"But they were successful, and while they may have been helped along by the alignment of the stars and a healthy smattering of luck, if it happened once it can happen again. I don't expect game studios will begin flying fans all over the countryside on a regular basis, but I do think that closer attention will be paid when squeaky wheels start demanding grease. And for that, no matter what we may think of the boycotters or their motives, we owe these guys a thanks."
This is the second article which attempts to prove that the L4D2 boycott provided any lasting result ... and the second article to provide zero proof.
The L4D2 boycott was, ultimately, unsuccessful. To wit:
(1) Valve has not changed the L4D2 release date at all.
(2) Valve released new content for L4D1 on their own schedule, on their own terms. There is no proof that the boycott accelerated this release schedule in any way.
(3) Previous to the boycott, Valve Software already had a reputation for being a forward-speaking company with DLC-friendly policies. After the boycott was started, nothing changed.
(3a) Valve's open discussion policy on their most anticipated game release, "Half Life 2: Episode 3", has not increased at all, and in fact continues to be drowned out by TF2 and L4D publicity releases. The boycott was ultimately ineffective at anything involving HL2:E3.
Andy Chalk can continue to claim this boycott was a "good" thing, but all he's proved is that it grew publicity of a wide-release gaming product, which then didn't change anything they were already doing, and now they're set for big sales numbers. If anything, Mr. Chalk has proved that a gaming boycott is extremely ineffective at changing anything a large gaming company will do, and that the ripple effect of internet noise simply grows publicity, so the company should keep doing things as they are doing them.
The L4D2 boycott is now a joke that will be cited when future boycotts try to influence game publishers.
This is the second article which attempts to prove that the L4D2 boycott provided any lasting result ... and the second article to provide zero proof.
The L4D2 boycott was, ultimately, unsuccessful. To wit:
(1) Valve has not changed the L4D2 release date at all.
(2) Valve released new content for L4D1 on their own schedule, on their own terms. There is no proof that the boycott accelerated this release schedule in any way.
(3) Previous to the boycott, Valve Software already had a reputation for being a forward-speaking company with DLC-friendly policies. After the boycott was started, nothing changed.
(3a) Valve's open discussion policy on their most anticipated game release, "Half Life 2: Episode 3", has not increased at all, and in fact continues to be drowned out by TF2 and L4D publicity releases. The boycott was ultimately ineffective at anything involving HL2:E3.
Andy Chalk can continue to claim this boycott was a "good" thing, but all he's proved is that it grew publicity of a wide-release gaming product, which then didn't change anything they were already doing, and now they're set for big sales numbers. If anything, Mr. Chalk has proved that a gaming boycott is extremely ineffective at changing anything a large gaming company will do, and that the ripple effect of internet noise simply grows publicity, so the company should keep doing things as they are doing them.
The L4D2 boycott is now a joke that will be cited when future boycotts try to influence game publishers.