Left 4 Dead 1 DLC Brings New Campaign: Free on PC, Paid on Xbox 360
The downloadable add-on will be available to owners of the PC version at no cost, with Xbox 360 players needing to pony up 560 Microsoft Points ($7) for the experience.
"New locations, new dialogue from the original cast, and an explosive finale" were promised, with Valve noting that the download--meant to bridge the gap between the existing "No Mercy" and "Death Toll" campaigns--will also bring new Survival maps alongside the new single and multiplayer campaign.
"The primary goal of 'Crash' is to deliver a complete Versus mode experience in just 30 minutes, resulting in a streamlined version of the game's existing Versus campaigns," the company explained. "A recharge timer for infected teammates has also been added, and item spawn behavior has changed for more balanced gameplay."
"We're working with the fans toward the ongoing entertainment value of the product," said Valve founder Gabe Newell.
Though the controversial sequel to Left 4 Dead, appropriately titled Left 4 Dead 2, is due to hit PC and Xbox 360 on November 17, the studio has previously pledged that it will "keep supporting Left 4 Dead 1" and hopes that once "everyone's had time to see the complete product of Left 4 Dead 2 and see continued support for Left 4 Dead 1, they may sort of see what we were up to and what the method of our madness was."
-
Archangel2007
replyVALVE LIED TO US! BOYCOTT!
Wait.
Gosh, don't I feel like an idiot.-
Haha, the boycotters are looking pretty stupid right now. Valve said they would add more content to L4D and they have . . . several times. I can't wait for the boycotters response, it will be hilarious, as usual! :D
-
i think i know what they're going to say...
http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?id=20581799#itemanchor_20581799 -
You *REALLY* don't get the whole point of the "boycott", do you?
For starters, I wouldn't even have called the thing a boycott if I had my way but meh, a name is only as important as you make it out to be.
Anyway, the primary intent has been (for the majority) to express discontent with Valve's offerings up to when they announced L4D 2 and to basically state that if such remained the same, then myself and others would not be purchasing L4D 2 for the foreseeable future. The only reason I bought L4D 1 for full price was Valve's statement that they would continue in the vein of TF2 which has an excellent track record for post-release support (and which was at most $30 at launch now matter how you split it up as HL2: Ep2 and Portal account for at least $20 out of the Orange Box or did on launch anyway).
So anyway, the whole intent of the "boycott" has been to express to Valve that they have not met their claims yet and because many people only shelled out such an amount for L4D because of those claims (which Valve previously backed-up) that L4D 2 would be a no-go. Part of that intent of course was to attempt to get Valve to change course as they began to realize that they basically have a giant pile of lost sales for L4D 2 sitting around now because of their actions. Previously Valve had only been talking about group matchmaking but since the "boycott" they have started talking about new content and now we have this. There is not the slightest chance, you don't think, that Crash Course comes courtesy of the "boycott"'s efforts? If this comes out within the next month or two, they certainly would have needed to shift devs to this from L4D 2 if the Survival Pack is even the slightest indicator of what kind of team they had working on L4D 1 prior to the extreme discontent that was voiced. Not to mention that Valve has ONLY started talking about attempting to achieve some form of interoperability between L4D and L4D 2 since the boycott.
And I also question why you give much of a damn about "boycotters looking stupid". In fact, it seems that you, yourself, are quite a fair bit dumber as despite your ambivalence the ultimate goal of the "boycotters" is to get Valve to honor their promises or release L4D 2 as an expansion. If either of those goals is accomplished, you benefit rather nicely.-
[deleted]
-
Nothing was "promised".
There was nothing in the EULA statement that says Valve is going to support this in the same vein has any previous product. That is the only document that is in any way shape or form binding between you and the publisher of the game - and even then I'm sure there's a disconnect that doesn't hold Valve to any liability.
Your "boycott" is nothing but 10,000 people whining about how they want more for nothing.
Nothing is free. If you feel you are not getting the value out of a product, fine bitch, but to make demands based on statements that have no legal bearing - is absolutely ludicrous.-
Free content isn't even free- learn a basic understanding of why developers and publishers release "free" content at all. It is, of course, all about sales. TF2's sales have been considerably greater because of that. L4D's were because of the- yes, the- PROMISE of such a continuation of support in L4D. Again, you are making the assumption that myself and others are all, "omfg we want what we paid for" when what we are really saying is, "Fine, if that is how you're going to follow-up your marketing, then I'm not going to accept it anymore and therefore I will not buy L4D 2 for $50 because imo L4D 2 is not worth $50".
-
I bought L4D for $25 bucks mid November during the holiday sales. Any game that has a minimal SP/COOP campaign and a heavy focus on MP is never worth more than $30-40. But that's my perception of it's value - and is not the rule or the norm, merely an opinion.
I've reached an age where there's really no reason to spend a premium for Day 1 exposure. Best to let the kiddies suck it up and a month later see if the game is really up to snuff or not. Sure you might be the noob for a few weeks having to learn what some people learning 1-2 months ago, but you'll learn just as fast if not faster than those that grabbed the game on Day 1.
-
-
-
You seriously think the boycott had ANYTHING to do with this? That's both sad and hilarious!
-
You might want to read what has actually been written as opposed to what you've conjured in your mind.
-
-
-
-
Lawlfail.
I'm merely putting forth some reasoning- I'm not Gabe Newell so I can't ever say for certain exactly what he had and hadn't planned and when such occurred. However, Valve's initial responses to the backlash after the L4D 2 announcement were their continued support via the SDK and adding group matchmaking. If they knew they had Crash Course coming down the line, it would have behooved them not to mention that another campaign was in the works as well then. That is all I'm saying.-
Maybe they didn't want to announce until what they had was at a particular stage in development? The point is moot nonetheless, the advent of this campaign is if NOTHING ELSE Valve giving the boycotters exactly what they wanted. Whether it was meditated far in advance (I have no doubt it was) or not doesn't matter. There is no longer any reason to bitch; why must it continue?
-
As I recall, what began the "bitching" "again" was the bitching about bitching. Then bitching about that there is certainly the potential that the "bitching" accomplished something (certainly has accomplished the L4D + L4D 2 interoperability dialogue).
Side note, but I wasn't talking about announcing Crash Course specifically, but stating that they had a Vs-oriented campaign in development woulda been nice (since Vs is the only reason I still play L4D at all).-
Stop with the bitching! Okay you saved valve from being a horrible company by making a big hot fuss! Nobody cares. Seriously. Valve fans have been influencing their business since Half-Life 1 was released, this is really far from a great big surprise even if the DLC was made exclusively after the boycott. The best part? The same would probably have been accomplished without trying to threaten the sales of L4D2, or simply leaving it as a "no thanks" instead of moaning about how Valve kicked your dog.
-
... So basically you're arguing about nothing is your point? But you want to establish some kind of non-existent high moral platform for yourself? Smooth.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I think Valve learned their lesson with the Half-Life 2 fiasco. Since then, they've been exceptionally good at keeping their mouths shut about upcoming releases unless they have something solid to back it up.
Then again, maybe this was a campaign that didn't make the cut and they dusted it off, polished it and are putting it out there in response to the complaints about L4D2. Its certainly not out of the realm of possibility.
-
-
-
-
Is it? I never specifically said that the boycott DEFINITELY is the reason for the update. I merely implied that it could have been a catalyst for it. Again, look around at the evidence and only since the outcry has Valve started talking about actual new DLC. I'm merely pointing out that such is suspicious.
-
-
It was foolish of anyone to purchase a product which they don't currently consider worth the money. The lack of DLC for L4D does hurt the credibility of Valve's PR a little bit but it's not like they deceived you, they just changed their minds about something that was only a passing mention in an interview to begin with.
-
More than a passing mention in interviews and they had the track record for it with TF2.
Of course, once again, my purchase of L4D matters not and that is not what I am getting at. The purchase of L4D 2 is of course the focus and again, I and others are merely indicating to Valve that one of the marketing ploys they used for L4D 1 will not have the same success with L4D 2- which is to say they're probably not getting my money at all but definitely not at launch. When L4D 2 drops down to a more reasonable price for its current content, I may reconsider.-
Where was it ever more than that?
And when people complain that they only bought L4D because of Valve's "promises," how else am I supposed to interpret that except that they didn't think what we got was worth the money? They got burnt once and they don't want to fall for it again, I can at least understand that. If you did think L4D was worth the money, then what about L4D2 is not worth the money? It has far more content - five campaigns, all with Versus and Survival and another new gamemode, new guns(at least a few beyond remodels), melee weapons and powerups, new special infected, and various new features like director improvements and moving finales? If you think even half of that would ever have been done in free updates you're delusional.-
Why do you feel some kind of pressure that because some people did not feel L4D was worth the money and do not feel L4D 2 is worth the money that those people are somehow indicated that YOU need to feel the same way? What?
As far as L4D 2 having more and such things coming in updates = delusional, the entire concept of the AI Director has been rather BS in L4D 1 and what Valve has mentioned so far is nothing massive- changing weather (the technical capability for such already having been implemented in TF2 btw) and altering level lay-out? The latter is more a chore of level design than technical/AI programming and therefore imo is map-based more so than core/engine-based.
Five campaigns, if Valve is charging the same price for L4D 2 as for L4D 1 well there had better be more for that money because the core of the game was already established in L4D 1 whereas L4D 2 is merely building off of that (if you need a reference for that, just consider the disparity in dev times- L4D 2 is effectively a mod of L4D and not much more). Now, incorporating all game mode support in those is a good start but there is always the argument that few expected Valve to take five months to get DA and DT Vs up and why did it take that long? Because the majority of the team was already working on L4D 2. Anyway, that L4D 2 visually looks worse than L4D 1 does not help its case (unless ALL of those screenshots are X360).
Now, comparing the crap in L4D 2 vs. what has been supplied in TF2, 19 maps have been added to TF2 via updates so far and there are still at least three more major updates in the pipeline. Three game modes have been added to TF2 (including my favorite, Payload). Thus far, 18 weapons have been added to TF2 on top of various little changes which both L4D and TF2 have received (L4D still needs to implement the Smoker Cloud Damage Mod though as that fixes the issue that the three announced special infected for L4D 2 are all trying to fix). A majority of TF2's new weapons have been rather unique as opposed to L4D 2's which seem to be... reskins... Melee weapons the jury is still out on but I am not enthused by what I've seen so far- seems more like they saw Killing Floor use them and decided that they should be in L4D 2 as well without giving any real thought to the impact of such.
And moving finales again, imo, are map-based. Just like the moving sawblades in Sawmill for TF2 are a map-specific feature.
But regardless of what TF2 has done, I surely would have settled for expansion pricing. As already indicated, Crash Course has made at least a small inroad and the SDK is making some more so I may eventually pick-up L4D 2 when it drops to $30 or below and will then judge it purely on its own merits (which, again, thus far I'm not overly enthused with but that *could* change).
-
-
I concede your point about expectation of support, but your position is a moving target. How does one quantifiably measure 'TF2-like' support for another game, which has a different game play focus? Is there a time frame quotient? Total number of updates (which then requires calibrating each update's impact), perhaps? Both?
I think its a slippery slope to gauge expectations in situations like these. Let's suppose there was no L4D2 and it took Valve a year and a half to release a "significant" piece DLC? Are you angry? At what point do you feel entitled to "support" and what detail of "support" are you expecting?
The truth is, Valve has supported the game all along via patches, tweaks and the developer toolkit (albeit somewhat later than most would have liked alleged). At no point has Valve said support would be discontinuing. The discord seems to stem from *assumption* of discontinued support.
The only issue I ever found remotely compelling with respect to the boycotting related to "fracturing the L4D community" and even then I felt it was a stretch for relevance. People who own and enjoy L4D would maintain ownership and continue to play. Those owning L4D2 would do the same. Nothing prevents going back and forth between titles--though some sort of link between the two would be appreciated.-
If Valve continues to meaningfully update L4D after L4D 2 is released then I doubt you'll see many more quibbles on the matter. However, such efforts will either detract from them updating L4D 2 or will cause them to have three relatively heavy post-launch teams at which point it almost seems it would have been financially beneficial to Valve to simply make L4D 2 and L4D expansion and to thus consolidate further support. Therefore, support beyond L4D 2 seems unlikely.
As for TF2-level support, Crash Course is moving L4D towards that but if Crash Course is it, L4D will have gotten perhaps a year of life for me from Valve directly (SDK would be indirect but that as well may be hurt by L4D 2- the issue with that is going to be if a lot of mappers move to L4D 2 and L4D 2 features cannot be used in L4D 1, it won't particularly matter if you can take an L4D 1 map and run it in L4D 2 because the greater issue will be running L4D 2 maps in L4D 1 which is doubtful that will happen). When I bought L4D, I was expecting it to last at least a couple of years as all Valve games I have previously bought have done but L4D 2 makes that quite doubtful.
Anyway, as I said a bit back, I don't think that boycott was particularly the correct term for the backlash that Valve has received. Imo, it is more a notion simply that many people have developed a consensus that Valve has not yet fulfilled its perceived/implied obligations to L4D 1 and therefore there will be no expectation that Valve will do such for L4D 2. The consensus also indicates that the proffered content is not worthy of its launch price tag and because Valve has thus far failed to make a case for that the game will eventually support that price tag like Team Fortress 2 has, no purchasing decisions will be made along that line of thought. However, most of us greatly enjoy L4D and would like to continue that with L4D 2 and if Valve could accommodate that, well quite a few of us would probably already have it preordered. Personally, I will wait for reviews no matter what because I don't like some of what I'm seeing from it at the moment and am not convinced it will hold-up to L4D's legacy, but if they proved me wrong and it released for $30 and was a great game I'd grab it then. As things stand now, I'll wait for a significant sale if I buy it at all.-
TerranUp16 wrote:
"[...] I'll wait for a significant sale if I buy it at all."
As is your right as a consumer. I applaud your fiscal conservatism.
I disagree with your entire firs paragraph, however. Your position is based on wild speculation. Unless you have access to Valve's personel records and accounting ledgers, your position is untennable in the extreme. I also call your attention to the excert "meaningfully update"; this is the heart of the debate. "Meaningful" is a wholy subjective term, which by definition precludes Valve from ever winning this battle. I say the updates have been meaningful. You might disagree. Hence, such quibbling only amounts to noise.
As for the SDK, Valve has made quite a bit of effort to assure mod-makers that cross-compatibility between games should require minimal coding so as to make this a non-issue. As always, we shall see when the time comes how onerous a task it is.
TerranUp16 wrote:
"When I bought L4D, I was expecting it to last at least a couple of years as all Valve games I have previously bought have done but L4D 2 makes that quite doubtful. "
Life-time expected value from a software title is another fallacy. This will differ with each person, and expecting Valve to live up to your vision in this regard is approaching a level of narcissism. However, I still don't see how L4D2 is going to obviate your ability to play the original. It isn't a replacement.
TerranUp16 wrote:
"[...] a consensus that Valve has not yet fulfilled its perceived/implied obligations to L4D 1 [...]"
Those people will never be satisfied. Furthermore, I don't see Valve as having any obligation to L4D beyond what they're currently doing. In the event Valve should announce a cesation of development on L4D tomorrow, any outrage would be the result of users having gotten used to benefiting from Valve's good graces. To hold Valve accountable for equal amounts of "care" as with TF2 is not only unrealistic, but unfair. One may or may not feel their purchase has been justified based on the entirety of what L4D is today. One may also enjoy an extended experience due to the afforementioned non-industry standard "care" afforded by the developer. But to categorize Valve as having failed to fullfil some perceived obligation, even in light of past performance is beyond fairness.
As I mentioned at the outset ... voicing your opinion with your wallet is the heart of a free market society. Clamoring for ones desires to be met by relying misguided expectation is akin to naivete.-
Actually, voicing your opinion purely with your wallet isn't nearly enough. When we do that, publishers and developers simply blame piracy for why their game sold like crap. Voicing your complaints directly ensures that the publisher/developer knows precisely why you are unsatisfied with them and, if you do it *properly*, allows them a path so that they can gain your purchase. Whether they take such or not is entirely up to them.
As far as personnel records and crap, let me put forth this- how is it that within a year they can crank out five campaigns and have each support four modes (ofc, that the fourth is probably time trials I suppose makes little difference) and etc, but it took them five months to add Vs. to existing co-op campaigns when modders did it in about a day (and other than having to turn shaders down to Medium instead of High, they worked about as well; that the shaders were what Valve spent five months working on is unlikely and Valve itself chose to blame level design polish and not shaders)? That is the crux of the "now" bit. It's not that I want my free DLC yesterday, but if Valve is going to do it then do it- particularly something like DA/DT Vs. Even for Valve Time, getting DA/DT Vs. out the door was quite fail in that regard and there really is only one viable explanation.
As far as "meaningful", I'm simply using the term to distinguish major updates that go towards their promises of TF2-style post-release support. Crash Course pretty much satisfies that (though X360 owners got the shaft on it). I think the real point behind "meaningful" is that Valve is actually putting forth something new as opposed to rehashing what they already have with the Survival Pack and tossing in a single new Survival map. That, then, is rather tangible- we're talking a campaign or as in the case of Crash Course, half a campaign of all-new content that supports Vs.
As far as L4D 2 not being a replacement, well no it rather obviously is not as it is making some changes and as I've stated before, I'm not convinced all of those are for the better. However, that L4D 2 will not cannibalize quite a bit of L4D's community... Valve would need to avoid that somehow and how they do so or if they do so remains to be seen, but again, I am expressing a concern and giving Valve a path to address that concern.
As for the assessment of Valve's support, it is and was one of Valve's selling points. If they had maintained L4D 1 like they did TF2 for ~2-3 years then came out with L4D 2, I am quite sure that alone would be a rather instant selling point for L4D 2 if it was even remotely as good as L4D and even if it perhaps packed less content than L4D at launch.-
I have enjoyed this discussion greatly. Always nice to see another perspective.
Just a few more observations--I get the impression that you feel like your $49.99 purchase included on-going free updates in-line with your expectations derived from your experience with Team Fortress 2. I don't believe this is Valve's failing in so much as it is an issue of perception. At no point whatsoever did valve "promise" anyone anything with L4D. The made assertions about their "intension" to support L4D in a similar fashion to TF2 which is a completely different thing. If the result of this was your hightened expectations, you have no one to blame but yourself. As near as I can tell, they have been following through on their intensions--just not to the extent you were hoping.
Also--you keep saying things like "If they had maintained [...]" which would seem to presuppose that support has ended or will end shortly. Again, you are speculating and it makes your position very hard to defend.
BTW, X360 owners should make their own petition against Microsoft I guess. Being forced to buy "free" downloadable content would be laughable if it wasn't so absurd.-
Have some friends w/the X360 version and they are pretty much just fed-up with all the BS they have endured at this point and are looking into getting PC's for Xmas- the L4D DLC seems to have been the last straw (as if not getting anything out of TF2 and with it worse yet, the levels it does have are all broken because they haven't been patched in forever). I do feel for them but am interested in seeing how Valve spins this. With TF2, they always blamed MS. But there have been plenty of free DLC packs for console games such as FEAR 2 between now and then on X360 so unless MS is discriminating in some fashion, it would seem quite odd.
Also, it is quite nice as well to speak with someone else rational. There is a sizable segment of those minded more as I am in the L4D 2 Boycott Steam group and definitely our segment was rather galled by the news post there last night ("Delayed Lackluster Content"). Crash Course is, at a bare minimum (though I'd say it's more than that) a very huge and positive step for Valve towards "properly supporting" L4D and the bashing in that post I simply find highly unnecessary- the post should instead have been one of congratulation with perhaps a single, very small paragraph indicating there are still other concerns. But as it stands now that post offers no viable path for Valve to follow and interestingly flies in the face of the group's supposed stance on L4D 2 about waiting until it's released to judge it. So I would say that there is not complete agreement in that camp and you have your splinters per se.
Now, as for why I expected updates with the $49.99, Valve at least indicated that they would support the game post-release TF2-style which was far more than they had given for TF2. Gabe Newell has also been talking about games as a service rather than a good lately. Basically, there were just a lot of things adding-up to indicate that L4D would get good post-release support (including, ironically, the fact that DA/DT Vs. were not originally included). As mentioned before, TF2-style post-release updates are a business model for Valve as much as they are quite nice for the fans. As a start-up indie developer currently, imo Valve with TF2 certainly shone a very bright light on where games can eventually ascend to. So certainly, part of my issue is that I supported Valve w/L4D to support that so there is disappointment there and ofc I could blame myself but I also want to indicate to Valve that I am disappointed with them in that regard.
And yes, all of this assumes a cessation of support, but again the goal is to ensure that support does not cease. However, in order to ensure such a result, it does seem that Valve needs to be reminded that there is still a desire for such support and that they will benefit from that. If support does not cease then of course I will be rather happy but I make the assumption that it will in an effort to ensure it won't.
Also, my other concern with L4D 2 is that sequelitis has brought behemoths down. Most notable of those is EA. The Guitar Hero franchise is beginning to suffer from such as well and all-around, with rather few exceptions, while slapping out quick sequels seems to increase short-term revenue, it seems to not work very well at all in the long run and Valve does make excellent games and it would be a great shame to see them have some of the same problems tossed on them that others are. And with TF2, they really gave a viable alternative to this route by showing how a game's sales lifespan can be significantly extended without eroding or "mehing out" the playerbase. So, again, some of the issue is just general disappoint with Valve in that manner and undoubtedly some of that filters into views about how L4D should be supported. But ultimately, with TF2 I think Valve really did something that could have had a hugely positive impact on the entire industry and with L4D they had the chance to continue and expand that and I'll be damned if I don't honestly say that there is a degree of attachment to a company doing something positive and it does better-endow their products to one while a shift away from that which endowed you will of course have the opposite effect- in a sense, it is a monster that they created.
So I think some of what you're also seeing in terms of the demand for DLC is for not just a hollow offering from Valve but rather a reaffirmation of their commitment to games as a service and to relying more on lifetime sales than lessening yearly sale spikes via quick sequels. That may be something that Valve won't or doesn't want to do, but then of course that is going to create disappointment among those hoping for that and such will distance those people from Valve and I do feel those people should let Valve know that- perhaps you could make an argument that current measures are a tad "extreme" but (shrug). Such reactions only come from giving a great damn and thus hopefully Valve recognizes that it had excellently succeeded in building an incredibly strong PR relationship with much of its fanbase that it now risks losing.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Valve has stated that they had more content coming for L4D from day one. Before, during and after the L4D2 announcement. These "boycott" people have essentially dreamed up their own self-worth in thinking that they changed Valve's attitude when in fact they didn't do anything but make themselves look like a bunch of spoiled kids. How do they look like spoiled kids? The majority of these people are the exact same ones that bitched about the "Survivor Pack" stating that it was completely worthless and something mod authors could have done in a day or two. These are the same guys that want everything right now, and for free because they "think" they deserve it in some way.
It's been said time and time again, everyone that purchased the game got exactly what they paid for. The whole argument of "I bought it on the promise/expectation of tons of content like in TF2, etc." is a bunch of crap. Anyone in their right mind would never purchase anything solely based on the possibility that they might get something more later. Then again, that would imply that these people would have common sense, which apparently doesn't apply here.
My point is, the majority of the people complaining about lack of content for L4D have no clue how difficult it is to actually make this content. At least to the high quality standards we expect from Valve (or any other reputable developer for that matter.) Anyone who thinks otherwise should actually try to compare what the community has made so far to Valves official levels. Sure there are some fantastic level architectures out so far that look very nice, but not one map out there has the quality or game play that the official levels have. No offense to the mod/map authors out there that have released maps so far as I know they have put in a lot of time and effort. That is my point. It takes A LOT of time, testing and tweaking to make great content.
Patience is very good thing sometimes, sadly when it comes a lot of people these days that concept is lost.-
Eh, I do think there are a couple of campaigns in the works currently that will seriously challenge some Valve maps and I think some others could just use some refinement.
But anyway, to clarify the "get stuff for free" and etc... The point really is that the content isn't free. On one hand, you can look at it as "Games as a Service" which is a model that Gabe Newell has talked about quite a bit (interestingly until now) where effectively the game is continuously expanded as TF2 has been (TF2 basically being the poster child for that entire model). The other aim of the new content is to draw in new buyers. This has, as Gabe Newell himself has pointed out plenty of times, worked excellently for TF2. Valve puts together a sizable update, shoves forth a media blitz, people who had left TF2 to the wayside for a bit pick it up again and start berating their friends yet again to buy the game, the pack comes out, Valve offers a free weekend, a bunch of people try it out, either for the first time or perhaps yet again, find something they like and buy it. In particular, the Spy/Sniper free weekend I played with a ton of free trial guys online and just about all of them bought the game. Thus, the addition of such free content is a very cheap way for Valve to extend the sales life of its product and that works for both Valve and its player base nicely.
So there is certainly disappointment that Valve should take such a massive backward step here.
As far as the Survivor Pack, while I came to Valve's defense a bit initially on that but since having spent a ton of time with Killing Floor... And frankly, having experience with such, the amount of time it took Valve to crank the Survivor Pack out is definitely related to it working on L4D 2. Not to mention that I'm sure L4D 2's development has a hand in the absence of HL2: Ep3 as well.
Anyway, patience is apparently a virtue Valve lacks as well given L4D 2 coming out less than a year after L4D ;)
-
-
IAWTP. I bought L4D with the understanding it would get the TF2 treatment. I bought it with the understanding of how Valve releases games--REALLY FUCKING SLOWLY WITH YEARS OF DELAYS.
Does no one remember the two years of delays before L4D1 came out? The last-second multiple delays of HL:2? The constant delays of Episodes 1 and 2? The EIGHT YEAR GAP between TFC and TF2?
I buy from Valve because I like their games and I like their company. I didn't expect them to pull a Madden NFL on me for a $60 game that came with the company's promise to continue expanding the game (not their promise to create a new game).
It's a shift in how Valve has conducted themselves and it was disappointing to a lot of people. So a lot of people voiced their disappointment. And anyone who thinks the boycott didn't achieve anything is living in a dream world: it is a fucking PROTEST, and when your core players protest en masse, and company spokespeople are questioned repeatedly about the protest and about that disappointment, you think there's no trickle-up effect? Put another way, if everyone in the boycott group had instead pre-ordered for $60 the day of the announcement, do you think Valve would give a shit about L4D1 anymore, or the possibility of L4D1 & 2 interoperability?-
To answer your last question. YES!!!! They HAVE been supporting L4D, they HAVE always said they were continuing support for L4D, they HAVE released new content for L4D, they ARE releasing more content for L4D.
And don't fool yourself into thinking that those people on the "boycott" list are the "core" gamers. While some may feel that the amount of "signatures" on that list is impressive, it's a pretty significant number compared to the actual amount of people who purchased and play the game. Anyone who actually believes this boycott made any difference at all is highly delusional. They can dream all they want, but the reality speak for itself.-
Because, of course, everyone who feels a certain way joins an internet group to express it, amirite? We can't even get everyone to vote in presidential elections so... yeah...
And as far as being the core gamers, yeah, a lot of them actually are. Those whom I know who are of a mind like mine are primarily those who enjoy L4D greatly and who cajoled others into buying it and who consume it ravenously and supported Valve nigh fervently. Valve has damaged their trust. For the "non-core", well they don't really care about giving Valve feedback about that- they just simply aren't going to say anything, aren't going to get involved, and CERTAINLY aren't going to buy L4D 2. The "core" that Valve has lost is effectively its recruitment stable, its players that are attached emotionally to a degree to the company and the game and who care enough about one of the two to go out spread word of mouth and such. TF2 has easily sold 3x as many copies on PC purely because of this from my personal observations among friends at home, on forums, and from my university's (sizable) PC LAN club.
-
-
QFT and Thank You.
As I've noted in other posts, Valve's proposition of "Games as a Service" as opposed to a good, is something imo that Valve proved can be good for gamers and developers both and there is quite a bit of disappointment that Valve appears, or appeared, to be shunning that with L4D 2.
It also brings into question what kind of quality L4D 2 will be of given that, I don't think I've ever seen this kind of a turn-around from Valve on getting a new game out so insanely quickly. One would think that quality would almost have to suffer from such, otherwise why else would L4D have taken so long in comparison, or TF2 or HL2 or etc... That is something I have not yet seen answered yet.
-
-
[deleted]
-
But then there is the argument that Valve was a reputable developer and they had and are doing great things with Team Fortress 2 and that one would want to support such a developer to continue doing such great things. When a developer then halts practices that you supported so fervently, of course you are going to indicate your upset with them and you're going to indicate that a key selling point they once had they have now lost.
-
-
-
-
Valve lied, the Internet cried.
-
It's only two maps. A far cry from what we were told we can expect. Also, still no 4v4 matchmaking.
-
-
Who is clinging? I enjoy the game, but two maps, some voices, and some MUCH needed Versus updates isn't really anything near what they had told us.
I'd just like to see 4v4 matchmaking, personally. It's really hard to start a game and not have 30 people join and then leave after they see a team already formed.
-
-
