There has been, it seems, something of a fuss over the announcement from Valve that they’re releasing a sequel to Left 4 Dead this November. The main point of contention has been that many were expecting more new content to be added to the original game, rather than appearing in the form of a full price sequel. This was underlined when an article on VideoGamer was rediscovered in which Valve boss Gabe Newell stated, “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.”
We spoke to Valve’s VP of marketing, Doug Lombardi, to ask him about the player response. He talks to us about the reasons why L4D2 is a full sequel, why gamers should wait to find out more about the game before making up their minds, and how there are definitely still plans for the original Left 4 Dead.
RPS: The main point of contention has been that a while back there was a statement from Gabe Newell given to VideoGamer in which he said there were plans to add more characters, unlockables, weapons and achievements to the original Left 4 Dead.
Doug Lombardi: So, we’ve made a number of releases on the PC, and we made a pretty big release on the 360 in terms of the DLC, and we were able to get out for free which I thought would pretty cool, and it was not an easy thing to pull off. Beyond that, we plan to continue updating Left 4 Dead. We’re not done with that title, it’s not over. The SDK stuff just came out. I think we mentioned to RPS that if you’re using the SDK and making maps for it, those will work for L4D2 as well. We are trying to keep the community together – we’re going to be doing more stuff about keeping the community together as we get closer to launch.
I think the short answer is: trust us a little bit. We’ve been pretty good over the years, even with L4D going back just a few months, about supporting games post-launch. Gabe’s always talking about providing entertainment as a service – it’s not about making a game any more. That’s one point of it.
The other point is, we didn’t sit down and say, “We need to ship a sequel next for next Christmas, what features do we need?” That wasn’t the way it happened, that’s not the way Valve works. What did happen was, the team sat down and said, “We’ve got a bunch of ideas of stuff we want to do.” People were really fired up when the game was finished, and there was a lot of feedback and ideas that came from watching people play – on the scale of millions of people, as opposed to hundreds of people that we went through during the playtesting sessions. So we put a lot of those things on the board and said, “What can we do quickly? What’s going to take more time? What’s the best way to get stuff out to customers?” And part of that plan ended up with L4D2, with things like changing the way the finales worked, introducing some new Survivors, giving new dialogue, telling more about the story, introducing new Specials. We said, “Wow, that makes for a nice sequel.” And then there was the stuff in the Survival Pack which makes for a nice DLC. And what we’d like to do is release a great game, provide lots of entertainment-as-a-service type of features, whether they’re technical updates or whether it’s the Survival Pack, and then also deliver more.
RPS: So how did the sequel come about?
DL: One of the biggest pieces of feedback we got after the game came out, and even after the Survival Pack, was: this is all really great, I loved it, but I want a bunch more campaigns, I want more content. In a sense, L4D2 is a response to what players were asking for after the first one shipped. That’s really how it came about. I think if folks spot us a bit more time, they may see where we’re going with all this. The more they learn about how much there is in L4D2… I mean, twenty new weapons isn’t DLC! Three new Specials, and twenty weapons, and five new campaigns: that starts to feel like a sequel. I think as more gets unveiled as we go from E3 to Comic Con and PAX, and show the game in places where the public can play, and then when the demo comes out a couple of weeks before launch, I think people will get where we’re going, and hopefully don’t think that we’ve turned into some sort of opportunist cow milkers.
RPS: Do you wonder whether an aspect of it is that it’s been so quick? Do you think if you’d waited another six or eight months, people might have responded better?
DL: Maybe, maybe. But two years from now though, would you look back and say that was better? Like I say, give it some time: quick decisions aren’t usually the best ones. I would say that may have been part of it, people may have felt differently about it had it taken longer to produce it. The other thing is, it’s something new for Valve. Valve doesn’t have a reputation for shipping quick sequels! So it’s something different. We had similar reactions when we announced The Orange Box. There were a lot of people who thought, “It’s not going to be worth fifty dollars, all these games are really tiny,” and then by the time the game came out the review said, “The best value in gaming.” Again, I would say, let us tell more of the story before people make their final judgement. And then if they say we’re f’d, then that’s fair. [laughs]
RPS: Do you think part of the problem might have been that the Survival Pack felt like it was finishing the first game. When there were two versus campaigns that weren’t in there, it might have felt like the Survival Pack completed the game rather than added to it.
DL: Maybe. It’s hard to say, I haven’t sat down and had a calm, reasonable dialogue with a group of people that have had [this week's] reaction yet. I’ve been busy keeping it a secret, then we just announced it a couple of days ago. I also want to get more informations, I want to hear more of what their story is and what they’re reacting to, so I can understand it better, and I’m sure Gabe feels the same way. We’ll see what is the genesis of why folks are having this reaction to it. And that [the Survival Pack] might have been part of it as well, but it’s definitely not the case that we’re closing the book on L4D and saying, “Next time you get anything it’s when the sequel comes out.”
RPS: So is there any chance of new content like new maps and new campaigns in the original L4D?
DL: Yeah, there’s certainly a chance of that, and we’re not announcing any of the specifics of that today. Like I say, stay tuned, there’s more coming, there’s more information we’re going to talk about for the sequel, there’s more content coming for Left 4 Dead in the fairly near term, that I think will sort of add to this picture and hopefully change some people’s opinions of what’s happening right now.
Thanks to Doug Lombardi for taking time out of a crazed E3 schedule to talk to us. The RPS hivemind realises people are very passionate about this subject, but remains confident that the discussion below will not make us frown.
Related Stories:
It’s clearly a deceptive marketing practice, specifically a bait-and-switch scheme. Both of which are illegal and actionable.
Life is built on assumptions, Daniel — saying “you should never make assumptions” is totally inane. Valve say that there will be ongoing support in the form of new content for a game, they have a track record of being good on their word content-wise, with TF2, and show good will with their ongoing support for their older games (frequent small fixes via Steam, etc), so the rational customer weighs up a promise from a reputable vendor with a rational interest in not lying to their customers, against what’s already in the product as it’s released, and maybe thinks to himself, “okay, this is a good foundation for a game, I wouldn’t go so far as to pay full price for what’s here, but Valve wouldn’t be so foolish as to bullshit me about the DLC, because,” — and this is the important bit, Daniel — “it would ultimately be against their interest, since I wouldn’t trust a pricetag from Valve ever again if they did.” You’re acting like the customer was the irrational one in this transaction — quite the contrary.
I expect a reply to that might be, “Yeah, well they SAY they don’t trust Valve anymore, but they’ll come crawling back…” — yeah, they might still have a go at Valve games after that… They just might not pay for them anymore…
Oh yeah, the ole “bait and switch”, I forgot there was a name for it; joe’s right. And he said it so much quicker than me!
L4D1 for $50 was a stretch, no way I’m paying $50 for L4D2 which is just an expansion pack with no new game mechanics.
@Crispy: I honestly don’t think that the Xbox360’s 512mb of RAM have anything to do with this at all.
I think there’s a big point Valve are missing here (and sorry I’ve not read 300 comments but I hope someone has already mentioned it); we don’t mind paying for more content, but bringing out a sequel makes the current L4D that we have redundant. People will stop playing it and so four decent campaigns and 4 fairly likeable characters are consigned to the dustbin. Just tell us that either servers will be backwards compatible, or the old maps will ship with the new game, or something like that and we’ll be happy. If that isn’t the case then it is too soon for a sequel – you wouldn’t see an MMO releasing a sequel within a year, they’d release a big paid expansion pack because there isn’t the need for a whole new game and they don’t want to waste what they already have.
If you insist on making it a non-compatible sequel then at least add a “join as group” option to random online game search.
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.
The problem is that L4D2 is what L4D should have been. I love valve, but L4D was the first valve game i was semi-disappointed in. Everybody says “20 maps” but it’s not, it’s 4 maps with loading points and the Last Stand now. You move through the maps like a single player game, not a multiplayer game, and so you need more content. Also, there are only 5 primary guns, which is pretty small when you have 4 characters. With more guns it would feel like players were more unique and individualy useful if they have their own gun. With upgraded guns, at least 2 people need the exact same gun. If L4D2 was $20 payed DLC, i personally would be overjoyed and be anticipating it hotly. With a new game I feel cheated for paying $50 at launch for something that i felt had so much potential, but was just had too little to it. Even though they say there will be more L4D content, and i don’t doubt that, who really cares? It’s obsolete. Does anybody really play Gears 1 multi anymore? No. The problem is I DID trust them when L4D came out, and I was let down.
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.
Comments thread is too fuckin’ long eh. Don’t you have pagination at RPS?
“I wish you legions of adoring fans”
– Ancient Chinese curse.
@JonFitt
Heh, very apt.
edit: I just googled it and apparently you are the only person in the world to have ever uttered those words in that order, but it would have made a nice anicient Chinese curse nonetheless ;)
DL: Maybe, maybe.
Did anyone else read this in the Heavy’s voice?
Why all the comparisons with TF2 anyway?
One unusual game has managed to inflate people’s expectations way too far.
The more established rules of commerce still apply – if you are prepared to pay the asking price for the game this company puts out, then do. If not, then don’t.
You have no right to whine in the meantime.
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
DB – I just don’t understand why you would take against Valve in this way because they want to release a sequel to a popular game?
TF2 might have had a lot of content released for free but it is exceptional, a very different game and as such hardly a fair benchmark.
Some people feel L4D was fine content-wise, some people felt it was a little light.
How does them wanting to do a sequel give you any justification at all in turning on a developer with a longstanding record in makingbrilliant games.
It just seems like a petulant and, frankly, odd attitude to take.
There is some nonsense in this thread which is making my nonsens-o-meter go off the scale.
Jesus.
game development isn’t just the more weapons the better, the more maps the better, the more animations the better, the longer the campaign the better…. and yes, that’s all just common sense. reconsider what you’ve heard in the game commentary along with blogs, articles, etc. they iterate a LOT. another goal is replayability. it just so happens that the new l4d has all of those things i’ve just listed, plus things that valve chose not to spoil. it’s definitely worth buying, and nothing to complain about. hands down.
although i would say they’ve done an excellent job in all their other games and will continue to do so (if you’re reading this, or have at least payed and played the games hours on end, you can’t deny this), it’s all just opinion…
it’s all about making an excellent game. that’s the bottom line.
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.
What on earth has happened to the audience of RPS? Go back to your PC closets people! I want intelligent reasoned comments again.
People get so hysterical so easily. It’s Valve! They make awesome games! Really really awesome games! Making more games is in no way a betrayal of games they have already made and it’s ridiculous to think they don’t care about their current games. Left 4 dead was totally worth it’s launch price. Some people clearly like TF2 better, well that’s fine, there’s plenty of that to go around.
I guess the comments indicate that RPS really is the most important PC games site now.
I empathise with Valve, everyone know more then half of all users (of any service) are morons, but we still need to deal with them.
actually I now suspect that some of these comments are actually just people trolling, or marketing people from elsewhere.
TheApologist: “You have no right to whine in the meantime.”
actually, people DO have the right to whine.
Also, I don’t get your point. are you arguing that people shouldn’t be arguing about this on the internet, by posting comments on the internet?
Get over it. People discuss things on the internet. They even discuss things that some people think are not worth arguing about.
I’m very interested in the inclusion of more story!
Valve say “so, we screwed you on L4D. But trust us! We won’t do it again!!!”
And this is supposed to be reassuring. Riiiight. Aside from the fact that he didn’t address any of the concerns about Gabe’s lies, the fact that they’re dressing an expansion up as a new game, or the inevitable fragmentation of the player base and mod scene? Pathetic.
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.
Those defending this decision are missing the main gripe people have with this – The community. A turn around sequel in a year does NOT = creating a community, which is what I know alot (if not most) people who bought L4D felt they were getting in the same vein as CS:S and TF2.
‘But the story..’ is the biggest load of tosh for an argument, btw. WHAT story? The VERY loose story that held the campaign together was just nostalgic zombie-flick romp. It was awesome, but it was very easy to mistake for three seperate zombie films – which is great, but it was NOT some precious narrative that could not be broken.
Would everyone have been really jarred if suddenly map five took place on a space station? No, we would have fucking loved it – yet more zombie horror fodder. It doesn’t have to make sense, it never did. This is a co-op multiplayer game. Not a sodding biopic.
It should have been an expansion, by all means a paid for one. But this is just throwing the first game out and the community with it. Good luck convincing those friends that you did the four-pack deal with to do it all over again this soon.
Just to clarify, it doesn’t matter if LFd2 is even more awesome. It fractured a community that wanted to build. IF they released lfd3 in another six months would that be cool too if it was ‘more awesome’? Sure for a standard single player game. Not for this.
Man, the internet is rubbish at reserving judgement!
@Meat Circus
I understand (and to some degree share) your frustration with the L4D situation, but don’t take it out on RPS. John asked the right questions, Doug simply chose not to answer them in any concrete way. It’s not in RPS’s interest as journalists to antagonize Valve (or any developer), but I don’t see any sign that John went out of his way to pamper them either. Keep the frustration aimed where it belongs.
Also: if Lombardi accepts that L4D2 has gone down like a bucket of cold sick, why hasn’t he tried to ask why?
Doug lombardi has been the ultimate Tool for Valve.
When Half life 2 was experiencing untold amounts of delay he fed us marketing crap with promises of dates that weren’t delivered.
He fed us the episodic content that would be released every 6 months.. and then a year and then god knows how long now.
I treat everything this marketing troll has to say like I treat a Car Salesman. The only guy at Valve I listen to is Gabe. But $ talks. And let’s face it Steam and Valve are starting to really roll in the dough and power of distrubtion.
When was the last time they released new CSS maps? Hl2 multiplayer maps? get over it. Valve is slowly turning into the next Generation of EA. Plan on seeing franchise titles updated for $50 a year. Maybe you’ll get a free level or playability patch during the run up to the sequel of the sequel. But don’t plan on the good old days of buying a title that gets supported for 4+ years. Not going to happen anymore. Because why support a $19 title when you can force your lemmings onto a $59 title with the updates the last one shoulda coulda had.
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…”
Alec Meer -
“I’d imagine that, after all this outrage, it seems inevitable there’ll be a pretty beefy L4D1 update soon-ish, and some manner of integration between the two games. It would be lovely if people would stop angrily presuming there won’t be. Perhaps there won’t, but you simply do not know that yet.”
I completely agree. We don’t know for sure. But here’s the thing: Valve won’t commit to even ONE full campaign six months after the game’s release. They wont’ even commit to such a thing with an indefinite “when it’s done’ release date.
To me, that makes the prospect of a full, studio-developed (rather than community-made) campaign prior to the release of L4D2 seem really, really unlikely.
But I have no doubt they’ll release a couple of cool little things.
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!
I think they would make everyone happy if they just sold L4D2 at a discounted price for L4D owners (at least on Steam).
If there’s any law which forbids that sort of thing, they could sell L4D2 as an expansion to L4D. So new players must buy the L4D + L4D2 pack in order to play, and they get their full $49 from those new customers, while charging, say, $25 for the expansion.
Seems fair to me and that’s about the only way I’d consider buying it.
@ 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.
Quite agree. I had no idea where the outrage came from. I’m still a very happy man.
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.
I disagree with this, having watched a few gameplay videos and thought about what they’ve done. See, what they have made here is 5 campaigns, with a whole new cast, in very different locations, with the new weapons and new special and common infected, also some new stuff regarding body deformation (and probably a whole lot of other engine tweaks).
Now, if it was just some new guns and special infected, and maybe a single campaign, then that would definately be DLC or an expansion in my eyes, but it’s plain to see this is a lot more than that. Most expansions and DLC I’ve seen is adding that little bit extra to a game, like an extra unit, army and campaign in a RTS expansion, or horse armour as per some DLC.
I’ve never heard of an expansion or DLC that’s bigger than the original game it’s based on, set in a completely different setting with completely different characters and with some big gameplay changes. It’s really a lot of stuff compared to pretty much every other expansion or DLC I can think of, unless you can enlighten me as to an expansion which actually was bigger than the game it is an expansion to, yet still priced as an expasion?
@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.
@Paul Morel – fine people have a right to complain, but they have no reason.
@Boo Hoo Hoo – have to agree. People expect 100% loyalty from Valve, and loyalty like it is a comrade in arms not a business, and expect that loyalty to be expressed with free content to support their community. They then behave like the most fickle of consumers in a free market, and nothing like a community, and show Valve no loyalty whatsoever in return.
This trust and loyalty held by some commenters talking about ‘community’ here apears to be so tenuous they won’t even ‘wait and see’.
Baffling.
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?
The Sombrero Kid: You think making new real – as opposed to multiplayer, non-scripted, non-detailed – levels with new art assets is no work?
KG
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?
@TheSombreroKid, I think you’re rather downplaying the difficulty of the other aspect of making a game, especially if you think half decent writing and voice acting doesn’t take much work to do (to implement in the engine, pretty easy, to get it done to a high level though…also what KG said in the time it took me to umm and ahh and avoid work to write this).
I don’t see why the effort of polishing up, improving and expanding upon features and gameplay of a previous game should be seen as less valued than the effort of making a new game, it’s still hard work and it’s still creating a new experience (yes, similar to the first, but plenty different as well, so new).
TheApologist: Your name is very, very apt.
You scoff at the notion of ‘loyalty’ in business dealings? Customer loyalty is something businesses treasure like money itself. Did you seriously need me to tell you that?
Context missing (you can reacquire it by clicking the second link in John’s post). Keeping your promises is rational, and in your own interest — it shows that you are trustworthy. People expected that rational self-interest from Valve, because they assume Valve is a professional company run by grownups who can understand why maintaining trust would be useful to their business. Again, customer loyalty is not a bauble to be tossed aside, it’s a precious business asset (a thousand times moreso in an industry utterly vulnerable to piracy). Keep promises, you keep people’s trust. Break promises, you break their trust. Break their trust, you lose their custom — and the customer doesn’t even give a shit about leaving, because if he gets really burningly curious about your products again, he can just pirate them and have a look, rather than shelling out!
Fickleness? How do you think Valve are acting in your conception of them as laughingly throwing away the trust of their customers? You don’t think gleeful abandonment of one of their greatest assets would be a little ‘fickle’?
Meaningless.
It takes two to tango!
L4D2: Valve’s first genuine flop?
Perhaps it’s a lesson Lombardi and other Valve gobshites will have to learn the hard way.
Meat: Even if it doesn’t sell to the PC, it’s going to sell enormously.
KG
James T is right on the money, although I’d argue you should never give your trust to an entity whose sole goal is to take your money.
Zaij: That’s certainly the intuitive response, but if you’ve ever hopped in a taxi, that’s what you’ve done!
If Lombardi and Gabe are happy being a shovelware-to-consoletards developer, then so be it.
@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.