I'll upvote anything with a L4D tag.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Left 4 dead, animation, flash, zombies, wiiiiiiiiitch' to 'Left 4 dead, animation, flash, zombies, wiiiiiiiiitch, tank, comedy, l4d' - edited by Zonbie

thats god damn hilarious; i hate it when people start telling others what to do in l4d instead of trying to figure out with everyone else what is the best course of action.

Valve was too busy with L4D. I'd rather not have Valve rush episode.

In reply to this comment by therealblankman:
Yeah, I was talking about the game. Half Life 2: Episode 3 should have been out months ago, Episode 2 came out in October, 2007!

In reply to this comment by ant:
>> ^therealblankman:
Fantastic! But where's my episode 3?!


Where's episode 2? I don't see it. Or are you referring to the game?

Tags for this video have been changed from 'left4dead, get it off, incoming' to 'left4dead, get it off, incoming, l4d, tank, witch, wtf, louis, bill, jiggy' - edited by Zonbie

Did you know Valve foresaw this? Yeah, they're that good:

"(...) We found that the romantic tension between Zoey and Francis that you see in this version did not playtest well, as it proved to be a distraction from the gravity of the Survivors' desperate situation.

(...) Later in the piece, when the hunter pounces on Louis, the timing of Louis's line and the hunter's pounce consistently came off as comedic, which was certainly not the intended effect."
-Left 4 Dead Blog, 8 July 2008

WORST L4D Video I have ever seen.

>> ^thedeusmachine:
>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^hawkinson:
L4D is true coop, no matter how good one player is, if his/her teammates suck it'll lead to a wipe.
It's not like CS and those AWP whores who can take out a whole team from cover. I always hated/wanted to be those guys.

disagree

Strong argument...



Sounds to me like he knows how to run straight for the exit, leaving the rest of the team behind to suffer.

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^hawkinson:
L4D is true coop, no matter how good one player is, if his/her teammates suck it'll lead to a wipe.
It's not like CS and those AWP whores who can take out a whole team from cover. I always hated/wanted to be those guys.

disagree


Strong argument...

>> ^hawkinson:
L4D is true coop, no matter how good one player is, if his/her teammates suck it'll lead to a wipe.
It's not like CS and those AWP whores who can take out a whole team from cover. I always hated/wanted to be those guys.


disagree

L4D is true coop, no matter how good one player is, if his/her teammates suck it'll lead to a wipe.

It's not like CS and those AWP whores who can take out a whole team from cover. I always hated/wanted to be those guys.

Another L4D bug with douchebag commentary. Fun.

>> ^RedSky:
>> ^Deano:
>> ^RedSky:
Sure, he reviews games no one actually cares about or are weeks old, is oblivious to multiplayer and generally seems to get it wrong some of the time but hell if I can get a couple of laughs from a 5 minute video a week I'm not complaining.


He's reviewed Assassin's Creed, Halo 3 in the past and Fallout 3, Fable 2 and Left 4 Dead recently. Those are big games that alot of people care about.
Also he's not attempting to get anything "right", he's expressing an opinion.

He reviews some big name games, but he also reviews plenty that no one cares about because they already know they're shit just to take the piss. When he does review well received games on the other hand he takes his bloody time, (L4D - 3 weeks late, F3 - 3 weeks late, AC - 3 weeks late ... you get the idea) by which point you'd expect a lot of gamers to have either finished them or be well on their way through them, making 'reviewing' them a wee bit pointless.
By get it wrong, I'm obviously referring to my opinion. I would preface all my comments with 'in my opinion', but that would be incredibly obnoxious not to mention redundant because it should already be readily apparent.


I'm afraid with reaction to videogame reviews some people get a bit too upset over them and I assumed you might be one of them

I don't think his reviews have to coincide with release dates. Many people, myself included, don't buy games on release or certainly can't afford to. I might also be finishing something else. In that context his stuff remains useful as well as entertaining. He's not really competing with anyone else's reviews so he can take his time. My impression is that he actually has to buy these games himself (presumably funded by The Escapist) and isn't tied into the various politics of dealing with publishers like most gaming sites.

>> ^Kerotan:
From the end trailer I can postulate that Yahtzee has sold out faster that pele and his impotence adds.
I seriously wonder if he calls those people friends.
(on a side note, not that I'm against him selling out, good for him)
In addition co hosting something really kills the idea that he is a jaded sociapath of some description.


He already started and finished writing a PC Gamer column... not news.

>> ^PuffyJacket45:
Am I the only one who dislikes the horribly loud hard-rock intro/outro sequence of ZPR? Despise might be more apt. I have to be quick on the volume controls while watching these. Perhaps I'll do a narrated slideshow about it...


Blame the mini-Hitlers at the RIAA

>> ^RedSky:
>> ^Deano:
>> ^RedSky:
Sure, he reviews games no one actually cares about or are weeks old, is oblivious to multiplayer and generally seems to get it wrong some of the time but hell if I can get a couple of laughs from a 5 minute video a week I'm not complaining.


He's reviewed Assassin's Creed, Halo 3 in the past and Fallout 3, Fable 2 and Left 4 Dead recently. Those are big games that alot of people care about.
Also he's not attempting to get anything "right", he's expressing an opinion.

He reviews some big name games, but he also reviews plenty that no one cares about because they already know they're shit just to take the piss. When he does review well received games on the other hand he takes his bloody time, (L4D - 3 weeks late, F3 - 3 weeks late, AC - 3 weeks late ... you get the idea) by which point you'd expect a lot of gamers to have either finished them or be well on their way through them, making 'reviewing' them a wee bit pointless.
By get it wrong, I'm obviously referring to my opinion. I would preface all my comments with 'in my opinion', but that would be incredibly obnoxious not to mention redundant because it should already be readily apparent.


aw come on, you think everyone buys games within 2 weeks of release?

>> ^Deano:
>> ^RedSky:
Sure, he reviews games no one actually cares about or are weeks old, is oblivious to multiplayer and generally seems to get it wrong some of the time but hell if I can get a couple of laughs from a 5 minute video a week I'm not complaining.


He's reviewed Assassin's Creed, Halo 3 in the past and Fallout 3, Fable 2 and Left 4 Dead recently. Those are big games that alot of people care about.
Also he's not attempting to get anything "right", he's expressing an opinion.


He reviews some big name games, but he also reviews plenty that no one cares about because they already know they're shit just to take the piss. When he does review well received games on the other hand he takes his bloody time, (L4D - 3 weeks late, F3 - 3 weeks late, AC - 3 weeks late ... you get the idea) by which point you'd expect a lot of gamers to have either finished them or be well on their way through them, making 'reviewing' them a wee bit pointless.

By get it wrong, I'm obviously referring to my opinion. I would preface all my comments with 'in my opinion', but that would be incredibly obnoxious not to mention redundant because it should already be readily apparent.