to drag you around.

3) Zombies, multiple incarnations(Romero, whatever the hell preceded Romero, classic, "brain-eaters", the 28-Days-Later Infected kind, etc.). The developers decided that their Infected can be killed with enough bullets anywhere. Also that some can mutate. And they only feel like hitting people, not biting.

Maybe the Infected mutated so that they're faster and much more vicious and have the ability to evolve into stronger beings, but at the expense of their entire body being now their weak point.

I'm just saying there's not just one kind of zombie formula. As everybody else has stated, there are plenty of zombie formulas to go by. Many of which are not just restricted to "extermination by destroying the head".



But there is a modding community and a mapping community. I'll just say that. And I'm sure some are just dying for a viable L4D idea.