Valve: DLC Titles Just Placeholders

[Logan Westbrook]

Valve: DLC Titles Just Placeholders

Don't get your hopes up for the 'Miracle' and 'Apocalyptic' DLC packs for Left 4 Dead 2, they were only included to make Microsoft happy.

When gamers took a peak at the inner workings of the Left 4 Dead 2 demo [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/95830-Fans-Find-Left-4-Dead-2-DLC-Hints-in-Demo-Code] they found something very interesting, namely code for kicking people from an Xbox Live session if they didn't have the right DLC packs, leading us all to believe that Valve had some DLC planned, and perhaps even ready to go.

Unfortunately, Valve's Chet Faliszek has rather spoiled that idea by revealing that the names are just placeholders put in for Microsoft testing.

"If you're reading in the forums and you're reading about the "Miracle" DLC or whatever, that's test code," said Faliszek. "To get tested through Microsoft certification, we had to do test scenarios with DLC. We haven't actually come out internally with what we're going to do yet."

Source: VG247 [http://www.vg247.com/2009/10/31/l4d2-miracle-pack-and-apocalyptic-pack-are-spaceholder-names-only/]


Permalink

 

[AkJay]

Can i get a better explanation of "Test Code"; I'm rather confused.

 

[Sevre]

This is all the proof I need that Microsoft is evil, wanting a dev to make sure they are prepared to sell more if Microsoft wishes for it to happen. It's kind of silly to think Valve would do DLC anyway, they've always given the post-release content for free through patches.

 

[Woodsey]

leading us all to believe that Valve had some DLC planned, and perhaps even ready to go.

Since when did having DLC ready before a game even goes on sale count as a good thing?!

OT: Oh well, of course they'll have DLC for it (that'll be free as well). Come on, it is Valve; Gods of gaming but victims of a freak accident in which their timeline is ,whilst parallel to our own, about 3 years slower.

 

[Doktor Merkwurdigliebe]

Anyway we all know that there will be DLC eventually.

We haven't actually come out internally with what we're going to do yet

He even confirms it.

 

[The_Prophet]

Microsoft exist to annoy me. Why does everything on XBL have to cost something?Why are they so bureaucratic? Why does Games For Windows suck so much? The list goes on and on.

Because they need more money for their giant ocean of money?

 

[Vault boy Eddie]

Microsoft exist to annoy me. Why does everything on XBL have to cost something?Why are they so bureaucratic? Why does Games For Windows suck so much? The list goes on and on.

Because each exec at Microsoft needs a money vault/pool a la Scrooge McDuck. If you expect them to swim in water then you are SADLY mistaken my friend!

 

[Teh_Doomage]

Just goes to show you that Microsoft requires just about every game to have potential DLC...period.

 

[Paragon Fury]

'Ti better to take the time to be prepared for a later occurance, than to have deal with the problems down the road.

Also, I stil can't believe people think that they don't start working on DLC until after a game is out. Its been siad many times, by many different devs - work on DLC begins before the main game is even finished - otherwise even things as simple as maps for Halo 3 or Operation: Anchorage for Fallout 3 would take another year or so to come out.

 

[Radelaide]

Anyway we all know that there will be DLC eventually.

We haven't actually come out internally with what we're going to do yet

He even confirms it.

Of course there would be DLC. It's expected. I think Valve announced it when they announced the game.

Edit:

Microsoft exist to annoy me. Why does everything on XBL have to cost something?Why are they so bureaucratic? Why does Games For Windows suck so much? The list goes on and on.

They're a company with shareholders? Companies with shareholders live to make them happy so they'll keep buying shares and sell them to other people. It's simple business, not a vendetta against you.

 

[sneakypenguin]

'Ti better to take the time to be prepared for a later occurance, than to have deal with the problems down the road.

Also, I stil can't believe people think that they don't start working on DLC until after a game is out. Its been siad many times, by many different devs - work on DLC begins before the main game is even finished - otherwise even things as simple as maps for Halo 3 or Operation: Anchorage for Fallout 3 would take another year or so to come out.

Exactly, these people who ***** about a company planning/starting/annoucing dlc seem to miss the point that of course they have. It's called planning ahead, every company does it. Car manufactures have the next years model in progress when the make this years. If companies waited till after release to start working on dlc then it would be 6-12 months before any significant work was releasable. I personally love dlc as if I like a game it gives me new incentive to keep playing.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Microsoft exist to annoy me. Why does everything on XBL have to cost something?Why are they so bureaucratic? Why does Games For Windows suck so much? The list goes on and on.

Because each exec at Microsoft needs a money vault/pool a la Scrooge McDuck. If you expect them to swim in water then you are SADLY mistaken my friend!

If you think them having a lot of money is such an evil thing then you shouldn't be buying their products.

 

[Skizle]

Just goes to show you that Microsoft requires just about every game to have potential DLC...period.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. At least you'll know that there will be more to play down the line.

 

[Doug]

Can i get a better explanation of "Test Code"; I'm rather confused.

In order to prove to the Microsoft people that L4D2 could handle any potential DLC, they would have to have put in codes that pretended there was DLC to test for.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Knowing Valve, they'll release DLC with the same names anyway.

 

[Amnestic]

Microsoft exist to annoy me. Why does everything on XBL have to cost something?Why are they so bureaucratic? Why does Games For Windows suck so much? The list goes on and on.

Because each exec at Microsoft needs a money vault/pool a la Scrooge McDuck. If you expect them to swim in water then you are SADLY mistaken my friend!

If you think them having a lot of money is such an evil thing then you shouldn't be buying their products.

Or you should be investing in Microsoft yourself so that you can start swimming in money as well.

 

[Cabisco]

It all sounds like a good idea to me, means when they want to support their product (you know, like valve like to do) it won't go tits up on their loyal fanbase. I really don't see why people have a problem with this, i mean is making sure your product is ready for future changes such a bad thing?