Recent reviews by The Lizard Xing

Horribly balanced. Every match is designed to be stacked against you so everytime you win a fight, they become harder and harder instead of it just being a sandbox so you very soon find out the game is impossible.

One of the greatest games of the 21st century.

You can become, the LORD of WAR

you can commit war crimes with friends

cool

I wanted to look like the Engineer from Prometheus, I wanted to be the perfect lifeform. I can't even be a ragman.

But you can't even change your appearance in game which makes no sense. Okay a doctor can replace your entire nervous system but you can't get a haircut? And you can't alter your body, muscles, fat etc.

The gameplay is really cool,, hacking someones brain is creative but the most people bought the game for the huge array of customisation that was hyped and advertised but it's really lacking. GTA 4 & Red Dead has more options and you also can change your appearance anytime you want.

Forbes review by Richard Kiley (Featured 2018) 2/5

An Introduction
While Paradoxs franchised breadwinner Crusader Kings 2 has a growing player-base which is currently carrying the organization, where the latest announcement of Crusader Kings 3 was announced, which is, currently expected to be nominated Game of the Century (Forbes) at the end of the 2000s, the Europa Universalis has always been considered an experiment, an after thought from the award-winning Crusader Kings series which was conceived from an under-developed developer who had great ambitions.

Feedback from the Announcement
The mediocre success of Europa Universalis 3 caused eyebrows to raise when the predecessor, Europa Universalis IV was announced. We carried out an investigation and found that the IPO of Paradox actually rose when the lead developer was announced. Not because of his abilities, but more his flaws. With Derick Rijs leading the project, this meant that he wouldn't be involved in any other serious future projects that Paradox had shelved, which meant very little mistakes could have taken place.

With this in mind, the final product of Europa Universalis IV was demonstrated at the 2013 E3. The number of viewers watching the stream plummeted when the presenter (Stokely Carmichael) announced that the demo of the early build of Stellar is (Formally named Star man) had ended and now EU4 was to be streamed. The question of how much Paradox actually cared could be measured by the amount of time that was reserved for the stream. It was 7 minutes, further confirming the after thought of this game.

Game play
The game presents itself as a similar version of Crusader Kings 2, for players who find that game too daunting. A welcoming place where players can paint the map without any 'human' challenges or intrigue. The result was a very flawed game that had a very 2-dimential view of the world, with only one play style tailored to (some) nations. This ruined the sandbox experience and early reviews of the game show this amongst the community. DLC was later released but this was a cash-grab to make up the losses in sales.

Sales
The pre-order sales were minuscule compared to another game under Paradox, such as Crusader Kings 2. But that was always the case with the Europa Universalis series. This was the first IP under Paradox to perform worse than it's predecessor (Europa Universalis 3).

Conclusion
As Forbes previous investigations were carried out with our reporters going under-cover with some of the development team, it became clear that this game was never about profit, well not directly. Paradox released this game as a way of testing the market, first hand before a serious IP would be developed. Due to the few players that actually play the game (lower than Europa Universalis 3), we can't expect to see any announcements down the line which is unfortunate to any remaining fans.

This was brought you by Forbes, authored by Richard Kiley

It’s only been one year after the release of the first Left 4 Dead, and many of Valve’s fans including me would favor Half-Life 2 Episode 2. Valve usually take a long time to make a game, this is because of the quality of the finishing product being far superior to other titles such as Call of Duty (in my opinion). Team Fortress 2 was released several years later after the first Team Fortress. Despite their history, Left 4 Dead 2 seemed to be a very complete game and the time span of which it was created in didn’t affect the quality of the finishing product. There is no doubt that it’s better than the first Left 4 Dead.

You can play as one out of four survivors in a zombie apocalypse who attempt to blast their way through hordes of fast-moving zombies to get to the end goal. In Left 4 Dead 2 it’s set in the south with a new cast of characters. In this game, the characters backgrounds and attitudes are far more established, this can be seen with Ellis’ stories of exiting the safe house, but his story is promptly interrupted as hordes of zombies approach them.

I’ve played the first Left 4 Dead also, and this sequel didn’t feel much different. It uses the same gaming engine as the first Left 4 dead, so the gaming mechanics were almost identical. If you didn’t enjoy the first Left 4 Dead then you may not enjoy this one either. Although once you’ve played this game, it’s very difficult to turn back to the first without disappointment. Left 4 Dead 2 offers 5 campaign maps which have valuable replay value. For me, it seems like the content in Left 4 Dead 2 should have been DLC for the first Left 4 Dead. It simply had more content than the first.

Although some titles influence team work, this can do it more effectively than others, forcing you to work as a team to win. Every members of your four person squad must communicate and participate, where is ammunition, weapons and health packs, also asking for help when things get hot. Another great thing about Left 4 Dead 2’s A.I is the infamous Director, spawning a tank or a witch when you and your team is low on health. The Director also generates 3 different versions of the campaigns. Packs of common infected (zombies) at anytime, this usually has 5-10minute gaps depending on the difficulty you’re playing on, if the director is proving too challenging than you nerf down the difficulty.

Just like the first Left 4 Dead, there are multiple difficulty settings, normal is a good entry-level , for people who are new to the FPS genre or for those who would rather take it easy. And of course there is Expert which is the most challenging out of the 4 difficulties. With expert, you must have good communication and decision-making. Although there are the normal campaigns, Left 4 Dead 2 offers a realism mode which makes the game very challenging and to put it bluntly, daunting. Realism mode removes helpful glows that reveal weapons and health items, along with the glow around your team mates; it’s very easy to get lost if you are not familiar with the map. If you are a player who prefers to remain silent, or very shy, then Left 4 Dead 1 or 2 aren’t going to be well suited towards you. This is because your team needs the communication. Once you’ve completed a campaign, there is a great sense of accomplishment, if you are losing then it can be very frustrating, it’s also very easy to blame your team mates for your mistakes, which I’ve encountered.

Good game for those who wish to fight men.

Devs could update it more frequently though, I want to beat more MEN.

Played a game and from the distance I couldn't even tell who was a Christian damn.

Combat exploits need to be fixed.

Once you reach level 15 you're no longer able to play in official servers and you're forced to share with Russian filth who basically exploit the game.