Rock, Paper, Shotgun

04/06/2009 at 09:08 An Innocuous Coin says:

Wait and see?

Wait and see. I’m just glad we’ll get awesome stuff regardless of what happens – how many developers can you say that about?

04/06/2009 at 09:15 Howard says:

I understand that he was “shooting from the hip” as it were with that response while glad-handing at E3 but that answer is utterly bereft of…well…answers.

While I am not a player of L4D (did not like it one bit) I can see the concerns people have. I agree that this amount of new content should not be DLC (Valve have made a rod for their own back here by giving their DLCs away) but there is simply no earthly reason this could not have been a MUCH cheaper expansion.

The engine used has not progressed one bit so there are no technical limitations with this, this is just Valve gouging with one of their most popular titles, plain and simple.

04/06/2009 at 09:16 Professor says:

RPS you guys rock my sox, thanks for this!

Also, this makes me take another look at the sequel, and you know what, if there’s ENOUGH new content, then it is like you’re paying for l4d 1 all over again, rather than DLC. I guess that in a sense if you’re buying a complete game, then it’s worth a full game’s price or at least somewhere near that. I hope valve don’t let me down on this one.

04/06/2009 at 09:18 dishwasherlove says:

I’m glad Valve responded. I think it’s quite a reasonable response too considering to size of the reaction to the original L4D2 announcement.

04/06/2009 at 09:20 Ashurbanipal says:

Yeah, the sheer level of disproportionate nerdrage over this is just staggering.

But man, there’s quite a bit of tooting of one’s own horn in that interview, which, I suppose from any other company would be unacceptable. Valve so often delivers, and it’s worth trusting them on this.

After this storm in a teacup, I fully expect this game is going to be released to widespread acclaim and adulation. And I say this as someone largely indifferent to Valve’s charms, and Left-4-Dead (I’m not a multiplayer man).

The people who are complaining will naturally pick it up, because it’s stupidity to boycott the shinier, more advanced, more bountiful and richer game, which many of your less querulous friends are probably already enjoying, and all because you believe Valve aren’t going to fulfill your expectations of doing something to support the older, shittier game.

04/06/2009 at 09:21 Zaij says:

The problem is that L4D1 isn’t a $50 game, it’s $30 tops… and that’s stretching it. It feels more like a well made mod than a proper game, and the replay value is pretty light. It can’t hold your attention for more than a few days in 6 months. Sure, some people will disagree, but you always get people that obsess over a game.

If all the l4d2 stuff was incorporated into l4d, then it would finally feel like a $50 game and no one would bitch when they released a sequel. The reason people are bitching is because it feels a bit like ‘alright, we’ve released one game and it’s a pretty big success’, let’s get another one out quickly and change full price for it. The things they’ve said they’ve added to L4D2 simply don’t feel like they warrant a full game. 20 weapons? Big whoop! 3 new specials? Meh. New characters? These are all really, on the face of it, cosmetic changes with a few tidbits thrown in to keep people interested.

The only things that warrant a new game are the 5 new campaigns. and even that isn’t that special considering people can make their own damn campaigns.

04/06/2009 at 09:27 Yentz says:

What I don’t understand, is how do they consider this to be a practical application for L4D1?

If you release a game that is better than L4D, than what is the purpose of purchasing it? There is no incentive to update the game, as nobody would purchase the game when they could just out and purchase the brand new sequel.

It seems like Valve forgot the reason why the TF2 model works so well, which has nearly quadrupled in size since it was launched(It started with 6 maps, it’s now on 24). Doug mentions that 20 new weapons is *not* DLC, but that’s exactly what the TF2 team has done.

So why change it for L4D?

04/06/2009 at 09:28 dishwasherlove says:

@Zaij I don’t want to open the can of worms again (hell its been open for the last 2 days) but L4D launched on Steam for US$50, which in my sad currency translated to the time to about AU$75. Most in store new PC an console releases in Australia are AU$90. My total playtime of L4D is 34 hours.

Most new release console/PC games provide about 8-12 hours of content if they are single player only. Most games with multiplayer are lucky to see bug fixes let alone content patches.

The only reason anyone should be raw about L4D is the fact it shipped without half the Versus levels, and the length of time it took to finally release them.

04/06/2009 at 09:31 unwise says:

I’m delighted that L4D2 is coming out so soon, and it sounds awesome. There is no way I won’t be shelling over for it on release day.

However, that doesn’t stop me from feeling a little disgruntled about paying €45 (£40) for the original L4D on Steam, with the understanding that I could expect significant updates, notably, new campaigns.

If Valve have one or two secret L4D campaigns ready to go within the next couple of months to take us up to the release of L4D2, then I will be pacified. Otherwise, I will simply have to look upon L4D as the moment where Valve ninja-charged me for the insanely good value of The Orange Box.

04/06/2009 at 09:34 distended says:

The question is “What about L4D1?” but all the answers were about L4D2. I guess that’s understandable at an event where they are promoting the sequel.

I do trust them a bit, and that’s why I’ll wait and see like he advises, but I don’t think the answers here particularly addressed a lot of people’s concerns.

I do hope the next few articles we see on the internet are about the original Left 4 Dead, not the sequel.

04/06/2009 at 09:37 Ryan F says:

“Just trust us”

Isn’t that what we’ve been doing the last 7 months while you sold millions of copies of a game only half done?

Early adopters, competitive gamers, and modders are all rightfully upset at having the rug taken from under our feet.

Please do better than “keep waiting” Doug or you’ll find that the core of the community has moved on to titles that don’t jerk them around for half a year then try to charge them again for content that you blocked us from making for ourselves.

04/06/2009 at 09:40 Joseph says:

@VALVe

Expansion would have been preferable over a sequel. I guess I’ll wait and see how you plan to fix the issue of splitting the community, but as yet I can’t imagine it’s going to be very easy as long as they remain 2 seperate games.

04/06/2009 at 09:47 Crispy says:

“I mean, twenty new weapons isn’t DLC!”

TF2 PC DLC has already added 18 new weapons, for free:
3 x Spy, 3 x Sniper, 3 x Heavy, 3 x Pyro, 3 x Medic, 3 x Scout
+ 1 new taunt for each of those classes (6)

And the weapons in TF2 are FAR better thought-out than the simple CS-clone guns in L4D.

“So we’ll do the same thing with Left 4 Dead where we’ll have the initial release and then we’ll release more movies, more characters, more weapons, unlockables, achievements, because that’s the way you continue to grow a community over time.”

I don’t see where the new weapons for bogstandard L4D are going to come from if they’re adding 20 for L4D2.

I think they need to be honest and say their initial predictions were wrong and they need to make some quick money during the recession. Just be honest and fess up instead of perpetuating the mistrust here.

04/06/2009 at 09:48 Yentz says:

@tiktaalik

Keep in mind, those 18 weapons for TF2 were also entirely *new* weapons with a whole bunch of balancing. The majority of the new weapons in L4D2 are simply reskins of the old weapons. Other than the small few that actually change gameplay, they do not require major testing or development.

Furthermore, there are still 9 more weapons to come as well, bringing the total new weapons to 27 for TF2. All at no price. For a game that cost $20.

I don’t understand how he could be confused at our expectations when Gabe specifically stated that L4D would follow the same model as TF2.

04/06/2009 at 09:50 Zaij says:

@Alec Meer, yeah, because Valve really reassured us with this interview rather than giving us something concrete.

04/06/2009 at 09:55 Yentz says:

@Alec

The problem, which I mentioned earlier, is that updating L4D1 is now actually counter-intuitive to the ‘TF2 model” that Valve has been following.

The TF2 model, which Valve has described in numerous interviews, is essentially using updates as a form of advertisement and boosting their playerbase. I believe the statistics that Valve quoted was a 20% sales increase for every single TF2 update released. In fact, when the L4D update/free weekend came out, sales jumped 3,000%.

But the whole model is based on the theory that people will buy the game because it is being updated. But with L4D2 out, there is no incentive to purchase the game. Why would you purchase an obsolete game when you can get the exact same thing, only better in a different game?

Because of this, Valve does not actually have an incentive to update L4D.

04/06/2009 at 10:00 Professor says:

@Zaij
I think it’s commendable that they even gave the interview, at least they’re not ignoring the public’s anger. I think that if one development studio deserves our trust, it’s valve, they’ve never really let us down in the long run. Any disappointment they’ve caused, they eventually fixed. Whenever they see something people are angry about, they fix it, even if it’s in valve time. I’m confident that valve don’t want to cheat their public suddenly. They’re convinced that l4d2 is a good thing and worth the 50$. Whether their judgement is justified or not, only time will tell.

On a contradictory note, here’s some rage fuel http://www.amazon.com/Left4Dead-2-Pc/dp/B002BRYXRQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1244106073&sr=8-1

04/06/2009 at 10:03 Rei Onryou says:

Thanks again to John to go beyond the call of duty and get more details on this. The AIM reaction was OTT to say the least. If what they’re making isn’t worth full price, they wouldn’t sell it at full price. Simple as.

I swear AIMs will complain about anything just for the sake of being able to complain.

04/06/2009 at 10:10 Dan Lawrence says:

I love the way folks are assuming that Valve have no idea how to run their own business and that they are just saying:

‘Yeah, that TF2 model made us an absolute ton of money but y’know what? I hate money, lets just make a quick sequel this time around’

Also, the talk of all the TF2 weapons being dramatically different is a whole load of hokum, some are some different some are minor tweaks it sounds like they are doing the same with Left 4 Dead 2 except they have managed to do it a whole lot faster. Imagine of all the TF2 updates to date were ready to go on the same day? Wouldn’t you think Valve was a little insane for releasing twenty odd maps, 20 weapons thirty pages of balancing tweaks and the like on a single day for no money?

Yes you would.

Finally, as Alec has said we don’t know what there exact plans for Left 4 Dead 1 are. I wouldn’t put it port the core game updates over to Left 4 Dead 1 after 2 comes out allowing owners of 1 to play with owners of 2 on the original maps.

04/06/2009 at 10:13 Rinox says:

When has Valve ever disappointed us before when it comes to customer satisfaction and support? Uhmm…never? Yeah, must be about right.

Obviously this does not mean that they won’t do so now, but I think it would only be fair to them to reserve judgement for a while. Cfr. the (ungrounded) paying DLC for L4D controversy 3 months ago.

04/06/2009 at 10:13 Ludo says:

Just want to say that RPS’ coverage of the L4D2 reveal has been excellent, especially giving Doug Lombardi a chance to speak to the criticisms of the last few days.

Maybe now everyone can be a bit more calm :)

04/06/2009 at 10:16 Shake Appeal says:

This is the post I tried to make on GAF yesterday, just after I was banned for complaining about the people complaining about Left 4 Dead 2:

An acceptable amount of free DLC for L4D, if they followed the TF2 model, would have been maybe a new campaign (with new dialogue for the existing survivors), a new infected, a new gun or two… as well as continuing patches/updates to gameplay mechanics… over the next year to eighteen months or more. And yes, it would have been free, but it would have been a long time coming, and the game would have largely stagnated, even with the injection of the SDK and user maps (which are still coming, incidentally, and are compatible with L4D2). Valve simply wouldn’t have been giving it their full and proper attention, whatever you think, and the majority of the team responsible for L4D would have been repurposed to other large-scale retail projects.

Instead we are getting a fully-fledged and fleshed sequel, with a whole team’s focus and time. We’re getting a hefty patch/update to the mechanics all at once (AI Director 2.0, with dynamic weather and level paths), entirely new crescendo and finale mechanics (the ‘gauntlet’) which clearly couldn’t be patched into the existing campaigns, several new infected (as yet unannounced), several new guns (as well as all-new melee weapons), new Survival maps, a new game mode (as yet unannounced), five full campaigns with a more tightly-woven story than the original four (and with dialogue and relationships between characters that evolve over the course of it, all of which has to be written, voice-acted, and recorded), extensive new graphical assets, new destruction models and ragdolls, and perhaps more yet to be announced (matchmaking 2.0?).

Yes, it sucks that L4D represented largely the framework for a great game, but let’s not forget it took them years to work out how to get this game to play, and to devise the proper ‘blueprint’ for it. Now they have that in place, they can build on that (and subvert it, with things like daytime zombies and the wandering witch) and churn out content at a ferocious rate. I’m more than willing to pay for that if it means Valve employees get paid for their labours. Would this title have been more typically ‘Valve’ if they had never released L4D 1, waited until it was as fully-featured and evolved as L4D2, and then released it? Absolutely. But I would have missed out on six months and hundreds of hours of some of the most fun gameplay of my life, and Valve would have missed out on the mountain of data and real-life, in-the-wild experience being brought to bear on the sequel.

Still clinging to the ‘L4D as TF2′ model? Another point to consider is that TF2 is entirely a multiplayer-only game. It doesn’t have a ‘story’, only characters (and character profiles, through the ‘Meet the …’ videos). Left 4 Dead is a co-operative story experience. The levels are more intricate, more scripted. It has a strictly singleplayer component, can be played with bots, can be played split-screen locally. It’s a bigger, more fully-featured, more expansive title, with many, many times the content to be added (and if you listen to the RPS podcast, you’ll hear the focus this time is on much more integrated and successive campaigns, with a more clearly linked story). TF2 tweaks and updates are largely to the game’s code. Yes, there are new levels, new weapons, new weapon effects… but they haven’t added a new class, a new character model. L4D is adding many, many new character models, many of which are deformable in new and interesting ways. TF2 levels are simpler (and smaller) to build than even one L4D map, and if the new campaigns follow the structure of the old, there will be more than 20 maps in L4D (plus the tweaked Survival maps). TF2 doesn’t require much new writing, or new voice acting; L4D2 does. Hours of it. It also requires the design and pacing and balancing of five linked campaigns. It’s a lot of work. It costs.

So I guess you could have your free L4D DLC… but it would amount to a fraction of what you’re getting in L4D2, and it would take longer to arrive. Maybe your principles and convictions about how Valve as a company (as a business, trying to make money) should behave are so firm, so rigid, that you would prefer this relatively skimpy (but free!) future content over paying a little of your hard-earned cash for so, so much more, and near-immediately. If that’s the case, don’t buy it, but I reserve the right to laugh at you.

Last point: I don’t know about you, but I work out the value of my games based on how much fun they get me for what I pay, not some fairy-tale value based on principles, perceived entitlement, and a nebulous notion of ‘content’. Knowing that I played the original game for hundreds of hours… for me, L4D2 and the content it contains (which eclipses the original) would be worth it at twice the price.

04/06/2009 at 10:21 jarvoll says:

@Zaij: I’m frankly amazed that Valve have responded *this* quickly, in the middle of their industry’s biggest annual trade show, no less. I’m anxious for reassurance too, sharing many of the opinions voiced over the last couple of days, but I’d suggest perhaps exercising a little patience. It does seem like they have collectively failed to anticipate this reaction, and it’s presumably not easy to change tack as quickly as you and I might wish.

04/06/2009 at 10:22 dog says:

i’ve got to admit i was a bit disappointed with the lack of new content for L4D, but realistically speaking i’ve had dozens and dozens of hours out of L4D which means i’ve certainly had my moneys worth out of it…

i actually do trust valve… going by their track record i think they’ll offer some incentive for current L4D owners, or bundle it with something else to give better value (portal 2 can’t be that far off can it?)….

but really, the impotent rage and bile spewed at valve here is pretty sad… remember how everyone went ape-shit when the DLC was announced and every AIM presumed it was going to cost? shit, it was as if Gabe had personally come round to their houses and sat on their mothers….

04/06/2009 at 10:27 Quercus says:

I have the original L4D and I like playing it some of the time. I must admit that L4D players do seem to have the crappy end of the stick if you compare them to the TF2 community.

As for the content of L4D2, most of it would be welcome in an expansion, not a full-blown sequel.
And to be brutally honest, I couldn’t give a rat’s arse about “four new characters”. I would have been happy to keep the originals and just have Valve record a bit more dialogue for them (which surely would have been more cost effective than doing the whole thing over again for new characters anyway) and just have the different settings and additional weapons.

Sorry, but nothing Doug Lombardi said really justified why they have chosen to take they route they have, especially bearing in mind their earlier promises.
He didn’t mention anything about what additional content original L4D owners could expect, which makes the more cynical side of me think that they don’t have anything planned and that the “trust me and wait” is a smoke screen to cover up the fact that they are going to start working on something now in an effort to placate the players.

Obviously I don’t have any basis for this suspicion other than the fact that if they had anything at all already planned you would have thought he would have at least dropped a hint or two.

04/06/2009 at 10:31 J. Prevost says:

Chalk me up as another one who doesn’t understand the “L4D at release was a $30 game, not a $50 game” complaint. The people I’ve played with over at Gamers With Jobs played a *lot*, and a number of them came out with the above sort of sentiment.

I’m a little burnt out on the game, it’s true, but I expect to be back… but there’s a reason I’m burnt out. Since they started keeping play-time stats (some time around January?) I’ve put in just over 200 hours of playing L4D. Almost all of that was before the survival pack. Those four co-op campaigns, and two versus campaigns? They were satisfying for well over 100 hours.

Would it have been as large if I didn’t like the game as much, or if I didn’t like multiplayer? Well, no. But that’s still a huge amount of play time for any game at all. Even if I had only played it for 1/10th the time I’ve actually played it, it would be worth more than $50 on the $10 2-hour-movie scale of things.

The people who’ve gotten really burnt out on the content that was there got burnt out because they played it to *death*. They’re the last ones who should be complaining that it wasn’t worth the price of admission when it was released.

04/06/2009 at 10:33 Zaij says:

I’m not faulting Valve for responding so quickly, I’m saying their lack of information is stupid. Saying ‘trust us’ isn’t going to do anything except maybe one or two people will change to the “Valve can do no wrong” camp.

[Nastiness removed. Insults don't fly here - RPS]

04/06/2009 at 10:34 Optimaximal says:

I’d imagine that, after all this, it’s pretty much inevitable there’ll be a pretty beefy L4D1 update soon-ish. It would be lovely if people would stop angrily presuming there won’t be.

Yes, it’s a tad frustrating that Valve aren’t able or willing to spill all their secrets about both games at this stage – marketing campaigns can be damnable things – but “wait and see” is not an unreasonable request. As Lombardi says, try and save the wrath until we’ve seen for sure whether they’ve lived up their word or not.

Sometimes I think Valve’s silent running policies work against them and actually speaking out, even a bit, more often might work in their favour.

Had they actually definitely confirmed *some* significant L4D1 content alongside L4D2′s announcement, then nobody would have cared – sequels happen after all, but just a simple but definitive ‘we are making # new campaigns’ or ‘there’s a new character for vanilla L4D coming’ would placate the AIM.

Hell, just *one* concept screen for Half-Life 2: Episode 3 would work in their favour – it certainly kept everyone interested in Duke4Ever!

04/06/2009 at 10:40 pimorte says:

“Trust us, we won’t screw you over like last time”?
I see in other places Valve people are again promising content update streams for THIS title, now.

04/06/2009 at 10:43 Mr Pink says:

Ren02: Comments like yours are going to look so stupid in a few months, mark my words. You have no idea how Valve are going to handle the servers for this. You really think they haven’t thought about the issues of splitting the community? They have more experience in building multiplayer communties than any other company. They will have a solution.

04/06/2009 at 10:43 tim7168 says:

A lot of people seem to be forgetting that game design is actually a business. They exist primarily to make money, making great games are a means to an end. If they have had a massive team working on hours and hours of content, why should they give their hard work away for free? Because of an angry community’s misplaced sense of entitlement? Its nonsense.

Valve have consistently, far more than any other game developer out there, reinvented the wheel by releasing superb games, providing great value and innovation (such as the Orange Box and Steam). Often their moves have been controversial, but they’ve pretty much always worked out and come through for the consumer in the end.

They haven’t finished anouncing stuff yet, so until they have please give them some credit! You would think that they’ve earned it.

04/06/2009 at 10:46 Howard says:

@Kieron
Clear sky, while it was a bit pap and very buggy DID offer a considerable engine upgrade boasting far better graphics, fixed many of the gripes about the original stalker, added whole new areas to the game, a complete new story, many new weapons and items… the list goes on. (note I am not really defending Clear Sky at large as it was a bit of a cock up, but it offered far more new content and improvements that this so called sequel to L4D does. More importantly L4D is an online, multiplayer game unlike stalker so the comparison does not really work. What Valve are doing here is the equivalent of them announcing TF3 instead of doing all those DLC packs they have done over the last 2 years. There is no reason what-so-ever that everything L4D2 offers could not have been incorporated into L4D1 as an expansion. None at all.)

04/06/2009 at 10:51 Carvell says:

I don’t understand why they are not marketing it as an expand-alone. It may be purely physiological but I’m sure most people would have been fine to hear Valve was releasing an expansion to L4D. Considering it offers new campaigns, new weapons and minor actual game play mechanic tweaks, it sure sounds like a decent expansion that id have no problem playing £20 for. But if you label it a sequel you expect something game changing, with a shiny new engine to boot. At the same time if an expansion is promised for L4D 1 people are a lot less likely to demand more updates for the original.

Here is to hoping a secret release date for episode 3 with suddenly appear to calm the internet.

04/06/2009 at 10:54 Professor says:

What’s with this whole “new engine = new game” stuff? Since when did this come as a factor? A new game is measured by the amount of content it contains, not the new gameplay. Hell, if you’ve bought all the valve source games, you’ve spent over 150$ on them (depending on the deals you bought them with and so on). Wouldn’t you say that it’s only worth 50$ if it’s the same engine and the same graphical power?

Give me a break. If a game’s got good content and is fun, you’ll play it, if valve releases a good game, you will play it, stop whining about the lack of a new engine. The fact that the source engine is slowly getting outdated has nothing to do with the fact that it isn’t a justification for buying a whole new game.

04/06/2009 at 10:57 Howard says:

@Octaeder
No. No it isn’t. It is offering just more of the same thing that is on offer in L4D.
Clear Sky offered something new and strikingly different (albeit slightly shonky)

04/06/2009 at 11:00 CMaster says:

@Katsumoto – nope, Left 4 Dead was £35 on release in the UK offically. Places like Play and Amazon were selling it for cheaper , but £35 was the offical (and Steam) price for it.

In my defence, I was never angry at Valve, never “how could they do this” and I’m still not. My insistence was on dissapointment in a company I’d come to expect more from and barring Valve doing something really nifty I’ll expect that feeling to hold for a while. I’ve always said it sounds like with L4D2 they are correcting a lot of the things that were wrong with L4D (cresendo events, lack of weapon variety).

Thanks a lot to RPS for distilling some of the major concerns and putting a little pressure on Doug when he initally avoided the point a little. I’m also pleased to hear that it is Valve’s intention to sit down and talk to players who are unhappy, rather than just dismissing it out of hand (but please don’t talk to those “Boycott L4D2″ idiots.

04/06/2009 at 11:02 Howard says:

@IdleHands
I don’t see the comparison, I really don’t.
As a multiplayer, online game, adding content (particularly if its a Valve game) is par for the course.

I simply cannot see the logic in making this a “WHOLE NEW GAME” than just expanding what is already there.
Clear Sky could not have been an add on for Stalker as too many things were changed. It would have been WAY harder to get those 2 games working as one than to release CS as a Expandalone.
With L4d nothing fundamental has changed. The game is exactly the same from L4D1 to L4D2. All they are doing is increasing the map roster, changing the playable characters (not a real change) and adding guns (nothing new, just new skins). Arguing they are “adding story” is a bit flaky given the type of gameplay on offer.

(Just to be clear, I really have NO issue with them charging for this new content, I simply am baffled by the need to make it a separate game)

04/06/2009 at 11:03 Professor says:

@FurieMan
That’s a fair concern, and I can’t disagree with it. This is where logic steps out and your faith in valve comes in. That’s all you can do.

04/06/2009 at 11:04 CMaster says:

It also feels a bit like Valve are rather overstating what they hav released for L4D. Sure, they have tweaked the gameplay a lot, however there has only been one (reasonably large) update containing any actual content or new modes for the whole time. – I’m unable to edit my original post it seems.

@Katsumoto I think it was £30 to preorder on Steam. I think I actually paid £23 on Play about 3 weeks after release, but that still doesn’t change what Valve wanted to ask for it and at the time that felt like far too much.

04/06/2009 at 11:08 Andy says:

I’m fine to “wait and see” about this. I pre-ordered L4D on steam (£35 if I remember, it was before the UK specific prices came in) even though it was cheaper on Amazon, mainly because of my faith in Valve.

However, and I understand others disagree here, the game just didn’t last that long for me. Once I’d played once through each campaign there didn’t seem like much point in continuing. The Versus didn’t do anything for me so I went back to TF2 and lived happily ever after.

I’ve watched the developer walkthrough vids on gametrailers.com and although there are a few “heh, that’s cool” moments it doesn’t appear to have moved on enough to warrent a whole sequel, certainly not enough to get enthusiastic about.

Unless something spectacular is revealed, I just won’t be pre-ordering L4D2 this time around. Maybe when they eventually do a 75% off weekend…

04/06/2009 at 11:14 rob says:

Oh, man, I can’t believe Valve are doing this to their loyal fanbase!
Doing what, releasing a game?
Oh, don’t give me that – you obviously don’t understand the complex forces at work here! They said they’d update the first game!
Like with the survival pack, you mean?
Well –
… or the SDK? You can make you own maps with that, right?
Yeah, but –
So what, that’s not enough longevity for you?
Oh, but, c’mon, I mean, the first game was only out November last year!
[beep beep beep]
Hey, what are you doing?
Phoning Dave. He’s an EA sports fan.
But, ugh, you’re just missing the point…
Which is?
They should release this sequel –
– which is going to be bigger and better, by all accounts –
Yeah, but, well… They should release it for free.
Okay, I guess you’re right.
Right, finally! Sheesh.

04/06/2009 at 11:23 Nimic says:

What I find most silly is this whole “It wasn’t worth the full price” argument, which people use to justify the rage over L4D2. It’s… rubbish! I’ve almost certainly spent more time on L4D than almost any other game I’ve bought since then (almost any other game).

04/06/2009 at 11:29 IdleHands says:

@Howard

I think a better analogy than the Stalker one is Sims 3. The engine is pretty much the same as Sims 2, it’s core gameplay is the same, but it’s still worthy as a sequel rather than an expansion.

But I guess we should agree to disagree on this point. I see your train of logic and understand where your coming from, it’s one of the reasons I’m a little disappointed in Valve. I agree with my mate who said it’d be nice if owners of L4D1 got a discount on L4D2.

04/06/2009 at 11:29 Psychopomp says:

Okay.

A movie ticket costs around $8-10, with very few going to the 3 hour mark, and if you want to see it again, you have pay for another ticket.

A PC game costs $50, with the average play time being around 10 hours, and if it has good multiplayer that could be extended indefinitely. In addition, there is absolutely no reason a game should be longer than it’s narrative demands.
Anyone who says Beyond Good and Evil, Ico, and Shadow of the Collosus “aren’t $50 games, $30 tops” are absolutely daft, and that nowhere near encompasses the amount of rage such statements fill me with.
A game should not be judged by the length of it’s content, but by the quality of it. You aren’t paying $50 for X amount of game, you’re paying $50 for X amount of quality.
If TF2 had been $50 at launch, would you honestly not purchase it? Would you have let one of, and maybe *the* best multiplayer shooter in years, pass through your fingers because it was “content light?”

Now, with that being said, if you tell me that you only played(not to the end, expert’s a bitch) each campaign once, you’re a bloody fucking liar.

Finally, L4D=4 campaigns+6 weapons+4 SI+4 memorable characters+WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITCH+Closet camping

Whereas, L4D2=5 new campaigns+20 new weapons+3 new SI+4 new characters+roaming WIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITCH+No closet camping+tweaks to the formula

Let me do some math real quick
More content than the original+new story+tweaks to the formula=free DLC just because Valve gave us the TF2 updates for free?
No, no, Valve shouldn’t be held up to a different standard than every other developer, based on one game.

Maybe charged DLC over time?
No, no, it would end up totaling in the $50 range anyway, give or take…

So, if it’s not that…
More content than the original+new story+tweaks to the formula=Expansion pa-no, that’s not right either. What kind of expansion has more in it than the first game?

Wait, wait.

I think…
Yep, found the missing part of the formula

Any other developer+More content than the original+new story+tweaks to the formula=Sequel

Well that’s strange, it’s almost as if Valve’s being demonized for doing something *ordinary.*

Edit:Also, the comments on L4D2′s southern setting are, frankly, insulting to my Texan ass.

04/06/2009 at 11:31 Paul_M says:

@Bobsy – especially if aspects of the level design are randomized as well, great move.

04/06/2009 at 11:35 Optimaximal says:

Thinking about it, they could pull a Company of Heroes, which results in some mega patch for L4D that brings parity between the versions but limiting the people who don’t own L4D2 from playing ‘as’ the new pcs/infected.

As Paul_M says, there could be some mega 16 player versus campaign mode but L4D2 owners have more freedom with regards to choice of player characters, weapons & Infected.

04/06/2009 at 11:37 Andy says:

Psychopomp:”Well that’s strange, it’s almost as if Valve’s being demonized for doing something *ordinary.*”

That’s kind of the point in some ways – my personal opinion of Valve was that they were extra-ordinary. To see them doing something that any other game developer would do is…disheartening. Hardly demonizing though, I’m sure they will produce something I’ll be raving about in the future.

I guess a lot of this depends on how much you enjoyed the original. For me, not so much.

So the bottom line is, if you didn’t think the first one was worth the money – it’s probably not worth getting this one surely? It’s the only real way of showing where you stand (unless Valve actually ask you I guess!)

04/06/2009 at 11:40 Psychopomp says:

@Xercies

Quote for me, exactly, where he said it’s an expansion pack.

04/06/2009 at 11:43 James Riv says:

I’d say that anyone who expected L4D to have as much free DLC as TF2 were deluding themselves.

Adding, say, a new campaign to L4D is a much more time consuming prospect – and a far more costly process, than it is to simply pump out a new map and a new gun for TF2. They require much more tinkering, testing and clever design.

If you open the example map in the L4D SDK you’ll see how much more complicated that game is to make. The number of triggers and events is staggering. And making sure the game remains balanced at all times must be really tricky – it’s a very clever game.

There’s no need to feel cheated here – there’s more DLC to come for the first game. Who knows, there still might be new weapons, maps etc to come shortly. Valve have pretty much promised as much – and at the moment there’s no reason to not trust them.

Just don’t expect the TF2 model to work exactly the same way with every game that Valve puts out – it just doesn’t work that way most of the time. TF2 gamers have just been extremely lucky.

04/06/2009 at 11:44 Redford says:

Dear Doug Lombardi,

Making a slightly different version of every weapon in L4D, putting them in L4D2, and then calling them new weapons is not actually making new weapons. The ONLY new weapons in L4D2 are the melee weapons, of which may be considered two new weapons, the chainsaw, and everything else. You already bragged that L4D had a huge number of weapons during the demo release. This wasn’t true, mostly for the fact that you considered the mounted minigun a weapon, among other things.

It’s like you’re doing the exact same marketing debacle you did in L4D for L4D2, which is ironic in a way.

The fact remains, the primary problem everyone had with L4D was there wasn’t enough content, so you are clearly learning from your mistakes by releasing more content – and then making us pay another $40 for it. Your marketing scheme is thinly veiled, at best.

04/06/2009 at 11:51 Lobotomist says:

Jesus. Now RPS are removing posts aswell ?

04/06/2009 at 11:53 teo says:

This is not about L4D not getting more content.

They’re making this game in TWELVE MONTHS. They have a playable E3 build after SIX months. Why? Becuase they’re taking L4D and just adding stuff ontop of it. The amount of content doesn’t determine if it’s a sequel or not. This seems like almost exactly the same game but with more content.

Releasing the same game but with new content is generally regarded uncool. But it shouldn’t be when it comes to Valve, eh? And if they have so much content now, HOW THE HELL could they ship L4D with so little content. I don’t see any way to turn this mess into Valve doing something good, I really don’t.

If this was a 20-30$ expansion pack it would be a different matter. Why are Valve rushing this thing out? They’re already announcing the release date ffs. Just happens to be the holiday season too, but nooo noo it’s not that they want something out in that period. What happened to working on things until they are done?

Just the fact that NOBODY believed the rumours of L4D2 says a lot.

04/06/2009 at 11:55 Psychopomp says:

@Reford

Because they’ve totally showed us all the new weapons and stuff for L4D2

Try harder.

@Lobotomist

They always have. We like not looking like the steam forums.

@Teo
Call of Duty, sports games, and many more do such things.

And have you not read the articles? Do you now know what a sequel is? Did you manage to miss all the parts where it’s *not* just a bunch of new stuff?

04/06/2009 at 12:03 AK says:

>save the wrath until we’ve seen for sure whether they’ve lived up to their word or not. They haven’t betrayed you >until they’ve actually betrayed you.

People keep citing the Orange Box as something that didn’t look like good value for money, and then did. Episode 1 and 2 might be closer to the mark: superbly high-quality games but naughtily short for the money we paid. I’d buy Ep 3 tomorrow if I knew it was equally pricey in £/hr of game time though. Quality counts.

Here are some *entirely* foolish speculations.

(1) We are in the middle of a serious recession. Valve might be a bit keener than usual to release something quickly.
(2) Valve have a history of investing in their tech and reusing it in different games. I wonder if we’ll see explosive dismemberment gameplay in Episode 3. Or refinements to the Director / multiplayer process giving us an L4D-style co-op experience set in the Half-Life universe. Or a single-player story-driven L4D campaign. Or a clever hybrid of single-player and Director-driven gameplay that improves replay value of single-player games. If that happens, L4D2 might turn out to be a test-bed, or a way to make money off their development efforts.

04/06/2009 at 12:09 SwiftRanger says:

This follow-up interview is what every other self-respecting games media outlet should have done. It’s nice to know it’s coming from RPS and yes, the answers from Doug given here make it sound a lot better than what was earlier stated (like the “Hey, don’t be worried, L4D is still going to get 4vs4 matchmaking guys!” comment). EG’s piece on this issue said some of the same things but it’s not as precise as this.

RPS wins the internet.

04/06/2009 at 12:14 GLOWi says:

Why no one aks Valve about Ep3? I would suppose such question appropriate, given the 2 years since the last ep.

04/06/2009 at 12:20 IdleHands says:

@ Howard

Yeah I see your point, although you could argue (badly) that the Survivor Pack was a better game addition than most Sims expansions. Plus how many of the Sims expansions are pure shovelware. Those post release updates were more about making money rather than creating a better gaming experience.

04/06/2009 at 12:28 Funky Badger says:

A lot of people seem stuck in a zero-sum mentality. Just because TF2 is percieved as “better” value does not mean L4D is “worse” value. Each has to be considered on its own merits.

I mean, it would be silly to compare the price of every game release to, say, The Orange Box, wouldn’t it?

04/06/2009 at 12:54 Wirbelwind says:

I’m not surprised they aren’t sharing anything more on their L4D plans – Gamers like me will bitch about it if they happen to change their minds (even if only for the better).

I was on the fence when I first heard the announcement (“WHAT????!!!!”), I’ll give them a chance to prove themselves. It’s Valve after all, no one does multiplayer better.

L4D could have been more. Hopefully they integrate both games into one menu client.

04/06/2009 at 13:03 El_MUERkO says:

I’m looking forward to L4D2 but it is a pity Valve aren’t taking more advantage of L4D ‘movie based levels’ concept to provide a steady stream of content. I would happily have paid £5/8 for a new movie every couple of months as DLC.

As an aside, I hope we don’t end up with two icons on our desktop or in steam, I want to load L4D and be able to jump from new content to old without faffing around, seamlessly switching from L4D1 content to L4D2 content will keep the community healthy, not doing so will divide the haves from the have-nots and ultimately lead to L4D1 dying an early death.

04/06/2009 at 13:06 VelvetFistIronGlove says:

I’m also in the mildly disappointed but not at all outraged camp. While I preordered L4D on Steam also, I don’t at all regret the price I paid for it: I played an awful lot of it the first three months, but pretty much nothing since.

However, I still play a lot of TF2: the main contributors to my continued interest are: playing with a community (e.g. on the RPS server and others), the strong SDK support and wealth of good custom maps, and the continual addons rolled out by Valve. Left 4 Dead has none of the first, little of the last, and I don’t expect a lot of good custom content just because you really need a mod team to make a good campaign, there’s just too much work in there for a single mapper to do in a reasonable timeframe.

So I’m going to wait and see, and try the demo, and then decide if L4D2 interests me enough to buy it.

If TF2 had been $50 at launch, would you honestly not purchase it? Would you have let one of, and maybe *the* best multiplayer shooter in years, pass through your fingers because it was “content light?”

Actually, I might well have not bought it at all if not for the orange box. I preordered the orange box in order to get HL2ep2 and Portal, then tried out TF2 during the public beta and was hooked. But TF2 alone would have been well worthwhile at $50, even for the time I spent playing it before the first update.

04/06/2009 at 13:16 Professor says:

Jaif has just about nailed down the biggest issue with this release. If only valve would’ve done some more for l4d1, l4d2 would have felt like a proper sequel, but they haven’t, and so it feels a bit more like what should have been rather than what will be.

04/06/2009 at 13:19 IdleHands says:

@ Howard
Even though my complaints of the Sims, I’m still looking forward to getting home to play the new one. I can’t help it they sold me at having a trait for insanity and evil. I am a consumer whore, but a happy one ;p

My big problem with this whole outrage is that there are far too much disproportionate rage (“Valve suxs”/”Valve have screwed us”), which is taking away from legitimate worries. It creates a pro-valve and anti-valve camp, rather than an objective view on the news.

I also find it strange after all the good Valve does for it’s customers, so many people still can’t put some faith in them and immediately cry out in rage over the little details they know.

04/06/2009 at 13:25 C4Cypher says:

I got pretty worked up over what I saw coming out of E3 … I don’t think that L4D2 isn’t going to be great … I just don’t want to see Valve starting to make a shift twoards being a more console oriented developer, and I don’t want to see L4D get left behind.

Unlike any other company, when Valve says ‘trust us’ I’m willing to cut them a LOT more slack than I would anyone else.

Okay Doug … cool … ball’s in your court. Your product. I’m not entitled to anything. I know I felt yanked around with this announcement but I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt.

04/06/2009 at 13:26 distended says:

Muzman, people don’t want details to help make a purchasing decision, they want them as reassurance that Valve hasn’t gone over to the dark side.

04/06/2009 at 13:28 Gorgeras says:

Ok if people are going to make a case for Valve based on their own personal anecdotes about how much hours they squeezed out the first game, it’s only fair that it be mentioned the countless threads on the Steam forums pointing out the very obvious indicators that the game is nearing the end of it’s life and the last(and only) content patch was too little too late: people ARE frequently bored with it and it’s been noticed that the average skill of the player-base has significantly increased; only the more unusually dedicated tend to play it now. There is nothing to attract people that think a game should be about more than rehearsed patterns of movement into playing again.

There is.no reason.to trust. Valve. With this one under-supported game, they’ve managed to burn more than a decade of good-will. They have become just another developer and should be treated as nothing special any more. This isn’t presumption: if the critics are wrong, it is Valve who control the flow of information and it is their defenders which make far-reaching claims far beyond the information available. The rest of us are only going by what is known.

The closest I will come to making an evidence-free claim is that I smell the rotten hand of EA in this.

04/06/2009 at 13:34 Octaeder says:

@distended,

There was a PvZ avatar creator (don’t remember the address) which included pirate gear. I’ve not actually seen zombie pirates in the game yet, but I still hold out hope!

04/06/2009 at 13:38 Tworak says:

L4D 2, Portal 2 and Episode 3 to be released in The Gravy Box, confirmed?

04/06/2009 at 13:41 distended says:

Well, surely the game will be the best indicator of that. We can be sure it will be covered fairly extensively.

Not really – I think their treatment of L4D1 will be the best indicator of that.

We all know L4D2 will probably be a damn good game, but really after two mammoth threads you must realise that for most people that is not the point.

04/06/2009 at 13:42 yutt says:

@Alec Meer

No offense, but “wait and see” unti Valve reaches the point where they are completely unable to rectify their errors seems like an idiotic position to take. It is nice of you to run damage control for Valve, but fans of L4D have many valid justifications for being outraged by this news.

I’m not sure why we should accept anything on mere faith.

04/06/2009 at 13:57 Muzman says:

distended says:
We all know L4D2 will probably be a damn good game, but really after two mammoth threads you must realise that for most people that is not that point.

Yes, I think I said something regarding that earlier.

04/06/2009 at 14:02 CMaster says:

@Yutt – I think RPS did a good job here. They distilled out some of the key complaints/concerns that were being expressed and went and asked Valve about them. Then they told us what Valve said. Now Lombardi was a bit vauge and perhaps I don’t entirley believe him/agree with him. But I don’t see how that is RPSes fault.

@Denton – why are you trying to muddy the issue?

04/06/2009 at 14:08 IdleHands says:

@ CMaster & Jalf

He was responding to JKJoker’s comment that was deleted. Where he called Valve games over-rated and compared game developers to wild bears.

“trusting a game developer is like hugging a real bear and hoping it wont rip your arms and head off”

@JKJoker
Not ‘too harsh’ but complete hyperbole

04/06/2009 at 14:08 Rabbitsoup says:

This is fine by me, might even buy it but it does seem like L4D just completed instead of L4D2

04/06/2009 at 14:09 JKjoker says:

ok, shoot me for trying to be “graphic”

i’m just saying that ppl should at least keep a healthy level of skepticism with game development

04/06/2009 at 14:14 autogunner says:

yeah, bundled with ep 3 would be titanic.

Still i would hardly say I am ‘outraged’ by L4D2, you lot have all been spoiled by valve in the past. L4D was a great COOP game, an important distinction to make. It wasn’t multiplayer, it was COOP, and lasted about as long as any singleplayer game had a right to.
TF2 is MULTIPLAYER so can’t be condisdered in the same light.

its not like anyone is complaining that there is no free content updates for half life 2 is there?

04/06/2009 at 14:15 The Sombrero Kid says:

i don’t think RPS or any individuals for that matter are to blame here, but I do think a mistake has been made, the mistake i think is to have made this content in the first place, although you could see it as not making it a core part of the L4D original also.

the reason it’s not part of L4D is clear to me at least, they were trying to rectify a problem with the xbox 360 distribution model that makes it difficult to make games a service as they’d like, as for why it was made in the first place, well maybe to fulfil the promise everyone feels has been broken., i personally would prefer Episode 3 or a new IP if it really must be a new multiplayer game, I don’t think a new IP would’ve been received badly at all.

04/06/2009 at 14:19 Psychopomp says:

@Gorgeras

You site the Steam forums, a place infamous for being full of unreasonable, ungrateful, knee-jerk reactionaries as a source?

You sir, just ruined any credibility you might have.

“Software houses are, by me at least, judged on each and every release as is stands, not by their back catalogue.”

And this is exactly what people are failing to do.

04/06/2009 at 14:31 Duoae says:

First off, i’ve not read through all the comments as thoroughly as others so forgive me if i’m repeating myself.

Now, the problem with the Stalker argument mentioned in the comments above is that they are single player games – each one stands on its own merits and does not affect the others. Just because a new stalker is released a year after the first doesn’t diminish that original release. Multiplayer games are different in this regard, and despite L4D having a single player setting most of its value is in the multiplayer aspect of the game. It is a commonly known fact that MP games live and die on their after release support – whether that’s from the developers or the community. By taking so long to release the SDK (now we know why, since their main focus was on the sequel) they cut the support of the community while providing none of their own. They also released the beta SDK within a couple of months of the announcement that they’re making a sequel and that maps will be cross compatible – except that they’re not.

http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=1138&page=2

Obviously if you want to take advantage of the new director stuff you’ll have to go back in and touch some stuff up

Valve’s own interview has stated that the maps work with the features of L4D in both L4D and L4D2 but that L4D2 features won’t work with L4D (which is fair since they’re not upgrading the engine to cope with these things in L4D) but to enable maps to work with either feature set requires extra work, it’s not a “one map will support both” scenario from what i understand of their comment. With L4D2 coming out there’s now a reason for both Valve and community map designers to ignore making maps for L4D and instead focus on L4D2 (which is what Valve have already been doing) without taking the extra time to make ‘old feature set’ maps. For Valve it’s the reason that they see L4D2 as a platform, not as just a game and for the community designers it’s because the feature set in L4D2 is so much better than L4D.

Once players start migrating to L4D2 then there will be an avalanche – people want to play with their friends and they also want to play the latest and greatest release. How many people are playing Halo or Halo 2 MP since Halo 3 came out? How many people play Battlefield 1942 as opposed to Battlefield 2? I’d wager (since i don’t know of anywhere the stats can be found) that the numbers have dropped off significantly since the release of those newer games. This all means that the chance of getting a decent L4D match (and support) after L4D2′s release will become smaller and smaller. This is only worsened by the terrible lobby system and integration of the Steam community (or lack thereof) into the match-making system – there just isn’t enough choice/control and it was something that was promised to be improved upon post release… well, we got a little of that.

Then there’s all the promises made to people who were buying L4D that there would be content updates. I didn’t know about Gabe’s interview but there were plenty that i read elsewhere:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/i_left4dead_pc360
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169669
http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=986
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/left-4-dead-live-interview-live-q-and-a

I bought the game at full price believing that those four co-op campaigns would be expanded upon. I hate it when people say but each one has 5 maps. These aren’t maps like in counterstrike or Team Fortress 2, a lot of the maps are actually very short and linear. Judging from playing on advanced in co-op most of the time i get through a campaign in between 45-60 minutes. If you spread that evenly that’s between 9 and 12 minutes per map: that’s not an awful lot considering some people literally just run through them (i’m not that good). So i count it as a campaign and not as separate maps per campaign because each one is barely worth playing by itself – though that’s my personal opinion. It took a long time to bring out the promised ‘should have been finished for release’ versus maps (though i don’t really care for versus so i wasn’t complaining) and perhaps this is also due to a focus on L4D2.

The thing is, i wouldn’t expect 5 campaigns for free… maybe one and maybe some new weapons or a new character skin or two for each character (perhaps the ones from beta because i thought they looked cool) but i would have been happy to pay for DLC like the new AI/campaigns, characters and enemies. I wouldn’t expect to pay full price (£39/$60) for it, just like we don’t pay full price for expansions or paid DLC on the consoles for map packs.

As it stands though i’m left scratching my head over what Valve have done here. They’ve taken a popular game, left it practically unsupported whether through free DLC or paid DLC and they’ve gone straight onto a sequel which they plan to make into a platform. WHY?! You have the perfect platform already there in Left 4 Dead, why is L4D2 a platform when it’s still the same engine (though with a beefier director which could probably be backwards inserted into L4D if the source engine is still as modular as it was) but L4D can’t be? It makes no sense to me. The best solution would have been to make L4D the platform, have paid DLC and churn out content for it – there’d be one front end, one player base (though a little fragmented) one distribution network all linked in. As it is now the player base will be split between L4D and L4D2… people in L4D2 can play L4D maps (if they’re ported over, no idea whether they will be since that would be free content to new adopters, but not for the people who adopted L4D) but will they be able to play with people in L4D or will they have to exit the game and load up L4D and then play?

There’s just too many questions and too many questionable decisions (from a public/consumer perspective) and it makes people uneasy and feel like they were taken for a ride. If the promises were never made then i doubt people would be as angry as they are.

With regards to Shake Appeal’s argument about TF2/L4D updates… it takes a LOT more time and energy to integrate and balance a new weapon and maps than it does to add models and animations. Limb dismemberment is already a part of L4D as is map item/barrier randomisation (though on a smaller scale). Adding in the RPG elements to TF2 in conjunction with the above is even more work…. That’s not skimpy free content there, that equates to quite a lot of content.

04/06/2009 at 14:45 apnea says:

Wow, my previous comment was that offensive? What, a mild, mild take on the whole “imputing anger where there is none” thing is now ground for deletion? That’s kinda sad, most of all considering the now frightening frequency with which that old meme comes out in any discussion now.

04/06/2009 at 14:47 Theoban says:

I agree with Tzarkahn. I’ve had my money’s worth from Left 4 Dead, and I will get the same from Left 4 Dead 2. I’m just looking forward to playing more games.

04/06/2009 at 15:18 dash says:

Heh, my comment was deleted…
This is exactly why i rarely browse/post here on RPS and prefer Kotaku, where you can share your thoughts and express yourself the way you want to, without being afraid that your opinion will be censored (well, unless you’re being a jerk, troll or a mix of both.)

Way to go Alec, keep it up…

04/06/2009 at 15:25 Jake Roth says:

So it basically goes like -
1) Hooray, we’re done with L4D! *Launch*
2) …Crap, we need to fix that, let’s keep iterating.
3) Hooray, we fixed L4D!
4) …Crap, half of these fixes won’t even reliably work in context with our existing content. *Announces L4D2*
I’d have enjoyed more content for L4D, but I understand how something like a completely overhauled melee system and new boss infected could utterly break a series of maps already fairly vulnerable to cheese.

04/06/2009 at 15:36 KlausKleber says:

I don’t blame it on Valve, I blame it on Turtle Rock.
Joke aside…

They have some rule book reasons to call this a new full price game, but it still doesn’t feel that way. In my opinion not a leap worth paying 45€ for. Valve usually exceeds my expectations. I mean remember the days when they presented TF2, that was exciting. L4D2 is like “Ah ok the old game with just enough new features to package this as a new game.”

In my opinion:
- ideas to improve the existing game -> keep working it
- fundamentally new ideas -> new game

L4D and L4D2 won’t exist as two different games of which each has some advantages over the other(hl hl2). L4D2 is L4D but improved. Period. Especially if they plan to incorporate L4D campaigns.
Well the only high ground that L4D has, is that it will cost less.

04/06/2009 at 15:39 The Innocent says:

And… uh…

Otters are ace, too.

04/06/2009 at 15:43 I hate airports. says:

Seriously though, Valve shot themselves in the foot in a glorious manner with TF2 (and orange box, to some extent). That’ll teach ‘em to be generous.

04/06/2009 at 15:45 Psychopomp says:

“The last few threads about L4D2 were horrible, soul-destroying misery, >even with all the racism<”

I cannot thank you enough for pointing this out, and I don’t just mean half the cast being black

The slights against the southern setting are god damn insulting.

04/06/2009 at 15:49 JKjoker says:

@Alec: ok, then, ill try to keep my hyperboles in check

04/06/2009 at 15:52 Francis says:

I hate games!
I hate game journalists!
I hate game developers!
I hate gamers!
I hate zombies!
I hate sequels!
I hate DLC!

You know what I don’t hate?
I don’t hate that there is going to be a chainsaw

04/06/2009 at 15:57 Psychopomp says:

@JKJoker

He is telling the truth, I’ve had a few of my own comments deleted.

04/06/2009 at 16:01 Rinox says:

All I can say is that I’m gonna miss Francis. But that con artist character looked pretty cool too. Bring on the anti-heroes!

04/06/2009 at 16:05 Duoae says:

@ Alec

I think it’s a bit too soon for a sequel too, but I’m not going to call anyone names about it. At least not unless, in the event of my finally playing L4D2, it’s rubbish and one of the new infected is called Alec-is-a-twat.

Harsh! You know that Valve read these things, right? Someone’s going to get a graffiti easter egg named after him.

The last few threads about L4D2 were horrible, soul-destroying misery, even with all the racism, slights upon Newell’s weight, comments that Valve are worse than Hitler and whatnot removed on sight. We’d like this thread to remain a sober, constructive discussion of the many legitimate issues around the game. Though you can also talk about how ace otters are, if you like.

Wow, glad i missed out on those. Honestly, though the southern setting doesn’t really interest me that much and characters seem relatively bland by comparison to the first four these things have never entered my mind as valid points of complaint.

04/06/2009 at 16:08 yutt says:

@PC Monster

I think that is a very cynical, clinical, and capitalistic assessment of the situation, which I reject wholeheartedly. Valve is a business, who needs to make money: Yes.

It is still, also, people. People who love to make games, who want fans to be excited about what they are making, and who have given every indication they make decisions on more than milking as much money as they can. Excusing unethical behavior with, “well, that’s business!” is the most disgusting aspect of capitalism, and I surely won’t support companies who feed me that line.

There are humans at the heart of each decision, and expecting or allowing them to hide behind a shield of business brings consumers no good at all.

Thankfully Valve has not done that, and this seems more a poorly thought-out development direction than a money-grabbing marketing decision.

04/06/2009 at 16:11 Gorgeras says:

The post where I cite the Steam forums begins by drawing attention and ire to the frequent use of useless, uninformative and misleading personal anecdote. The point was to answer posts like that of TheFanciestofPants with talking-points of equally worthless merit.

If I fail to get the point about this low quality type of discussion across to posters like TheFanciestofPants, I will at least have made an argument engaging them on their level because so far those few who have attempted to dredge the sewage have been ignored.

So why cherry-pick? Why is my deliberate and self-concious nonsense to be criticised but not TheFanciestofPants’ accidental but frankly genuine garbage reasoning it’s in response to?

04/06/2009 at 16:15 Dave says:

I love the phrase “opportunistic cow milker.” I may just have to change my Steam nickname.

I think people who think L4D wasn’t worth $50 have been spoiled by the likes of TF2. There certainly have been shorter, less fun games at that price.

04/06/2009 at 16:18 lumpi says:

What I don’t get is how people say “I spent 73.5 hours playing L4D, so it’s a full game and a full-priced sequel is due, you greedy anti-capitalist bastards!”.

I mean, I’ve probably spent 200 hours playing dustbowl in TFC, but I don’t feel that makes dustbowl a $300 sequel by that logic. The number of hours in your Steam stats isn’t what makes a game feel complete. Especially for a multiplayer game.

If they called L4D2 an expansion pack (remember “Opposing Force”?), while reassuring players that there would be other, free updates for L4D, nobody would complain.

PS: Look how ace these otters are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epUk3T2Kfno

04/06/2009 at 16:25 yutt says:

It’s like both sides of this discussion aren’t even aware of what the other side is actually saying. I continually read these defenses of Valve’s decision claiming those of us upset want everything for free.

No. No, no. No! We want what we were explicitly told we would get for free, for free. I paid $50 for what I felt was an incomplete game with the expectation that would be expanded upon directly as Valve claimed numerous times it would. I drove a dozen or more hesitant friends to purchase the game as well.

Valve seems to have no idea the impact this decision will make on sales. Without my personal active pressure and enthusiasm they could have easily lost 20-30 sales of TF2 and L4D each. I am not anyone special, and in any community there are people like me evangelizing and pushing their friends to focus on specific games. If you lose the hearts and minds of your most avid supporters, you also lose those that were never passionately interested in you to begin with.

I don’t think any amount of marketing can make up for that, over the long-term.

04/06/2009 at 16:30 The Sombrero Kid says:

@Dave
it’s irrelevant how many bad games there are in the world, when plumbers don’t wear ties 2 gets released it wont all of a sudden make call of duty 5 a good game.

04/06/2009 at 16:36 PC Monster says:

@yutt: Heh, having been recently fired from a business composed of some exceedingly lovely people, I think I’m allowed a small touch of cynicism now and again. Still, calling my assessment ‘cynical, clinical and capitalist’ doesn’t mean it isn’t true, right? Neither does your rejection of it.

And to be clear: I agree with you that there is no excuse for unethical behaviour in business, full-stop/period.

But I’m happy to see we’re agreeing on the main point, that Valve may just have not thought this out properly, rather than an active attempt by them to fleece their customers EA-style.

04/06/2009 at 16:38 Tzarkahn says:

I guess I will try again.

I see this as a case of: “I want something for nothing.”

Valve are continuing supporting L4D and such, albeit slower that promised but that’s what “Valve time” is all about.

04/06/2009 at 16:40 Radiant says:

Hyperbole – It’s where the hysterical put their Super Cornflakes!

04/06/2009 at 16:48 Lobotomist says:

“Certainly far more cynical and capitalistic minds than yours are making game development decisions all the time. My only point is, as consumers, we should be advocating on behalf of ourselves, the corporations and their PR consultants will do just find defending themselves.”

So true

Why people dont realize this , is really beyond me

04/06/2009 at 16:53 apnea says:

@yutt

That’s what’s really getting to me about RPS comment threads lately. People are actively discouraging other people from, as you say, ‘advocating on behalf’ of themselves, all because of some BS rationale of capitalistic greed taken as THE natural order of things, or because it makes you angry, or because it’s uncool or entitled or whatever. The funny thing is, in doing the whole ‘dog eats dog’ act, they are actually willing defenders of the companies they so casually identify as soulless profit-machines out to pilfer their own pockets. I don’t know what that says about people when they’re willing to cut the marketing middlemen and take it upon themselves to counteract the skeptical inquiries and principled expectations of consumers LIKE THEM. A very noxious dynamic indeed.

Anyway, stop doing the damage control thing if you’re not paid to do it. Leave it to professionals (and some here probably are for all I know).

04/06/2009 at 16:57 yutt says:

@I hate airports.

Small number of maps in rotation? That isn’t how L4D functions at all, so I am not sure why you even brought it up. And regardless to how TF2 and other games function on a server-by-server basis, you can easily switch to another server with alternative maps.

There is not a single, not one, set of popular community maps. That alone speaks volumes of how L4D stands compared to Valve’s other games. We haven’t seen anything near the support or content we expected.

Communities take time to develop impressive levels and modifications, and if developers keep pressing the reset button with sequel releases, that never has a chance to occur. Valve of all developers, should understand this.

You are free to disagree, but my opinion is far from ridiculous.

04/06/2009 at 16:58 Psychopomp says:

@jalf

“If L4D was updated at the same pace, it should, by now, have had two updates, and a third should be in the works. It has had one, which didn’t really add any of the content we were promised. Of course, we were promised *faster* updates than TF2, so saying it should have had a mere two updates is cutting Valve a lot of slack.”

I was referring to this paragraph
I wouldn’t doubt Valve fully intended to live up to hose promises, then the reality of the whole thing put a foot in their mouths.

04/06/2009 at 17:05 JonFitt says:

“It’s more than DLC” may be true when taken as a single drop, but if all the proposed changes were made incrementally over a long period no-one would be arguing.

The thing that gets my goat is that it’s clear now that the molasses slow reaction to finishing the original campaigns and lack of new content is because efforts were focussed on the new child. They can produce 5 completely new inter-twinned campaigns for Coop & Vs & ‘other’, in a new setting, taking into account new AiD functions like weather, and new characters, but somehow it takes 6 months to knock up a lighthouse and make tweaks to Vs maps in 2 campaigns?!

It’s a natural reaction to finishing a project to want to go grander bigger and better, but in this case it seems that instead of coming from a place of “there’s so much more we wish we could have done to L4D, let’s keep working”, they’ve expressed dissatisfaction in interview more along the lines of “now the rest of Valve has looked at this we wish we’d done some things differently let’s make a v2.0″.

It just looks like L4D was the first stab, that was very successful, but they immediately moved on.

04/06/2009 at 17:08 dash says:

@Psychopomp
“I wouldn’t doubt Valve fully intended to live up to hose promises, then the reality of the whole thing put a foot in their mouths.”

I don’t think it was the reality, i think it was greed…
I would bet that L4D2 started as a part of promised DLC (which explains why they said that works on L4D2 began right after L4D was released) , until valve’s suits decided that there is enough new stuff to put into a separate box and sell it at full-price.

04/06/2009 at 17:16 Psychopomp says:

@Dash

remember, there’s a 360 version as well, with significant limitations

Part of the TF2 update delay on the 360 has been that very thing

@Sombrero

An AIM isn’t someone who is angry, an AIM is someone who is angry to the point of turning into an unreasonable child

04/06/2009 at 17:18 jalf says:

And why exactly do i need to think about a comment in another thread in regard to deletion of a comment in this thread? O_o’

Because you might have gotten them mixed up. I’ve done that before, thinking they deleted one of my comments, only to find it where I left it in another thread on the same subject…. ;)
Just thought I’d mention it in case that’s what happened. If they deleted your post, tough luck, and I’m going to choose to believe they had a reason. :)

04/06/2009 at 17:30 yutt says:

@I hate airports.

Of course games don’t come with communities. That’s why gamers like me focus on companies good at building these communities. Releasing sequels too quickly makes that impossible. This isn’t hard to understand, so don’t you dare quibble with me about it. Any reasonable person can see that splitting development of maps and modifications between two games that, according to Valve, are sufficiently different to warrant a sequel, segments the community.

Community projects will have to choose to either hook to L4D1 or L4D2′s capabilities. They will use one set of characters or the other. When you play with your friends you can’t just all launch TF2, you have to make sure everyone has the $50 update, TF2.5.

Further, Gabe Newell and others specifically said that they would follow the TF2 update model with L4D, including free updates of weapons and special infected. You can’t argue your way out of this, they said they would do one thing, and they are not.

04/06/2009 at 17:44 yutt says:

@I hate airports.

My response wasn’t completely unrelated, and thus I am done wasting my time with you. You did more than ask a single question. If you are satisfied with the L4D situation, kudos to you. I am not and have explained in several thousand words here and elsewhere why that is.

If you do not understand you are not going to.

04/06/2009 at 17:56 markcocjin says:

OMG!

An idea just hit me.

Wouldn’t it be cool if Left 4 Dead 2 updated Left 4 Dead 1 with all those functionality based features and that the point of the sequel is just to present a different story in the world of the zombie apocalypse?

And everyone of all those Left 4 Dead versions will be united under one server browser for user made content.

Left 4 Dead 3: Paris, Left 4 Dead 4: Tokyo, Left 4 Dead 5: Siberia….

A guy can dream.

04/06/2009 at 17:59 autogunner says:

i will take that as a compliment

04/06/2009 at 18:03 Seth says:

I for one share the outrage about L4D2.

If it were a true sequel, it would be in a new engine. It would also be a monster raising sim with some platforming elements, as I expected.

Valve is just making another amazing game where you kill zombies. My sense of betrayal is palpable.

04/06/2009 at 18:17 Psychopomp says:

With the arrival of DawgUndawg, I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone, don’t respond to a comment you *know* is going to be deleted

Edit:I am well aware of the irony

04/06/2009 at 18:31 Big Daddy says:

PC Gamer UK 195
Left 4 Dead Review: 93%. Must Buy.
‘As long as they keep introducing new missions, there’s no reason why this won’t be sucking on your bandwidth for years to come’ -Craig Pearson

04/06/2009 at 18:46 Tei says:

@Osama Haggag: I don’t think so. But If that make you happy, feel free that. But I doubt any game studio “uses” the ideas from forums for the next weapon/etc. It just don’t work like that (I think).

04/06/2009 at 19:13 Thirith says:

You’re judging it in terms of a single-player game, from the sound of it. If that’s how you see it, fine, but I don’t think it’s all that accurate to do so.

04/06/2009 at 19:17 fucrate says:

I, for one, would like to kill more zombies as I hate their kind. I am willing to pay money for this opportunity, which is why I work for a living (sorta).

04/06/2009 at 19:21 Smithee says:

What amazes me about this is not that people are displeased (which I can understand, even if I don’t fully agree), it’s the sheer amount of fury. Valve did not insult your mom, or rape your dog. (Though I’m pretty sure that DRM, and possibly Bioshock, were already responsible for both of these.)

@ Tei: Yes, I too miss the halcyon days when RPS was a club of gentlemen, when we wore smoking jackets and swirled brandy, discussing the latest electronic entertainments of the day. Also, back when everyone wasn’t so shouty all the time.

04/06/2009 at 19:32 JonFitt says:

@Thirith
It’s an interesting point, that due to the way L4D is played the maps are more equivalent to a single player game, albeit with a lot more care taken to avoid ‘sploits.
Because players are running past things A-B and not fighting in an arena, there’s only so many times someone can run the same course without getting jaded.
It does get repetitive, especially in VS where the tactics are quickly generally well known and you are expecting the ambushes at largely set times.

04/06/2009 at 19:38 JonFitt says:

@Smithee
I would consider myself more disappointed than angry. It’s the kind of disappointment that you might have when your star pupil graffitis the school. You expected better and suspect the rough kids were involved somehow.

Also, when I heard the news the shock caused my monocle to drop straight into my brandy, splashing my silk smoking jacket and ruining all three. Harumph!

04/06/2009 at 19:49 Tom says:

I wont be in the least bit surprised if i don’t feel ripped off when I buy L4D2.

04/06/2009 at 19:53 Erlam says:

‘The engine used has not progressed one bit so there are no technical limitations with this, this is just Valve gouging with one of their most popular titles, plain and simple.”

I’d think a rather large overhaul of the AI counts as engine progression.

It’s funny that on one hand people will demand a new engine/game entirely, then complain that it’s not like the old one. I’m not saying you’re doing this, but frankly, I love the idea of L4D2 this soon.

People are totally spoiled by this company, and the second they ever charge money people are up in arms. They’re adding 20 new guns, new special infected, new normal infected (in terms of models/texturing/etc), new maps, new modes, new ends to maps, new TYPES of weapons (melee uses), new ammunition types, and overhauled the AI Director.

How do you think these people make money? Giving this all away? That’s a lot of fucking work.

04/06/2009 at 20:07 JonFitt says:

@Erlam
Actually on the ‘types’ of weapons. I believe Chet made a sideways reference to the Gas Cans etc. being melee weapons (when picked up). I would not be surprised if these new ones worked in the same way i.e. can only be used or dropped but not carried.
That’s a guess, they may well add a weapon slot for these.

04/06/2009 at 20:30 Shake Appeal says:

@JonFitt

No, from what I’ve seen that’s accurate. They seem to be dropped when you get pounced the same way a gas can would be.

04/06/2009 at 20:59 MagrothJ says:

Well when Valve can’t even make a proper conversion between dollars and euros then why should I trust them?

04/06/2009 at 21:04 678 says:

w/e, still no word on EP3 ?

04/06/2009 at 21:18 Crispy says:

*** VALVE GIVE PC CUSTOMERS COLD SHOULDER SHOCKER ***

Okay, well that’s a bit of an extreme way of putting it, but I’m mostly thinking that it has more do to with the console version than anything else. I’ll explain.

Every time Valve wants to update a console version they have to pay Microsoft tens of thousands of dollars for it to go through compliance checks and if they don’t want to charge for it (and let Microsoft take a cut) they still have to pay Microsoft for their bandwidth. My flatmate (the more console-inclined of the two of us) was playing TF2 on the 360 the other day. They still don’t have the Kritzkrieg. They’re missing a ton of map updates, unlocks, fixes (I saw people building teleporters through the doors on Dust) because it’s expensive to deliver the service we get on the PC through Microsoft.

So, yes, in theory Valve could do L4D as updates, or they could do it as DLC, but they have to pay Microsoft more money if they do this. If they sell the same as a fresh disc they only have to pay someone else for the advertising space and the distribution, all the other costs can be absorbed by Valve.

But there’s another stumbling block which is more to do with practise than theory. The 360 only has a puny 512MB of RAM. All of the extra content like weapon models, textures and sounds are all loaded into RAM when you start a game. So if Valve want to mix extra content together and have it in the game at the same time (i.e. new weapons + old weapons; new Special Infected + old Special Infected), they would need to find a way to compress it all into no more than 512MB at a time. This isn’t as much of a problem on the PC where anyone who can run L4D needs at least 1GB RAM (this is the minimum spec on the box). Valve have also cited this reason for why the 360 DLC for TF2 (with the weapon unlocks and maps) is taking so long.

So Valve is between a rock and a hard place because they wanted a bigger piece of the pie and they wanted a presence on the consoles, but it seems like doing this is making them compromise the awesome relationship they have built with their PC customers. This is the root of much of the ill feeling: the PC customers know this can be done as DLC and it doesn’t need to cost the same as a full-price game; we know this should be L4D: The Survivor Diaries and not L4D2. This should be HL2 Episodes cost bracket, not HL2 cost bracket.

They could give the DLC free or cheaper to PC customers, but then they would piss off the console customers. They didn’t have to worry about this as much with the OB customers because they were getting an awesome deal anyway with 5 games in 1. Or maybe their market research is telling them that the console customers are pissed they can’t have the updates the PC customers get, so they wanted to make it more ‘equal’. Anyway, I don’t see how Valve can do this without pissing one of their customer bases off, unless they absorb the cost of DLC on the consoles or give PC customers an almighty Steam-only discount.

04/06/2009 at 21:44 JonFitt says:

@Daniel Rivas
There was nothing binding but there was an explicit statement in interview.
Statements are pretty much as firm as you’re going to get with games. We only have statements to suggest that the Demoman and Soldier will get unlocks for instance.

They’re also pretty flimsy, look at Mr Romero and Mr Molyneux for instance.

But reputations are built and destroyed in the games industry based on statements vs reality.

04/06/2009 at 21:49 Daniel Rivas says:

@JonFitt:
And so, people should not buy TF2 on the promise of Demoman and Soldier unlocks. It doesn’t matter if “Statements are pretty much as firm as you’re going to get with games.”, a nonbinding statement shouldn’t be enough to sell a game, at least not if you aren’t prepared to get burned by the company.

04/06/2009 at 22:28 Okami says:

@Crispy: I honestly don’t think that the Xbox360′s 512mb of RAM have anything to do with this at all.

04/06/2009 at 22:35 The Sombrero Kid says:

incidently if left 4 dead 2 runs left 4 dead 1 content it is left 4 dead 1 plus more, there seems to be nothing stopping people loading in the l4d maps into 2 and getting both games, we’ll see how that plays out.

04/06/2009 at 22:51 scarfa says:

Once again consoles and greed got into another companies head. If it wasn’t L4D2 would just be a $20 expansion pack on the original game kinda like HL2 episode 1.

04/06/2009 at 23:42 JonFitt says:

“I wish you legions of adoring fans”
– Ancient Chinese curse.

05/06/2009 at 00:18 Hoppipolla says:

DL: Maybe, maybe.

Did anyone else read this in the Heavy’s voice?

05/06/2009 at 00:50 DB says:

Greed. Plain and simple.

How long does Valve actually think it will take talented modders (and pirates of course) to add these few things to L4D1? Probably not long at all assuming we all don’t drop valve like a used tampon. This will be even easier if the SDK is compatible with both games. Ever heard of “Save As…”?

Welcome to my shit list:
1: EA
2: Any games for windows half-assed port
3: Valve

05/06/2009 at 01:07 Tomo says:

There is some nonsense in this thread which is making my nonsens-o-meter go off the scale.

Jesus.

05/06/2009 at 01:59 ACS says:

It’s clearly a deceptive marketing practice, specifically a bait-and-switch scheme. Both of which are illegal and actionable.

What, did you go to Upstairs Backdoor Angry Internet Man Law School? It most certainly is not. Even if it’s a poor business practice, it doesn’t even vaguely fulfill any of the elements of deceptive advertising.

05/06/2009 at 02:16 Tim says:

actually I now suspect that some of these comments are actually just people trolling, or marketing people from elsewhere.

05/06/2009 at 02:59 mejobloggs says:

I’m very interested in the inclusion of more story!

05/06/2009 at 03:19 Styngent says:

L4D2 means a few $$$ for valve and something to show at E3 that isn’t last minute scraps of concept art for an episodic game that’s been on the development line for longer than this sequel.

So they took the user feedback and decided they can make money with it, end of demo.

05/06/2009 at 03:22 SuperNashwan says:

Man, the internet is rubbish at reserving judgement!

05/06/2009 at 03:51 Spyhere! says:

Personally when I first heard the news it got a resounding “eugh…” and a little bit of trepidation on the subject of L4D2.

Personally, I’ll probably still buy it but I’m not going to be paying full whack for it this time, going to wait for it to go into a sale (on steam, on Amazon or in the shops) perhaps even wait around for whatever the equivilent Survivor Pack version of the game will be.

If they offer a discount (though steam ofc) to those that purchased L4D (say knock ten-to-fifteen whole english pounds off the price) and announce it ‘soonish’ (remember valve time people) it would probably be a great move and lessen the ARRGGGGHHHH!!! factor I’m seeing.

There is still the problem of them, despite their best efforts, that they could create a L4D community and a L4D2 community, splitting the fanbase BUT if the original campaigns work (and are shipped with L4D2) essentially anyone who owns L4D2 could play with anyone who owns L4D.

Trouble is, we just don’t know enough yet, yes everyone hates the “wait and see” approach (hell on the EU City of Heroes forums if any of the devs so much as utter the word “soon” it gets a twitchy eyeballed response since there’s been things that were promised to arrive soon but never showed up, only telling people at a test server Q&A that the project had been shelved…) but sadly it’s all we’ve got right now.

There are very, very legitimate conscerns, like the price tag and the knock on effect of whether people are going to be willing to pony up the money upfront this time or (like me) say “Bugger it…not until it’s cheaper or until after a major update, sorry but not waiting ages again for added content at full whack price…”

05/06/2009 at 05:44 Boo Hoo Hoo says:

You people make me sick. Valve is not a charity, yet they’ve still given the community more free content than any other software company. Valve’s record speaks for itself yet the majority of you are ignoring it. I bet you’re the same clowns who went on and on and on about getting two free – yes free games with the Orange Box.

Get over yourselves and grow up!

05/06/2009 at 05:55 Juror #9 says:

@ Toad
Come on seriously. You’re upset because things roll out late? Has Valve disappointed with their offerings? even though a bit late at times. Give these talented people a break. You’re still playing aren’t ya? Have you ever mapped before or write code? If you have, you know that the devil is in the details. I”ll still pay for the L4D 2, for the price that some spend on updating their computers now a days, 40-50 bucks is a worth it even in this silly economy we’re in.

05/06/2009 at 08:07 Ravenger says:

I think it’s safe to say that if there weren’t a 360 version of L4D then L4D2 would simply be an expansion or DLC added to the original game.

It’s probably cheaper and easier to do this as a separate game on the 360 due to Microsoft’s rules (and charges) on patches, updates, DLC and achievements. It’d probably make more money too as expansions aren’t looked on favourably by retail stores. They take up just as much space as a full price title, yet cost less and sell fewer units.

It’s sad that such a PC centric developer like Valve can break it’s own principles of community building because of the console version.

Still, if you can play the original campaign in L4D2, then I’ll be happy.

05/06/2009 at 09:07 The Sombrero Kid says:

@Malagate
outside of the new maps and the body deformation stuff (which adds nothing to the game) it really doesn’t take much work to implement what they have shown us so far.

05/06/2009 at 09:17 TheApologist says:

Incidentally, has anyone considered that, rather than conspiracies involving the xbox 360 or the desire to attack a community of gamers who pay their wages or whatever, or a sudden switch in values to become EA, this is in fact Valve being very traditionally Valve.

They have over the years talked a lot about the fact that they allow people to assign themselves to projects based on their enthusiam – at least to some extent. Perhaps those who are upset should stop looking for money hats, and accept that the culture of the company that led to great games they love has also led to this decision.

Perhaps that would mean that those who don’t like the decision could live with it more easily?

05/06/2009 at 09:54 runcrash says:

I can understand why people would be pissed on first hearing this but I’m still waiting to see if L4D1 does get the updates that were promised.

I’m looking forward to those and to L4D2.

And hey, did you guys hear Lucas Arts is making adventure games again? That’s pretty cool huh?

05/06/2009 at 11:08 Daniel Rivas says:

@James T: I think you are overestimating how much this move is going to hurt Valve’s brand.

In all likelihood L4D2 is going to be pretty fantastic, and will come out in line with other major franchises (a sequel just about every year). To the vast majority of people that will buy this title, Valve are being timely, not premature.

Of course, if l4d2 is the trainwreck half this thread seem to think it will be, well…

For the record, I’m probably not going to buy left4dead 2 on release, seeing as I have the first game and I do not have a lot of money.

@Meat Circus: Wow, feeling the hate.

05/06/2009 at 11:29 Daniel Rivas says:

@James T: My point is that valve making a most likely very commercially successful sequel to a very commercially successful game, instead of supplying free content really isn’t “farcically self-destructive”.

Maybe if they announced they were no longer making video games because they wanted to make, oh I don’t know, cheese instead, I would agree with you.

It’s perfectly rational for valve to do this, and I don’t think it was too much to ask for people to keep that in mind when purchasing a game they perceive as being half finished.

05/06/2009 at 11:38 Crispy says:

Why all the comparisons with TF2 anyway?

Because when Valve stated they would be continuing extra content support for L4D, they said they would be delivering the same kind of support they were already delivering for TF2. It was a direct comparison between the post-release support of the two games, and Valve made that statement.

Crispy: I honestly don’t think that the Xbox360’s 512mb of RAM have anything to do with this at all

Valve have already said that this is the reason the 360 DLC unlocks for TF2 is taking longer than originally anticipated. With consoles, unlike Steam-hosted PC content, the bulk of the game exists on the disc as untouchable data. L4D2 as DLC means you can’t reverse-engineer anything on the L4D 360 disc to help all the weapons and character classes co-exist within the 512MB RAM limitation. However, if they make L4D2 a separate disc they could create new versions of the assets in L4D optimised specifically to co-exist with all the new content in L4D2.

My issue is with the pricing. If L4D2 is a genuine step-up from L4D then I might just buy it, but if it’s basically an expansion pack priced as a full-price game I won’t.

05/06/2009 at 11:43 Daniel Rivas says:

@James T:

And I have already stated that I don’t think this will particularly affect the public perception of or trust for Valve.

@Theo:
They executed the TF2 content updates brilliantly, even if it wasn’t to your liking. Each update gave them a big boost in their sales. If they had released it all at once, the update would:

a): Still not be out.
b): Not have sold as many copies as the staggered updates.

05/06/2009 at 11:52 Daniel Rivas says:

@James T:
A small and vocal minority does not equal Valve’s entire audience. The vast majority of people who will make up the bulk of this game’s sales don’t give a shit either way.

Edit: In any case, I should be revising for the Maths A-Level exam I have this afternoon, and am therefore done with this conversation.

05/06/2009 at 11:59 Tei says:

@Crispy: RAM? are u sure? I think is the download filesize. I think that Microsoft want to artificially top that download, maybe to stop people from serving whole full AAA games as DLC. Because Microsoft pay for the bandwith, and probably Microsoft is in bed with people that don’t like DLC’s.
But I could be wrong.

05/06/2009 at 12:02 Daniel Rivas says:

@The Sombrero Kid:

if the scripting is anything like left 4 deads then it could be done in under a week by a bunch of amateurs

Ehm, what?

Damn it, I should be learning the cosine rule.

05/06/2009 at 12:17 Boo Hoo Hoo says:

Honestly, how thick do you have to be not to understand by now that Valve is not abandoning Left 4 Dead?

Anyone here who doesn’t understand that in a constantly changing business enviroment with many variables not all promises can be kept doesn’t understand the first thing about business and should just go cry out all their “But you promised!” tears now.

05/06/2009 at 12:25 Tei says:

I am against the release of games in XMax. It may make sense for the publishers, because there are more buyers out here, so more sales. But for “hardcore” people is a pain. We, the hardcore, can buy 1 game ever 2 months, maybe every 3 or 1 (based on our budget). If the publishers release 20 games in one month (December), we want to buy 20 games, but we have to skip 19 of these good games.

These damn casuals!.. why these people buy in masses in december? distort the market!. Withouth these casuals, L4D and Dragon Age would have been release already, probably. And Dragon Age will be release wen enough Quick Time Events and unnecessary menu and unskippable videos are added.

@ Malagete “You will hear voice acting, and the southern accents with mannerisms.”. But how useful is a localism like that thing, on a game that will ship worldwide. Will the game been localized here in spain so the characters have a andaluz accent? You probably don’t know what is a andaluz, and I don’t know what is a “southern usa” guy. Are we making games for USA only now?. Maybe this new setting is not as good as the other one. As the original characters are universal, but if this one are based on USA localism, the “point” of these characters will be “lost in translation”.

05/06/2009 at 12:38 Daniel Rivas says:

@Tei:

Comparing an andalucian accent to a southern USA accent isn’t helpful. An andaluz accent and setting has completely different connotations, and I don’t expect the spanish language version of this game to feature flamenco zombies.

Also, in left4dead, the characters had more northern accents. This is more universal?

05/06/2009 at 14:01 Jonny says:

L4D2 will not flop.

05/06/2009 at 15:15 Malagate says:

@T.S.K., I didn’t say it took a long time to make, I said it was not easy to make it good ;) the fact that it’s good shows that they worked hard to make a good job of it. Time taken is meaningless, just because one can make something good in a short time doesn’t mean it’s worth less than something that took a long time to make, i.e. Daikatana; Duke Nukem Forever.

05/06/2009 at 15:57 Markoff Chaney says:

Lots of planets have a North.

05/06/2009 at 16:35 Tei says:

humm….

05/06/2009 at 17:01 Jim the Bean says:

Daddy Valve subsidized a Barbie-bike every year for your birthdays and gave you tassels for Christmas, did he? Last Christmas daddy didn’t get you tassels so you’re going to bitch about your next bike?

Poor, poor babies. :( Your biggest problem is that Valve has been too nice. They should have been charging a token fee for half of their DLC, and now you’re just plain spoiled.

A full sequel is more preferable to DLC that lets Zoey throw flammable teddy bears on the carnival map, or whatever small incremental crap they put in.

Ignore them Valve–they’re all the rage-quitters anyway.

05/06/2009 at 18:16 Seth says:

Tei: making the game take place in a locale with a specific culture is an artistic choice. The last thing they should do is make the game more generic because some people won’t “get it.” If anything you should look forward to the chance to experience something new rather than complain.

05/06/2009 at 20:13 Nutterguy says:

Otters are ACE!!

Also it would be super super savage if L4D2 was maybe released with HL Ep.3 and I don’t know something else in the next Orange (or what ever colour is next) box!

That would be as ace as a bucket load of otters!!!

05/06/2009 at 20:42 Telos says:

I read the first 75% of this long comment list and didn’t see this mentioned.

L4D2 craps on any one who spent time growing the community around L4D1. By this I mean people who paid for servers, people who played on L4D competition ladders and people who spent time modding the game. (16 man L4D is pretty fun :) ) I’ve paid for a server since day 1 so that my fiends and I would have a reliable place to play and from that grew a TWL team. We’ve put time and money into a game that is soon going to be obsolete because no one is going to buy L4D1 when L4D2 which actually seems like a complete game is sitting there beside it. L4D competition is just now gaining speed and I fear this announcement may stifle that effort.

L4D2 Looks like a more complete game, (this doesn’t mean they shouldn’t release DLC for it along the way to convince new blood to join in like TF2) and is probably worth the $50 price tag, much more so than L4D1. L4D1 came with promises that have been left unfulfilled and this “sequel” renders any effort to grow a community around the original seem worthless.

I might as well drop from the TWL ladder in L4D1 and just wait til 2 comes out at this point. I’ll take my server with me ( no not really I like the game and want to keep supporting it in hopes that the “wait and see” pays off). If enough server admins move on to L4D2 the first one will completely die off. I know I won’t pay for two servers for the same game.

I have high hopes that this will be made right in the coming months. In the podcast it was mentioned that people who buy L4D2 will get L4D1 content. This will help keep L4D1 alive but at the same time these people pay $50 and get both so why shouldn’t L4D1 owners at least get L4D2 at a discount. (They may no pricing structure has been announced).

Having a single server support both games would also do a lot to keep the community together.

People telling those of us with some concerns to shut up and sit down does no good. Now is the perfect time to clearly voice concerns in hopes that they will be addressed for everyone.

All my hopes for the “wait and see” end up with it being two identical games with slightly different content both unfortunately being full price game when really the first, by valves own admissions, isn’t as complete as the second.

(This sounds a lot like pokemon red and blue. Blue FTW!)

Like many I am glad to see a sequel coming because it looks awesome but upset that promises made pertaining to the original appear to have been left by the wayside. “wait and see” isn’t enough to quench my fears just yet but I do think Valve will make this right for the most part.

06/06/2009 at 01:05 Melf_Himself says:

Telos, did you buy a life-time server or do you pay a monthly fee? Do you know that L4D1 maps are going to be compatible with L4D2? Is the ladder you play on endless or does it have seasons? (I am assuming it has seasons)… After answering those questions, please explain how your time/money was wasted?

Gregory, I’m not sure how you think you can tell anything about a game’s gameplay from watching Trailers.

06/06/2009 at 06:54 Psychopomp says:

Moved to forums, by myself, for continued discussion.

07/06/2009 at 05:36 Halcyon says:

I genuinely feel better having read this interview. They made me feel quite foolish for sharpening my pitchfork so quickly. Thanks RPS and Valve, I’ll have a little faith.

07/06/2009 at 16:28 tim7168 says:

I can’t get over this “L4D is a beta” argument, frankly that’s ridiculous.

09/06/2009 at 18:44 yfni^ says:

I just bought this game… after they released the SDK..

Only to find out they are releasing the next game already..
I feel cheated.

09/06/2009 at 21:18 ThirdParity says:

I know this is at the bottom of the list so nobody is going to read it, but I want to get it off my chest.

I am dissapointed L4D is seemingly getting ‘left for dead’, but we don’t know that. L4D and L4D2 could have more to do with each other than you might assume, because that’s all it is, an assumption. It’s a guess.

Also, L4D2 has a lot of content that isn’t just being added into the game like TF2 does. They really don’t reinvent the game with TF2 (though sometimes it reinvents the game balance, not the same thing), they add new weapons and maps, that’s something anyone could do with modding. What are they adding with L4D2?

1) Zombies get limbs shot off rather than one universal life bar: This fundamentally changes the game and to repatch and change L4D 1 might be too difficult to do on it’s own.
2) There will be new generic zombies: Also changes the way the game works, spawning, how levels are designed, it could change it in ways we can’t even think about because we haven’t played with it or seen it behind the scenes.
3) Melee weapons: We didn’t have any before, so the standard Pistol/Weapon/Pills/HealthPack might be different. 5th slot? replaces your weapon slot? Will it have fuel/durability or will it run forever? This will also change the gameplay and if they just added it into L4D1, it might unbalance the game completely and require a reworking of maps, where equipment spawns, where enemies spawn, etc.
4) New maps: they take a lot more effort to design than TF2 ones, that’s for sure. TF2 maps could be skinless and it would function the same. There’s no interactivity with the environment, there’s no lightning issues, there’s no destructible terrain or objects. L4D maps have a ton of things to interact with, scripted events, have to worry about game balance in VS, objects to interact with, boarded up walls to break, doors to demolish, clipping issues that don’t exist with TF2 (such as the smoker tongue), and to worry about that with 5 maps rather than 1, and each map being a lot bigger than a single TF2 map.

That said, I hope L4D2 and L4D will not be two separate entities but more like a continuation. I hope they work and play well together and you can pick and choose what characters you want per level and what weapons you can gain access to in the lobby. I hope they don’t abandon L4D and continue to release new content.

I hate the 360 model of business with DLC and I hope that it’s not affecting their decisions on how to do this. I will wait and hear what Valve has to say because they have not let me down yet.

When portal was released, “It’s so short!”
When TF2 was announced, “It’s cartoony!”
When steam was announced, “I have to play online?”

While those are real concerns, yes Portal was short, yes TF2 is cartoony, yes Steam makes you play online, but the benefits to me are worth it. Steam lets me have access to games that I own in case I lose a CD key or lose the CD, it organizes and makes matchmaking and communicating with friends much easier, able to run Steam to chat with gaming friends rather than alt-tabbing or installing a separate program on the side. Portal is still hailed as one of the best games of (that) year, TF2 is a great game and a different kind of game than L4D. Similarities: Valve, online, multiplayer, that’s about where it stops.

10/06/2009 at 20:19 Gregory Donner says:

@Melf_Himself: probably because I’ve played the original, and I fail to understand how what I see that’s familiar–and hasn’t changed–differs from more of the same. Go figure. How many hours of the same thing do I need to watch to realize that it’s not new? Geez…YouTube hasn’t lied to me yet for any game I’ve played. I bought Crysis and Crysis Wars based on what I saw on YouTube, and it gave an excellent feel for the gameplay.

13/06/2009 at 03:24 Hyper says:

The one group of people that seems to be missing in most of the comments on the boycott group site and the articles on the web are the server owners.

As a server owner, I support L4D by paying for 4 West Coast servers out of my own pocket that have had in total roughly 17000 players since they were started 4 months ago. As well, I work for a server company that provides numerous servers for TF2, L4D, CS:S and other Valve games.

One disturbing trend I have seen is the daily cancellation of L4D servers. Since the ‘Survival Pack’ the company I work for has seen a 70% increase in server cancellations of servers that service Central North America and the West Coast. That number increases daily.

The biggest drop was right after the ‘Survival Pack’ when people began to realize how minor the changes actually were. Most people played Survival mode until they got the achievements and then moved back to Co-op or Versus. We lost 45% of the servers within days of that release.

The second spike was right after the news about L4D2. That was about 20% of the servers. The other 5% has been just due to attrition since the DLC was released.

Now, obviously there have been new servers started, but the total loss of server coverage totals about 70% in the company I work for, and I work for a shitty little hole in the wall no one even knows about. In actual numbers that means about 110 servers are now shut down in the past couple months with my employer alone. I wonder how this has affected Gameservers or Darkstar.

I should mention that most of the people canceling servers have been very vocal about why they’re canceling them, and I agree with the majority of their reasons, especially about the release of L4D2.

So, I pose this question to you, do you think splitting the games community base will increase or decrease the number of servers for both games?

Secondly, do you think server owners that are canceling their servers will be rushing out to start a L4D2 server after they feel that they’ve been burned by Valve?

The answers are pretty obvious.

All you flame-baiters screaming about the boycott group being a bunch of whining retards might want to think about that, because without the server owners, you’d have no where to play either game.

As for myself, I don’t have any choice but to ‘get’ the game since it’s purchased for me by my employer for troubleshooting and testing. However, I’ll be shutting down my servers the day L4D2 is released unless both games can be serviced by a single server and other significant issues about the release of L4D2 are satisfactorily dealt with by Valve.

15/06/2009 at 23:43 PHeMoX says:

“Secondly, do you think server owners that are canceling their servers will be rushing out to start a L4D2 server after they feel that they’ve been burned by Valve?

The answers are pretty obvious.”

You are dead wrong there, they will run to Left 4 Dead, as that has been exactly what happened after L4D 1, Team Fortress 2 even back with Counter-Strike Condition Zero.

Apparently not that many server owners dislike Valve and they really can get away with LOTS AND LOTS.

19/06/2009 at 01:38 Akane says:

Doesn’t matter anymore. The modders are planning to port L4D2 to L4D *without* the backwoods hick survivors and crap hillbilly music.

Sounds good to me.

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=898853

24/07/2009 at 23:41 Zen Zombie says:

I just looked at my gamer stats for l4d.
Total Playtime:185h 38m 57s Past 2 weeks:12h 54m

Lets say just for shits and giggles, we just go off of my past 2 weeks. (that 12 hours was done in 2 sittings by the way.) Average cost of a movie ticket: 10$ Cost of popcorn for a large tub? Oh look, 6 dollars (rip off), price for a large drink? 4 dollars. (wtf right?) HOW LONG IS THAT MOVIE? 3 hours. I just payed 20 bucks…for a 3 hour experiance. ok so lets do some quick math. I played 12 hours this week. Divide that by 3. OMG WE HAVE 4. Ok so 4 times the cost of a movie by yourself…80$. 80 dollars, no tax, no 4.99 bs. K?

Following me so far?

Game time for a single session of l4d? 50 bucks. JUST FOR SHITS AND GIGGLES, lets say I bought it JUST for the one game play of 12 hours. Right off the bat we are 30 bucks under. I could do more math, but how much popcorn and soda could I buy at a discount store like winco foods or costco with 30 bucks? I can guarentee that it is more than a 24oz soft drink and a bucket of popcorn.
Lets go on shall we.
I just looked at Batman the dark knight on Amazon, one of the cheaper places to get things and I saw one for 21 dollars.
Each time I play this move in my (horrible expesnive bluray player name *HERE*) it is the same movie. Every time. No matter what.
Every time I play L4D, it is close, so I can get into a groove, but everytime the level changes, as do the situations, the enemy spawns, and even who I am playing with and their personalities. I can guarentee that I won’t get the replayability at release of a brand new 60 dollar blu ray disk as a 50 dollar game.
EVEN if they don’t do ANYTHING more on l4d1, you can get more replayability out of it than any 60 dollar movie, 10 dollar movie ticket which is a one time go jacked up price, or normal platform game with a “great” story. Even MGS4, which I have played twice through, only gives me 32 total hours, and doesn’t have dynamic gameplay, nor does it have a integrated mutiplayer aspect that forces me to constantly change.

So next time you are thinking “50 bucks for a brand new game and hundreds of hours of high quality gameplay and co op experiance? INSANE” Compare it to the alternatives in the world.

Zen Zombie. That is my steam account, feel free to find me on l4d almost every night that I can. Currently my name is clang*`

See ya when Zday hits.

11/11/2009 at 00:26 Hotpockets0 says:

I like how it says Wot You want to say: Lol anyway i agree tombraiderguy like they should join up together and you would have 2 things 8 player co-op and people would have a choice like if your the last one to join a game so your forced to be someone you dont want to be this way you have a choice on who to be. Also I think that there should be a new boss which I believe there is (unless thats supposed to be the jockey) it should be something like a spawnable witch to play as the witch u must spawn like 10 yards away from the survivors and then spawn her there so they have to go past her and may make it harder this way there is more stratagy for the survivors instead of run and shoot.