The second one was better. I'll try to sum up as to why in one long sentence. It's way more challenging, you can give the survivors weapons of your choice, the graphics are better, it gives you a more realistic feel, you have to be on your toes in this one because your barricade is never at 100 (the health of the barricade changes from town to town), zombies can carry weapons (making it a pain, adding to the difficulty, which I like), you have to use strategy (when to leave town, where to set up traps on the field, etc), and there is a HUGE variety of weapons.
There were few problems, like the new searching system, which unpredictable and puts you at a disadvantage. Whenever the barricade collapses the survivors run away like wusses. Do you know how annoying that is? Not to mention, you might have to take on 20 zombies by yourself if this happens.
Still, The Last Stand 2 is better than The Last Stand.
I'm going to kick myself in the nuts for this but...
1. That's spam 2. TLS2 is tied for the highest rating on a game 3. Thus making your point null and void 4. You're probably some 10 year old kid (10 year olds on AG= Flamers and Spammers) 5. I don't care if I sound like a LS fanboy, everything I just said was true.
That's what I was going to kick myself in the nuts for. Pointing out spam is heavily frowned upon, but I couldn't resist. The rest of my points were fine.
