There seem to be a lot of people on the net that think its cool to say that Left 4 Dead 2 is not a real game but an expansion to Left 4 Dead 1. As of today we shall class these people as ‘n00bs’ or ‘idi0ts’, and put them on ‘overtime’ 500 times, as they have definitely no idea what they are talking about.

Our friends over at Destructoid give us a whole bunch of reasons and tell you WHY it is NOT an expansion pack but instead a brand new game and below we will name a few of them:

It’s bigger than the first game:

First of all, I’ve not heard of many expansion packs that are the same size as the original game, let alone even bigger. Left 4 Dead 2 has five campaigns to match Left 4 Dead 1‘s four, not to mention Versus Mode in all campaigns right out of the box, Survival Mode, Scavenge Mode and Realism Mode. If, perhaps, this game were one new campaign, and maybe the extra modes, I could almost buy the accusations. The fact this game is larger than the original says “sequel” more than “expansion” to me.

Simply put, you are getting way more gameplay for your money than you got with the original game. If that’s an expansion, it’s a pretty bloody great one, and if you were willing to spend sixty bucks on the first game, why the hesitance over buying something significantly larger for the same amount of money? What’s wrong with you? You must be a fucking idiot.

All that new content doesn’t come easy:

New content and brand new things appear in L4D2

An expansion pack uses the original game and simply dumps new content into it.Left 4 Dead 2‘s base game is all-new content. New levels, new characters, new voices, new music, new weapons, new enemies. All that shit doesn’t just magic itself out of Gabe Newell’s rosy red arsering.Left 4 Dead 2contains way more original content than most expansions, and doesn’t piggy-back off the first game like expansions are wont to do.
Left 4 Dead 2 does not expand Left 4 Dead 1. If it did, it would be an expansion. Left 4 Dead 2 is its own game. Practically everything about the game is new. Again, if Left 4 Dead 2 simply added melee weapons or new Special Infected to the original Left 4 Dead, I’d agree that it was an expansion pack. But the sheer volume of new content in an all-new set of campaigns and an all-new set of modes more than justifies the status of sequel.

Sure, Left 4 Dead 2 expands upon the idea of Left 4 Dead 1, but that’s what all sequels do, you fucking idiot!

Most sequels re-use engines and assets:

One of the stupidest arguments given by those who call L4D2 an expansion is that Valve used the Source Engine again, as well as a number of original assets. If this is what makes an expansion, well we better have a mass product recall, because there are shitloads of games on store shelves right now pretending to be sequels.

All this new cool stuff and new assets are worth it

Most sequels tend to stick with one engine, and a fair few of them re-use assets. If you have used this argument againstLeft 4 Dead 2, then surely you can’t considerGears of War 2a sequel. OrModern Warfare 2. Far too many games released in the same generation as its prequel could be called an expansion by this lunatic logic. If your argument againstLeft 4 Dead 2is simply “DUH DUH IT USES THE SOURCE ENGINE,” then by your own stupid reasoning,Left 4 Dead 1was merely an expansion pack forPortal.

Loads of sequels re-use assets and music from their predecessors. Even when L4D2 does re-use assets, it changes them to keep things feeling fresh. The Smoker, Boomer, Hunter, Witch and Tank may be the same as they were before, but they’ve been re-skinned and altered so that they’re unique to the new game. The music is certainly similar, but it’s been touched up with a Southern flavor to fit the fresh setting. Last time I checked, expansion packs don’t use a ton of fresh assets, while changing nearly all the older ones. If you’ve used this argument, you’re obviously some sort of fucking idiot.

It feels different:

Left 4 Dead 1 introduced us to a concept. Left 4 Dead 2 took that concept and thrust it in all sorts of different directions, experimenting with the format and giving us brand new ways to interact with a familiar premise. That’s pretty much what sequels are supposed to do. They don’t typically reinvent the wheel, they take the same wheel and add reflectors and baseball cards. I’ve seen a great many “real” sequels do far less than Left 4 Dead 2 and receive no criticism at all. Left 4 Dead 2 did what sequels do. It built upon the groundwork its prequel laid. How is that the work of a mere expansion pack?

More importantly, Left 4 Dead 2 has a totally different feel and totally different experiences to Left 4 Dead 1. Each campaign has its own distinct personality, with all sorts of cool new challenges, such as fighting through a burning building, collecting gas cans to fuel an escape car, or getting to one end of a level and then fighting back through it, this time during a perilous storm that threatens to scatter your party without due care.

Even the similar gameplay elements feel different and better. The finale event at the end of Dark Carnival, fighting on the Midnight Riders’ stage while pyrotechnics flare and music blasts out, automatically eclipses any finale in the first game. You can choose to disagree, but that is a choice for fucking idiots.

Even if it WAS an expansion, it’s worth the money:

Still think its an expansion? Go tell these guys!

IfLeft 4 Dead 2‘s an expansion, I’d consider it a compliment more than anything, because that’s one damn good expansion. With all the aforementioned new content, you can argue the semantics of what this game is all you want. At the end of the day, it delivers $60 worth of playability.

More content than the first game, plus an even more balanced and varied multiplayer to keep gamers playing? Yeah, that’s worth full retail price any day of the week.

Whether you want to call it an expansion or not doesn’t matter. The game stands alone and justifies its existence for anybody not too stubborn to get into it.

It’s called Left 4 Dead 2, IDIOT!!