UPDATE: Microsoft Announces Left 4 Dead 2

[Turtleboy1017]

Oh jesus god please PLEASE do not let them introduce these new characters in that new setting... I don't want to be a jerk or anything but they look like stereotypical Louisiana goers. A reverend? The local restraunt owner? Some trucker guy with a fish net cap? Plus the cap just makes me think of those douchebag hick guys from the movie Deliverance.

Keep the old characters, and add in the new elements! I have grown attached to Bill, Zoey, Francis, and Louis, and I am going to go crazy if you just let their story end as it did. Please, PLEASE Valve if your going to introduce new characters at least retain the old ones... I feel as if I don't like these new replacements already.

On the plus side the incendiary ammo is just plain kick ass.

 

[PersianLlama]

Well with Valve development time, we might see it around 2020. ^^

That's exactly what I've been thinking.

No way it's going to finish this year regardless of what they say.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm really hoping that Left 4 dead 2 is really just cover for Episode 3.

If not, why the hell aren't they working on it?

 

[Lord_Panzer]

And thus Valves credibility gets punched in the balls.

Pardon my apparent lack of enlightenment, but how is having the sequel to "2008's top-selling new IP on Xbox 360 and the PC" announced tantamount to being punched in the balls?

I didn't realize Great Success + Capitalizing on Said Success now = punch-in-balls.

 

[Aegwadar]

If this is legit, then either Valve was developing the second one while waiting to release the first, they're working on this instead of the next Half-Life, or I'm a monkey's uncle.

I'm going to go with this.

I'm happy either way; I don't give a hoot about all the other junk... I like L4D; Just hope they still let User Created Maps become playable soon.

 

[iJosh]

This is sudden. But still. Left 4 dead was sick. Best zombie game ever hands down.

Left 4 Dead 2 better not let me down.

 

[Lord_Panzer]

And thus Valves credibility gets punched in the balls.

Pardon my apparent lack of enlightenment, but how is having the sequel to "2008's top-selling new IP on Xbox 360 and the PC" announced tantamount to being punched in the balls?

I didn't realize Great Success + Capitalizing on Said Success now = punch-in-balls.

Releasing a sequel to a critically acclaimed game from the year before....there's ample precedent for that, like, say, Guitar Hero 3, Call of Duty World At War, noticing a pattern?

As a matter of fact, I am. Both games you mentioned had different developers than the games preceding them.

I am, however, a little confused as to why you'd bring such a point up, given how irrelevant it is in this context.

 

[ViolentlyHappy91]

Left 4 Dead 2, released 364 days after Left 4 Dead.....it looks like it was forced, the original characters set well with any player, the new ones look like a joke. Something valve should have done, is keep the original characters and just added more, longer missions in different locations after the rescue failed or something, you know, do something like they did with Half-Life, rather than pull a Farcry 2.

 

[The Bandit]

This is obviously a fake. Everyone knows it takes Valve at least a decade to do anything.

 

[Lord_Panzer]

This is obviously a fake. Everyone knows it takes Valve at least a decade to do anything.

Hahaha, a winner is you. Perhaps Gabe's using a new shampoo that makes him 10x as efficient.

 

[Lord_Panzer]

And thus Valves credibility gets punched in the balls.

Pardon my apparent lack of enlightenment, but how is having the sequel to "2008's top-selling new IP on Xbox 360 and the PC" announced tantamount to being punched in the balls?

I didn't realize Great Success + Capitalizing on Said Success now = punch-in-balls.

Releasing a sequel to a critically acclaimed game from the year before....there's ample precedent for that, like, say, Guitar Hero 3, Call of Duty World At War, noticing a pattern?

As a matter of fact, I am. Both games you mentioned had different developers than the games preceding them.

I am, however, a little confused as to why you'd bring such a point up, given how irrelevant it is in this context.

Do you understand the concept of quick capitalization?

How about we put this friendly little discussion on pause until the game actually sees completion, then we'll sit back and let the cold, hard numbers tell us who's jumping the gun.

 

[Jsnoopy]

/sigh. Its not coming out 'half a year later' its coming out A year later, (Ok so its off by 2 days. Go flame it then.) But listen here - The COD games all have a 1 year gap, except cod 1 to cod 2, but since then its 2005 - Cod 2, 2006, cod 3, 2007, cod 4, and 2008, cod 5...And later in 2009, guess what? Cod 6.

And those were all good games. SO CALM, THE FECK, DOWN. Thank you.

Actually IW took 2 years to develop COD4 and another 2 for MW2. I don't count 3 and 5 as being part of the series because of unbelievably sucky they were. And I've gotten a shitload more of multiplayer out of COD4 then I have out of L4D, mainly because of the large variety of MAPS and gameplay modes.

 

[RagnorakTres]

Y'know, I actually once said "I swear to God, if you send another horde after us, I will beat you with a frying pan!" to the AI Director. Now I can actually do it!

This looks awesome. Having played the first, there are some things that, while they definitely could be fixed with a patch and some DLC for the original, I think need to be done with this game. I don't object to this quick-off-the-mark release schedule because a) Half-Life wasn't very fun for me, so I'm not waiting with bated breath for Episode 3 (though I have some friends who are) and b) a year in-between games is a lot of time in reality. I've coded a flash game in less than five hours and me and a friend once did a full computer version of the same game in three months. Valve has a large team of highly talented coders, so I can definitely see this "yearly release schedule" thing working for them.

 

[karl_eller]

Man, some people are way too touchy about this. Stop thinking "OMG I have to pay for a new game. How dare Valve make me pay for their hard work?!" and start thinking "Yay new, more awesome co-op zombie game!". All the stuff I've see and read of this so far points to it winding up to being even better than the first one. I'll miss the new characters, but it looks like Valve is putting a lot of work into making these ones fairly likeable, including more random conversations/comments, and better story-lines.

As for "OMG I have to pay for it?", well I paid AU$50 for L4D about 3-4 months ago, and I've got ~200 hours on it. That's AU$0.25 (or like US$0.10 for the Americans) per hour! The only game that beats that is TF2 (~320 hours, and I've had that since the Beta). By the time L4D2 comes out, I'll probably have something like 600-odd hours of L4D, so I'll have well and truly had my money's worth out of that game, and I'll have no problem paying another AU$50 (or more like AU$30-40 if I pre-order it) for L4D2.

And to be honest, if I had to choose between L4D2 or HL2 Ep3 coming out this November, I would honestly choose L4D2. This is coming from a guy who's played every single Half Life game made, and I'm still really looking forward to Ep3. But I know I'd play L4D2 a lot more than I'd play Ep3.

Eller

 

[Dys]

Is this even going to be a paid update for PC?
It's the same engine, and we know that xbox 360 struggles with valve DLC, I wouldn't at all be surprised if they went all TF2 on us and released another several games worth of DLC for nothing.

 

[Virgil]

Releasing a sequel to a critically acclaimed game from the year before....there's ample precedent for that, like, say, Guitar Hero 3, Call of Duty World At War, noticing a pattern?

Speaking of Guitar Hero, the real developer (Harmonix) actually seemed to manage just fine. Guitar Hero - November 2005. Guitar Hero II - November 2006. Rock Band - November 2007. Rock Band 2 - September 2008. Plus, The Beatles: Rock Band is right around the corner, and looking quite nice. Not to mention all the DLC they've been churning out weekly for nearly 2 years.

And, despite being complicated games, BioWare managed to release a new Baldur's Gate product every year from 1999 to 2001 (including the two expansions - which were still full retail releases). 2002 saw the first Neverwinter Nights released, with two expansions in 2003.

Rockstar also had back-to-back blockbusters with Grand Theft Auto III (2003) and Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (2004).

Going back a bit, the first 6 Final Fantasy games were also originally released in a span of 8 years (1987-1994), and the first 5 Dragon Quest games in 6 years. Sure, they're smaller games compared to modern releases, but they were also significantly smaller teams at the time.

It's no coincidence that these also happen to be some of the most acclaimed, best-loved franchises in existence. Depending on their size, goals, and organization it's perfectly reasonable for a good developer to be able to maintain high quality yearly releases of games in the same line. You can get a lot done in a year if you have enough hard-working, capable people that really care about the work they do, and the results show.

 

[Joeshie]

I'm sorry Valve, but there is no chance in hell I will be buying what should have been in the first game. Unless it sells for under $20, you can count me out.

 

[thom_cat_]

I have no respect for them any more.
But I'm still buying it

 

[Abedeus]

I don't see why everyone is making such a big deal about this. Yearly sequels used to be the norm. It's kinda weird in that it's Valve doing something normal for a change, but all these suggestions that it "must be a joke" are frankly ridiculous.

Used to be norm? WHEN? Games took years to develop, because there were less gamers than today.

Well, not including every sports series ever, here are some examples:

Rockstar North:

GTA3 (2001)
Vice City (2002)
Manhunt (2003)
San Andreas (2004)

Core Design:

Tomb Raider (1996)
TR2 (1997)
TR3 (1998)
Last Revelation (1999)
Chronicles (2000)

NOT MULTIPLAYER GAMES

It's kind of a big deal, since a lot of people have bought the L4D even recently after the free weekend and price cuts, and now after November the game will be another abandoned title, because a sequel came out.

If you played L4D two hours each day from now until when L4D2 is released, you'd get approximately 350 hours of playtime. If you've been playing it two hours a day since it was released and continue to play it, you'd accumulate almost 800 hours play time...

...For a game which costs less than $40.

Seriously what are you complaining about?

The game doesn't cost $40 in Europe. Even now it costs 30 EUR after price cuts.

I'm complaining because it's an ONLINE MULTIPLAYER game. Don't you see? In multiplayer games, you have to buy new expansion packs or add-ons, or you stay behind with everyone else. You don't buy new Guild Wars expansions? No new skills or items or classes for you. You don't buy WoW expansions? No content or raids for you.

 

[NotAPie]

L4D2 better come bundled with Half Life 2:Episode 3...

-.-

Yes I hope so.