Back 4 Blood is..okay. I mainly choose "not recommended" because there's a chance people will still remember the marketing scheme of calling this a "spiritual successor to Left 4 Dead" and poised it to be the "L4D killer." In a way, it is similar: four survivors have to battle a horde of infected individuals, some of which have mutated to gain special abilities that set them apart from your average Joe. The only problem is that this game lacks one of the most important qualities the Left 4 Dead series had, and that's the soul of it.

The writing is unremarkable. As interesting as it is to see survivors trying to rebuild society, the problem with this is it strips away a lot of the desperation and bleakness from their situation, whereas the L4D games were rife with this. While there is a lot of characters to choose from, much moreso than L4D, Back 4 Blood offers quantity over quality. Whereas some characters like Jim, Doc or Heng just leave me feeling disappointed that these people aren't expanded upon further, there's others that I don't want on my team ever because they're either written poorly, come across as self inserts, or have the sort of personality which makes you wish they were eaten first. Karlee looks and acts horrible, and will never hold a candle to Nick, who, for being such a massive jerk when he first meets the Savannah Survivors, eventually thaws out and still holds some level of camaraderie with the people who he knows deep down he needs in order to survive.

That's only one survivor, with half or more of them suffering from bad writing and overall design. I also think it's obscenely ironic that she has a "corporate microtransactions suck" shirt in a game that is published by WB Games, who is notorious for their egregious microtransactions. Sorry guys, this isn't the own you think it is, it really isn't, even if I do agree with you.

Another issue I have with the survivors is that they are simply too chatty. I understand one of the appeals with L4D is the dialogue between the characters, but you do not need them to talk whenever shoving or using melee. Valve knew the importance of including dialogue for certain cues, like when someone was affected by Boomer bile, healing another player, etc., but they were also aware that too much chatter would be annoying. B4B did not. L4D's intermittent dialogue felt special because of how rare it was, whereas here they talk so much you'll wish they'd just shut up sometimes.

Crowbcat has already done a great job of pointing out how Back 4 Blood has traded graphic fidelity for every other quality Left 4 Dead had in spades, from characterizing the survivors and zombies alike with solid animations to physics-based props which left you with a much more lifelike world. The guns do look nice, but I've long shut off the option to have survivors covered in grime because it simply looks like they've had ketchup or whatever else splattered all over them. The first time I used the minigun placement, it was incredibly underwhelming visually. I wish this game would have adopted Valve's idea of silhouettes, or in other words making the special infected more visually unique so you can identify what kind of threat they are much quicker. I won't say the taller ones blend in well, because they don't, but the smaller jumpy ones are harder to pick out in a horde.

The one thing B4B does bring to the table which L4D doesn't, and may be what you ultimately have to ask yourself whether or not you want to try the game, is the card/character perk system. Not a big fan of cards, however I do like the ability to augment your play however you feel. Just a warning, though, that you should ultimately build your deck for the sake of your own survival if you're playing with randoms. Players still seem to have issues recognizing when teammates are in trouble, and if your team has poor coordination you will personally suffer greatly when using support builds. And maybe turn off that crossplay (which is a welcome feature if you've got friends on other consoles, regardless).

All things considered, I got this for $10 on Greenmangaming and am glad I got it at that price rather than full retail. I knew ahead of time its shortcomings, as well as strengths, and what I wanted is a game which plays like L4D but with RPG elements. And that is what B4B is, ultimately. To call it a spiritual successor to L4D is, however, incorrect, as it so sorely lacks in the spirit which made L4D so great to begin with. If you simply want a L4D-like horde shooter with RPG mechanics and are willing to look past the game's faults, you can't go wrong for $10 or less. Otherwise, just wait until L4D2 is on sale for its ridiculously low price, or simply keep playing that instead. Who knows, maybe there's an RPG mod on the workshop which can supplement having to consider this game at all.

While I am enjoying my time with this game, again, I don't recommend it on the basis it is not the L4D replacement they made it out to be. And it never will.

Back 4 Blood is..okay. I mainly choose "not recommended" because there's a chance people will still remember the marketing scheme of calling this a "spiritual successor to Left 4 Dead" and poised it to be the "L4D killer." In a way, it is similar: four survivors have to battle a horde of infected individuals, some of which have mutated to gain special abilities that set them apart from your average Joe. The only problem is that this game lacks one of the most important qualities the Left 4 Dead series had, and that's the soul of it. The writing is unremarkable. As interesting as it is to see survivors trying to rebuild society, the problem with this is it strips away a lot of the desperation and bleakness from their situation, whereas the L4D games were rife with this. While there is a lot of characters to choose from, much moreso than L4D, Back 4 Blood offers quantity over quality. Whereas some characters like Jim, Doc or Heng just leave me feeling disappointed that these people aren't expanded upon further, there's others that I don't want on my team ever because they're either written poorly, come across as self inserts, or have the sort of personality which makes you wish they were eaten first. Karlee looks and acts horrible, and will never hold a candle to Nick, who, for being such a massive jerk when he first meets the Savannah Survivors, eventually thaws out and still holds some level of camaraderie with the people who he knows deep down he needs in order to survive. That's only one survivor, with half or more of them suffering from bad writing and overall design. I also think it's obscenely ironic that she has a "corporate microtransactions suck" shirt in a game that is published by WB Games, who is notorious for their egregious microtransactions. Sorry guys, this isn't the own you think it is, it really isn't, even if I do agree with you. Another issue I have with the survivors is that they are simply too chatty. I understand one of the appeals with L4D is the dialogue between the characters, but you do not need them to talk whenever shoving or using melee. Valve knew the importance of including dialogue for certain cues, like when someone was affected by Boomer bile, healing another player, etc., but they were also aware that too much chatter would be annoying. B4B did not. L4D's intermittent dialogue felt special because of how rare it was, whereas here they talk so much you'll wish they'd just shut up sometimes. Crowbcat has already done a great job of pointing out how Back 4 Blood has traded graphic fidelity for every other quality Left 4 Dead had in spades, from characterizing the survivors and zombies alike with solid animations to physics-based props which left you with a much more lifelike world. The guns do look nice, but I've long shut off the option to have survivors covered in grime because it simply looks like they've had ketchup or whatever else splattered all over them. The first time I used the minigun placement, it was incredibly underwhelming visually. I wish this game would have adopted Valve's idea of silhouettes, or in other words making the special infected more visually unique so you can identify what kind of threat they are much quicker. I won't say the taller ones blend in well, because they don't, but the smaller jumpy ones are harder to pick out in a horde. The one thing B4B does bring to the table which L4D doesn't, and may be what you ultimately have to ask yourself whether or not you want to try the game, is the card/character perk system. Not a big fan of cards, however I do like the ability to augment your play however you feel. Just a warning, though, that you should ultimately build your deck for the sake of your own survival if you're playing with randoms. Players still seem to have issues recognizing when teammates are in trouble, and if your team has poor coordination you will personally suffer greatly when using support builds. And maybe turn off that crossplay (which is a welcome feature if you've got friends on other consoles, regardless). All things considered, I got this for $10 on Greenmangaming and am glad I got it at that price rather than full retail. I knew ahead of time its shortcomings, as well as strengths, and what I wanted is a game which plays like L4D but with RPG elements. And that is what B4B is, ultimately. To call it a spiritual successor to L4D is, however, incorrect, as it so sorely lacks in the spirit which made L4D so great to begin with. If you simply want a L4D-like horde shooter with RPG mechanics and are willing to look past the game's faults, you can't go wrong for $10 or less. Otherwise, just wait until L4D2 is on sale for its ridiculously low price, or simply keep playing that instead. Who knows, maybe there's an RPG mod on the workshop which can supplement having to consider this game at all. While I am enjoying my time with this game, again, I don't recommend it on the basis it is not the L4D replacement they made it out to be. And it never will.