Talk:Left 4 Dead 2

Template:WikiProject Xbox

Banned in Australia

Aparently l4d2 has been banned in australia as can be seen Here Sir Fritz (talk) 06:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I just updated the page to include the banning in Australia. Bagginators (talk) 07:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Wait, what? Left 4 Dead 2 "failed to gain a MA15+ rating" and that means it is "unsuitable for persons aged under 18 to play." ... Would someone like to help me understand what the Australians teach in their maths classes? Seriously, is this right? Because it just sounds... bizarre doesn't quite cover it. MA15+ should mean that it's suitable for those 15 and up, surely? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Correct, but the game did NOT earn an MA15+ rating (it earned a higher rating). And, evidently, if it's not suitable for 15+ (just 18+) then it doesn't get released. The section seems quite clear to me. Ie: the next rating up from 15+ is 18+, thus 'failing to acquire MA15+' means that it is deemed suitable only for 18+. DP76764 (Talk) 16:08, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

But... if the game earned a higher rating, then that rating exists... which means it should be coming out under that rating and... my head hurts. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 09:43, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

There is no higher rating. It's a crock. MA15+ is the highest the ratings can go for games, thanks to a backwater politician. --118.208.107.100 (talk) 08:13, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

(headdesk) Very well. But I vote that the part about it not being suitable for under 18s is deleted to avoid confusing others who are unaware of the Ozzie's bizarre ratings system. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Or perhaps an explanation of Australia's video game rating system would be appropriate. Hon Michael Atkinson, the Attorney-General for South Australia, is the one responsible for vetoing changes to the video game rating system which would have included an R18+ rating. The way the system works means that all Attorney's-General from every State (6 states) must agree to the changes in order for the changes to be made. While Atkinson continues to oppose the changes, there is no way of putting changes through. It is funny to note that the Board consider the game to be "unsuitable for for persons aged under 18 to play"; which also means that it IS suitable for those over 18 to play. And given that the average age of gamers in Australia is 29 or 30 years of age, it seems counter-intuitive to deny the game to all.202.89.183.233 (talk) 02:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

We probably don't want to provide an explanation of Australia's rating system for every game that was banned in Australia. I think that info belongs more to Office of Film and Literature Classification (Australia), and perhaps this article can link to an appropriate section of that article. —LOL ^T/_C 03:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This section seems to be the best choice. By the way, thanks. I've now got a more informed opinion of the world's stupidity. :P --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 09:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it's quite ridiculous, really. I've gone and added the link to the section. Incidentally, I wonder what Australian boycotters think of this whole shenanigan, haha. BlazerKnight (talk) 22:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Likely, the two things that always happen with moronic censors and/or moronic DRM. Importing for the first and piracy for both (though Valve is very intelligent with DRM and is one of the few companies I can think of that I respect in that department). --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 09:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

There needs to be a status update of this section- A censored, resubmitted version has been classified MA15+, while a review of the classification of the original submission has confirmed that it will remain RC'ed. In all likelyhood the censored one looks like it will hit Aus shores. Sad moment in Aus gaming history :( The censored version will have bodies removed and no dismemberment.203.28.251.101 (talk) 01:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait, it has the bodies removed? But... there were bodies in the first game... I totally give up on the Australian censor board. Thanks for the links. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 12:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Couldn't Australian players just buy the unedited version via steam? EvilHom3r (talk) 05:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, the law also prevents digital downloading. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 12:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

No, Steam would block AUS service to the game. There's always going to be SOME people that pirate it though. I can guarantee that.71.233.198.166 (talk) 19:15, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually EvilHomer is partly correct - if Australian players have it bought for them by international players, or buy it overseas, they will have the uncensored version. The restriction is that the uncensored version cannot be sold in Australia, not that it cannot exist in Australia. The determining factor of which version is purchased on steam is the location of the purchaser. Australian IPs receive the censored version, while international IPs receive the uncensored. So for instance, having an international friend gift you a copy means you have the international version. But we can't include that in the article unless there are sources. 152.91.9.219 (talk) 00:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, if that is common knowledge about how Steam works, we may be able to put that in. Wait for a bit though in case someone believes otherwise. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 00:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of "Fly Gabe Newell"

I have removed this section from the article, as it pertains only to the boycott, and isn't even necessarily a big part of the boycott in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.94.29.216 (talk) 23:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Here is the removed section, which I also removed:

===="Fly Gabe Newell"==== Shortly afterward, a Left 4 Dead modder known by the handles "Joe W-A" and "Lacabra" sent a joking email to Gabe Newell, prompting the following exchange: Why the hell haven't I been flown to Valve? I mean, you guys need to preview my campaign. — Joe W-A We are boycotting your campaign. — Gabe Newell Does... does that mean I have to fly you here? — Joe W-A Me and Erik. — Gabe Newell Joe W-A then started an online campaign on Blogspot to raise funds for air tickets. He rapidly received over USD$3000 in donations after several gaming news sites carried his story. Valve then announced in a press release that Gabe Newell and Erik Johnson were heading to Australia, presumably on their own money, as Joe W-A gave the collected donations to the charity Child's Play.

I removed this because:

1. It is not written in an encyclopedic manner.
2. It is an unimporant event, a sub event of the boycott.
3. the sites listed as references are blogs.

Ikip (talk) 21:31, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree the above is way too much for a minor thing - though this event is not so minor as it did get coverage, but it only needs a sentence or two. FWIW, the only true blog in the refs above is the flygabenewll one; Kotaku depends on authro, and Rock Paper Shotgun is considered reliable. --MASEM (t) 23:14, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I can understand that the previous version was too long for a minor event, but I thought I wrote it in an encyclopedic manner; could you be more specific so I can make better edits in the future? Also, I used the campaign blog itself as a primary source, but used secondary sources to back it up. I have gone and copyedited for accuracy, too. BlazerKnight (talk) 02:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

You need to assume the reader has no clue about these things, and thus explain the gross details, not the specifics. --MASEM (t) 04:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, revert my edits, call them unencyclopedic, but at least fix the information about Newell saying: "offered that if Joe was to pay to fly him to the country, he would take a look at it." He never did. Joe started the campaign on his own initiative. BlazerKnight (talk) 04:27, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

If I read the above portion of the email chain that was removed, it certainly sounds like that Newell told Joe to fly them to Aussie to review his mod. It could have ended at that but Joe then went and started the funding campaign; that was the initiative you refer to. It is important to note that the email chain was all jokingly done, and only once the funds got close to $3000 that it became serious. --MASEM (t) 14:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Newell joked about flying them to Australia. The way it's worded now implies that he asked, with seriousness, for Joe to pay for the flight. At least rephrase that. BlazerKnight (talk) 03:59, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Newell today (Oct 7) is apparently in Australia now, but reported as part of a press conference to discussion the rating issue with the AU Office. (just added this to article). My feeling (not yet supported) is that when the classification occurred, shortly after Joe announced he had $3000, Newell made plans to travel to AU to appeal to the board directly, and thus this is more a business trip for him , with a stop to see Joe. If we can affirm that these two events are related, that will help. --MASEM (t) 14:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Youtube has footage of a press event he held, and the way he tells it, when he saw the speed with which the community raised the money he realised they wanted him to visit Australia... so he decided to make it a useful trip by doing other things while in the country. The campaign began before the censorship thing blew up, so it doesn't seem like it began as a business trip. 152.91.9.219 (talk) 01:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Boycott Section too long?

Is anyone else noticing this? It's just way too long and seems that a few sentences are just basically saying the same thing. I'd shorten it up, but what do you guys think? 98.198.83.12 (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The boycott was significant and influenced another aspect of the game (Gabe's trip to AU) so it's still necessary to include. --MASEM (t) 00:17, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

The whole Pre-release reactions section is unnecessary and should be broken up into information dispersed throughout the article, except the boycott which deserves at least a subsection. I'm hoping that as the game nears release this page will be cleaned up because it's pretty dire right now. Smurfy 17:12, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree, with video game articles we're usually struggling to add real-world reception, and we have a gold mine of it right here (before the game is even released, too). If anyone thinks it can be trimmed for conciseness, go for it. BlazerKnight (talk) 21:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree with BlazerKnight. We actually sourced most of the stuff in the Boycott section too.--Ace Oliveira (talk) 18:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

UK Cover

I suggest the cover shown on the page be changed to the UK cover so the article doesn't appear doesn't appear offensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.51.173 (talk) 18:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Valve is a US company, so we use the US cover. Besides, Wikipedia doesn't censor for any purpose, potentially offensive or not (see Autofellatio). --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 18:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I see, not many people would find it offensive anyway, just giving a heads up.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.51.173 (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. I'm from the UK though, and I can tell you that a game cover on Wikipedia isn't going to offend anyone when they can simply look outside to see said gesture. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 18:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh come on, it's just a front cover. The fingers are meant to show that it is the second game in the Left 4 Dead series. Plus, who cares about front covers? -Anonymus 9 November 09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.79.247 (talk) 21:52, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

This is not a forum. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

New release date.

FYI I changed the release date on the page to the 16th. See http://store.steampowered.com/app/550/ Crazydog115 (talk) 23:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

What the heck were you looking at on the page? I Ctrl+F'd my way through. The number 16 isn't mentioned anywhere. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 23:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

It says the 16th there for me as when the game unlocks, but as this is a retail title too, we'll stick with the published release date, the 17th. --MASEM (t) 00:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

According to the source, the game will unlock at November 17, 6:00 am UTC, which would be November 16 for those at UTC-7 or less. At any rate, I think the press releases take precedence over this fact and timezone differences aren't significant in the release of a game. —LOL ^T/_C 02:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Good point. I'd forgotten that Steam unlocks around the world together. I'd presume it would unlock whenever the specific country hit the time. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 05:37, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

From what I can see on Amazon and Game's website the release date for the xbox 360 version of the game is 20th November in the UK, should this be included in the article as the stated EU release date of the 17th could be misleading (as it was for me!) Handlezone (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)]

At the time, the European release date was uncited in the info box, so I changed it to the 17th, believing it to be vandalism. It also wasn't mentioned in the article anywhere, supporting my theory. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 14:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Reception

The reception section actually has nothing bout the actual critical and commercial reception to the game. Anyone wanna add this?

Possibly because it's just come out? It'll come soon. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 01:17, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that an online videogame news site "Destructoid" gave the game an 9.5 out of 10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.187.131 (talk) 17:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

The reception section contains this quote: "Left 4 Dead 2 received strong positive reviews from game journalists, praising ... the details of the southern locale and individual campaigns compared with the generic city-scape of the first game." But Death Toll is mostly outdoors and small town America and Blood Harvest is entirely rural!! And several of the areas in the sequel are just as generic. It's really just Pennsylvania vs. the deep South near New Orleans (presumably around Louisiana and Mississippi). Given that, I think we need some RSs on this. Argel1200 (talk) 22:42, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I changed the end of the sentence to compared with the campaigns of the first game. Hervegirod (talk) 07:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Box Art

I think that the picture have been misplaced, the U.K one shold be on the top of the page and the U.S one at the middle.15:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)(usmc22) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Usmc22 (talk • contribs)

New sections go at the bottom. Secondly, I'm from England and I still have to ask the only logical question that I can think of. Why? --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 15:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Release date

Bit belated, but the release date for the EU was actually the 20th. i.e. Today. 194.83.84.16 (talk) 08:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Software Bugs

The company admits there is a problem which will repeatedly kick the user out of the software without warning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.170.131 (talk) 23:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

What a tragedy... I mean I've been kicked out of an application before but being kicked out of the software... well holy crap. Anyhow, do you have a source? —LOL ^T/_C 23:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Criticism section suggestion, opinions?

I propose we remove two sections from Criticism; Racism accusations and Australian ban. The racism incident was just some nonsense from a single journalist and is not notable at all, while the Australian "ban" is something that happens with a lot of games and deserves a quick mention somewhere else in the article, not a large section of its own. As for where, I don't know, but it certainly shouldn't have its own section. -- Love, Smurfy 23:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Both of those are notable. The racism incident for being so bloody stupid (just like RE5) and the Australian ban brought up a lot of issues, both with the censoring system and also with the game itself (the Australians aren't even really playing Left 4 Dead 2 anymore. The modified version appears to be just downloadable content because all the stuff that meant Valve couldn't add it in like that is gone). --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 23:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Your opinion of the events doesn't change the weight of those incidents. The racism issue had an official response from Valve. You're confusing the notability of a journalist with the potential weight of what they say. If I made a statement about L4D2 and it became as widespread as what he said, it should be on this page, too. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Uncommon Commons

Should we list all of them? Usually, I would say no to listing everything, but I think (though I haven't played L4D2 yet) that they're an important enough part of gameplay to warrant a sentence each at least. After all, the Specials all have descriptions because they affect the game in horrible, horrible ways. The Uncommon Commons were designed to be, essentially, mini-Specials. Therefore, I think that we should at them all into the article. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 01:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, the special infected are very different. They're playable, given prominence in both intro videos throughout them, etc. They're on a different level; if a Smoker incapacitates or kills someone, or a player kills one, a notice is given. However, if a clown infected is under the same circumstances, it is treated as a regular infected. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Given they are tied to the specific scenarios, and the fact that this means Valve (or another third-party) could add more uncommon common with new content, this could become a bit too unwieldy. --MASEM (t) 02:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

True, I'll admit I hadn't thought of either of those. Never mind then. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 11:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of the "Hacks" section

I vote for the removal of and strongly dispute the "Hacks" section. I find it as unencyclopedic and highly controversial content. The next best thing to removing this section, which I find rediculous, since it apparently can get peoples Steam accounts VAC-banned, which means they essentially irreversibly get their whole account blocked, is to add much clearer warnings of this and moving it to the Australian ban section. — KodakYarr (talk) 10:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, the section was removed as I was writing this. Which I find quite odd since the time of the reverting edit says 6:10 this morning, and I was never on before that time, so I shouldn't have seen the Hacks section when visiting. — KodakYarr (talk) 10:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

good summary article of the boycott

[1] Will try to work in what we already don't have covered when time. --MASEM (t) 14:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Good article, but the boycott section already tends to bias the corporate side a bit. Gabe's original comment that started the stir isn't even mentioned. That is:

"...we'll have the initial release and then we'll release more movies, more characters, more weapons, unlockables, achievements, because that's the way you continue to grow a community over time.". [2] The boycott wasn't for more content, it was for promised content. I haven't seen any new weapons or characters. Even if we don't agree with the boycott, this section is slightly bias. Is there any way we can work in that quote? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuzzyline (talk • contribs) 10:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Spoof of FEMA?

The organization CEDA (Civil Emergency and Defense Agency) and the military play a huge part in the plot of the game. It appears that CEDA is a spoof of the United States' Federal Emergency Management Agency, who received much negative press following the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans. In this case CEDA has plastered the game world with warnings, many of which are fairly nonsensical or even sinister, and has clearly mismanaged the outbreak as well. (Of particular note are instructions to cover windows with tape and plastic, and warnings against storing firearms in the safe houses.) Is this noteworthy? Atypicaloracle (talk) 04:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

It may be noteworthy if it's backed up by a reliable source; otherwise, it's just original research. —LOL ^T/_C 04:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Critical Reception of Australian Version

All of the reviews shown on the page right now are positive reviews about the uncensored version from American and European reviewers. If anyone else can help, I think any reviews of the Australian version would help. For example, despite IGN US and IGN UK giving L4D2 a 9.0, IGN AUS gave it a 5.0, mostly because they were reviewing the censored version. Link is http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/104/1047522p1.html. 74.101.104.241 (talk) 16:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

system requirements?

i WAS READING THE ARTICLE AND IT GOT ME THINKING, SHOULDN'T THERE BE A TABLE/SECTION OF THE INFORMATION AREA WHERE THE REQUIREMENTS ARE MENTIONED? It would be helpful to the people who want to get the game so they know how good their pc needs to be.--Master1001 (talk) 21:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

YES, THERE SHOULD BUT THERE'S NO NEED TO SHOUT. KEEP YOUR FINGER AWAY FROM THE CAPS LOCK BUTTON, THANK YOU. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 21:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, being partially blind I did not notice that a lot of my post was in capital letters. I asked about requirements because there are so many people saying different requirements and the average gamer would not know what one to go with. Some say "3.0GHZ", others say "2.4GHZ" and those who sent the game to me from Hong Kong say "2.0GHZ" so it would be nice to get that cleaned up. Master1001 (talk) 22:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Steam or a game box would be the best bet. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Steam is out of a question for me as my PC that I play on does not have net capability, the game box would be helpful however in some cases I have read a game case and the requirements seem low, however when I actually play the game it is higher/slower then expected. Master1001 (talk) 22:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm too busy to search right now, but someone else will probably have the requirements up soon (or at least a link to them). --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Is such a low resolution box art needed?

My main issue is that it's ugly and bordering on unreadable, but it's also inconsistent with practically every box art or poster on wikipedia which are allowed without such measures. Can we reach a consensus on it? Skeith (talk) 05:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)