THE PACK Message Boards

OK, I am possibly considering buying L4D in a month or so (tight money is tight) and several people on The Packs Den play the said game so why not make up a L4D Pack Team?

It could simply be some players playing certain modes and working together (of course). It could be fun and times could be orginised.

So, what you guys think to the idea?

I'm up for it, you already know my steam account.

I only have L4D for XBox 360 and I don't thinks its THAT great. I'd much rather play CS.

So Morkulv, if you had no suggestions of interest....why did you post?

I'm up for it. My Steam tag's Wolfdust, if you want to play sometime.

I think a game of Survival with packmembers would be pretty hilarious. Especially on the Boathouse. There's so much explosives and fire! A single stray round turns the world into pure fire. It's so awesome.

I still need to get a working mic. Expert's impossible without a mic. If something has you for even a few seconds you lose way too much health.

Morkulv wrote:I only have L4D for XBox 360 and I don't thinks its THAT great. I'd much rather play CS.

...why even compare the two? CS is a semi-tactical military shooter, L4D is a zombie game. The only relationship between the two is that L4D originated when Turtlerock Studios (who made CS) started to design their own zombie-mode of CS (dubbed "terrorstrike") and eventually grew it out into it's own full-length game (and became part of Valve in the process, "Valve West", I think).

L4D's better than any CS or CS:S zombie modes I've played anyways. Less guns, but the zombies are that much better. They won't run to the bottom of the APC you've clambered onto and stand there, looking up at you and waiting for you to step down so they can knife you. The Horde in L4D will climb up there and eat you. From every possible angle. And the Specials will help.

Silent Hunter wrote:So Morkulv, if you had no suggestions of interest....why did you post?

Because I can.

Aki wrote:

Morkulv wrote:I only have L4D for XBox 360 and I don't thinks its THAT great. I'd much rather play CS.

...why even compare the two? CS is a semi-tactical military shooter, L4D is a zombie game. The only relationship between the two is that L4D originated when Turtlerock Studios (who made CS) started to design their own zombie-mode of CS (dubbed "terrorstrike") and eventually grew it out into it's own full-length game (and became part of Valve in the process, "Valve West", I think).

L4D's better than any CS or CS:S zombie modes I've played anyways. Less guns, but the zombies are that much better. They won't run to the bottom of the APC you've clambered onto and stand there, looking up at you and waiting for you to step down so they can knife you. The Horde in L4D will climb up there and eat you. From every possible angle. And the Specials will help.

Counter-Strike is not made by Turtlerock studio, you are confusing it with Counter-Strike: Condition Zero. Counter-Strike itself was created by Minh Le and Jess Cliffe in 1999.

Anyway, I agree the genre's are different, CS being a fast-paced semi-tactical shooter. and L4D a zombie/survival-shooter, but they both run on the Source-engine. My personal opinion is that the gameplay that CS offers is more diverse then shooting hordes and hordes of zombies, on top of the fact that Left 4 Dead is just a very overrated game overall. Don't get me wrong, L4D is okay, but its not classic material and I'd much rather play a different popular online game.

Morkulv wrote:

Aki wrote:

Morkulv wrote:I only have L4D for XBox 360 and I don't thinks its THAT great. I'd much rather play CS.

...why even compare the two? CS is a semi-tactical military shooter, L4D is a zombie game. The only relationship between the two is that L4D originated when Turtlerock Studios (who made CS) started to design their own zombie-mode of CS (dubbed "terrorstrike") and eventually grew it out into it's own full-length game (and became part of Valve in the process, "Valve West", I think).

L4D's better than any CS or CS:S zombie modes I've played anyways. Less guns, but the zombies are that much better. They won't run to the bottom of the APC you've clambered onto and stand there, looking up at you and waiting for you to step down so they can knife you. The Horde in L4D will climb up there and eat you. From every possible angle. And the Specials will help.

Counter-Strike is not made by Turtlerock studio, you are confusing it with Counter-Strike: Condition Zero. Counter-Strike itself was created by Minh Le and Jess Cliffe in 1999.

Oh. Woops.

Anyway, I agree the genre's are different, CS being a fast-paced semi-tactical shooter. and L4D a zombie/survival-shooter, but they both run on the Source-engine. My personal opinion is that the gameplay that CS offers is more diverse then shooting hordes and hordes of zombies, on top of the fact that Left 4 Dead is just a very overrated game overall. Don't get me wrong, L4D is okay, but its not classic material and I'd much rather play a different popular online game.

"But they both run on the source engine" doesn't mean they're comperable. Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines runs on the source engine (the first build of it that was actually used in a commercial game no less - a little less advanced than the version HL2 got to use) but people don't compare that Action-RPG to, say, Day Of Defeat: Source. Same engine, entirely different genre.

I hardly see how "Shoot some dudes in ski masks while rescueing hostages" and "shoot some dudes in ski masks and keep them from planting a bomb" is any more diverse than "Shoot some zombies while trying to escape" or "Shoot some AI zombies and human-controlled zombies while trying to escape (and getting your turn as said human-zombies afterwards)" or "shoot zombies during an unwinnable Last Stand."

At the end of the day, both games are about shooting dudes in the face and their game modes aren't really all that varied.

I'm totally in, I really love this game for some strange reason maybe cause i love to PWN people lmfao name wolfeguardian on there