Why I am boycotting L4D2

[Lycaeus_Wrex]

Okkaaaaay, so from what I gather here, you are going to boycott what is shaping up to be a good game, just because it will not come as an update?

To me that seems slightly greedy; its as if your saying you want all those new features for nothing, which will make Valve a loss.

No. That's not at ALL what I'm saying. Did you even read the first paragraph of my OP? *Sigh*

L. Wrex

 

[maddawg IAJI]

I can't wait for this sequel. New boss infected,New maps, Fire ammo, Throw in the fact the rumors that the AI director is gonna be able to change the layout of the map it self. Making each level more like a maze. Hell I already like the new characters. I was geting tired of Louis,Francis,Bill, and Zoey and some new faces would be a great change of pace.

Throw in the fact that my Left 4 Dead just bit the dust I now have a reason to buy it.

 

[Shepard's Shadow]

snippity snip snip

Adam Sessler's thoughts sum up my feelings about it. You should watch it.

http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/696648/Sesslers-Soapbox-To-the-Left-4-Dead-2-Petitioners.html

The rest of it is complaining that Valve don't seem to be doing the sterling job that few other companies will even think of doing. Imagine asking EA, Activision, or any of the other companies for bug fixes, never mind dlc?

I'm just curious if you mean all of EA or just a specific part of EA. B/c Bioware intends to release more DLC for Mass Effect and they are now apart of EA. Also, Bioware games tend to be bug free.

 

[D_987]

It is a common theme in this industry that once the product is out of the door, the developer/publisher washes its hands and moves on. Valve did not follow this formula at all, instead taking an interest in their communities that is rivaled by no other developer and this went some way towards getting them the reputation that they now enjoy.

Wrong. There may not be many, but Valve is far from the only company that pays strong attention to the communities of their games. Heck, I could easily argue that Blizzard far surpasses Valve in community involvement simply based on the fact that there are websites devoted to posting information on a daily basis of Blizzard Employees making direct replies to customer comments, sometimes even re-replying in topic-long conversations on an issue. Meanwhile the only time I see comments coming from Valve employees, it's via news posts like on this site.

So yes, I agree that more developers need to chat with their communities in order to get a true understanding of what the fans want, but Valve is far from unrivaled in community interaction.

Agreed, I would also include Bungie and EPIC in this list. Bungie for their continued suport throughout Halo 3's lifespan and EPIC for the massive amount of user suggestions they use in Gears 2. There have been 4 title updates already due to fan demand.

 

[Lycaeus_Wrex]

http://store.steampowered.com/news/?filter=updates&appids=500

The last update for L4D was on July the 21st. There have been regular updates for L4D ever since it came out. See thats what bothers me about stupid fucks like you, you don't even bother to research before making ignorant, idiotic statements.

But who cares... certainly not Valve, or anyone who matters. I just think it sucks that they don't get recognition for all their good work.

BTW EA are a publisher.

Also, listen to this: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/01/left-4-dead-2-exclusive-podcast-with-chet-faliszek/ it should enlighten you as to why the evil money sucking scum at Valve want to rip off their poor helpless consumers again so soon.

And I object to calling this a 'boycott'. Like it actually matters. Like it has even anywhere near the same significance as something like the Montgomery bus boycott. Fucking ridiculous.

And what point, do tell, are you trying to make with this statement? You're ranting about me explaining my reasoning without actually giving any explanations as to what you disagree with me on, besides the L4D patching.

I think Valve gets plenty of recognition for its good work. It has gleaming reviews for all of its games, and the vast majority of publications, PC Gamer UK for example, revere them as gods. It seems Valve can do no wrong and to speak against them will result in you getting branded a heretic followed by a swift stoning.

And I object with you objecting to calling this a boycott. Perhaps you need to look up the definition of the word, here I did it for you:

r.v. boy·cott·ed, boy·cott·ing, boy·cotts
To abstain from or act together in abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with as an expression of protest or disfavor or as a means of coercion.

Sounds familiar?

L. Wrex

I don't think it should be called a boycott because it implies you have a significant reason for not wanting to buy it.

Admit it, valve have been supporting L4D ever since it came out, with very regular updates. Don't doge that fact.

I beleive thzt the staff of PC Gamer would not hold back from criticising Valve if they beleived they had made the wrong descision. You are exaggerating and you have not given any examples or facts to support your argument. Yes, the magazine has a generally positive tone towards Valve, but this is because they want to play L4D 2 and do not beleive that it came out too early.

Regular, sub-par updates. Updates nonetheless, granted, but nowhere near the scale and importance of what we have come to hope from Valve. An update comes out for (again) TF2 and you get not one, but two class updates as well as new game modes and maps. An update comes out for L4D and we get...bug fixes? Necessary yes, but hardly revolutionary.

I'm not here to argue the pros and cons of publications and their attitude towards Valve. Suffice to say that PC Gamer UK printed a rather biased and offensive article aimed at the boycott that merely highlighted out worst members, making us *all* out to be less than reputable.

I have a significant reason for not wanting to buy it. Those reasons are my own and if you do not share them, fine. I wasn't asking you to. I merely hoped to convey to the community why I'm doing what I'm doing in the hope that some would understand.

You, inevitable, do not.

L. Wrex

 

[Lycaeus_Wrex]

InfectingTheCrypts

I don't think I have anything else to say to you. You're obviously blinkered in your opinions that makes it impossible for you to identify or empathise with anyone elses. I'm not saying you have to agree with my views, I made that evident from the start, but insults and potty talk won't get you anywhere in the big, bad world.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I do not expect something for nothing. I am more than aware of the type of society we live in and its impact on the consumer. EA are a publisher, it was a slip of the keyboard on my part to call them a developer and I apologise for that. EA are renowned for publishing the same franchise year in, year out. Madden, FIFA, NBA, NFL the list goes on. The implied connection that you seem to have missed was that I didn't want Valve to start sliding down this particularly slippery slope.

L. Wrex

P.S. Grayl and Caliostro, I think I love you! Oh, and I'll be hanging around for a while. I like this place!

 

[Saskwach]

I'll start by addressing the first major criticism of us seemingly demanding a free game from a very reputable games developer. I would like to go on record by saying that I do NOT expect L4D2 to be free, indeed, I do not mind all that much that they are coming out with a sequel so soon. What ires me is that shortly after the release of L4D1, Valve started development on L4D2, which completely nullified all their previous promises of additional content. I would like to stress that whilst this content is free for other IPs such as TF2, I would NOT mind paying for it! I would happily shell out £5 for a new campaign/weapon bundle the fact is that I never got the opportunity to do so.

From what I've heard, Valve didn't so much "[start] development on L4D2" just after L4D's release as begin tabling changes to L4D that would be downloadable content. They made this change which logically meant that should also be there, which would mean they'd have to change these things. In the end it ballooned into what could only be justified as a sequel (from a business perspective and from a 'fair's fair' one).
But I don't remember where I heard this so take it with a grain of salt. Even if I'm remembering nothing, it seems like a logical theory for what happened anyway.

There is also the issue of price. I'm not going to be so presumptuous as to guess what the pricing will be for the new game, but suffice to say that lots of people paid full retail for quite a small game. There is the argument about re-playability but once you've encountered a Tank 5 times, you know what to do, regardless as to which part of the map you are in. The way to counter this is with, of course, new content which is...in a brand new sequel. Great. Even now I'm watching all the friends that I have spent long hours killing Infected with slowly drift away from a game that really had the potential to last so much longer.

Perhaps it didn't live up to your estimation of value, but there are others that aren't just pleased with the value for money but ecstatic. Shamus Young [http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/], our very own Stolen Pixels and Experienced Point brains trust, claims he's gotten (IIRC) at least a hundred hours of entertainment from it. I've gotten less (being restricted to LANs) and paid more (being Australian) but I'm still beyond happy with the value for money. I and my friends have faced Tanks far more than 5 times and we still find them tricky buggers. Perhaps we're just bad...
The splitting of community is an understandable grudge though. I can only hope that L4D2 will allow simultaneous play of L4D games if you already have it installed. That would do a lot for keeping the community together. And if L4D2 is a bigger hit than L4D, then the sequel will be the best thing that ever happened to the community. Still, that's an "if". Perhaps the zombie well has been drained?

It is a common theme in this industry that once the product is out of the door, the developer/publisher washes its hands and moves on. Valve did not follow this formula at all, instead taking an interest in their communities that is rivaled by no other developer and this went some way towards getting them the reputation that they now enjoy. I keep going back to TF2 but it really is the epitome of how successful an IP can be if it receives the support from its creator. How angry would you be if, instead of the class updates that Valve promised and delivered on, instead they boxed them all up and sold it as TF3 with a few new maps thrown in for good measure? That is, in essence, how the L4D community feels at the moment, that a developer they respect and believe respects them in return, has fallen foul of the greed normally associated with less reputable developers *cough*...EA...*cough*.

This is not meant as an insult, but I'm almost angered by the fact that a pretty damn nice developer is actually being boycotted for doing something that EA wouldn't even blink at. How many bigger, more important promises has EA broken? How badly has EA treated its fans? Where's the EA boycott group? You can turn it around and say that more is expected of Valve, but it's sick when the objectively worse publisher/developer gets away scot-free because it's consistently mean but Valve gets hammered because it was naughty once. The only parallel I can think of is if a man were to decry an accountant who stole a few bucks from his company but ignore Bernie Madoff.

P.S. They also removed Zoey. I have to hate them on principle just for this.

And it makes me angry! I cannot forgive them for this sin.

 

[RAKais]

To be fairly honest, L4D2 SHOULD have been an expansion disc not disimiliar to The Shivering Isles where you would simply install it to your hardrive and use the L4D 1 disc. This would go for all future L4D expansions. This gives the game far more choice on one disc and more replay ability then having to constantly keep changing discs.

Regardless, Im still going to buy it.

EDIT: Also, it doesnt help that they made likeable characters and then threw them aside for the next lot.

P.S LOL @ the Philip Banks look alike Only redeeming feature with the characters.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

P.S. They also removed Zoey. I have to hate them on principle just for this.

And it makes me angry! I cannot forgive them for this sin.

If you have the Pc version you could easily put Zoey back in. I mean I've seen people put the Left 4 Dead survivors in Portal and if it makes you feel better the orginal team does have a cameo......Proably there corpses but cameos non the less.

 

[Khada]

lfd2 run on source engine just like lfd1. I got no problem paying more money for more content, i do believe however that both 1&2 should be run out of a single UI (making 2 more like an expansion) to avoid making the content in number 1 obsolete.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

I won't buy the game because A) There's no katana! They add melee weapons without including the most efficient zombie killer next to the shaolin spade? B) There's no unlockable Romero zombie mode, with shambling, headshots, and maybe an open world.

Oh, and I only have a PS3, creating a third, technical, reason.

 

[InfectingTheCrypts]

InfectingTheCrypts

I don't think I have anything else to say to you. You're obviously blinkered in your opinions that makes it impossible for you to identify or empathise with anyone elses. I'm not saying you have to agree with my views, I made that evident from the start, but insults and potty talk won't get you anywhere in the big, bad world.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I do not expect something for nothing. I am more than aware of the type of society we live in and its impact on the consumer. EA are a publisher, it was a slip of the keyboard on my part to call them a developer and I apologise for that. EA are renowned for publishing the same franchise year in, year out. Madden, FIFA, NBA, NFL the list goes on. The implied connection that you seem to have missed was that I didn't want Valve to start sliding down this particularly slippery slope.

L. Wrex

P.S. Grayl and Caliostro, I think I love you! Oh, and I'll be hanging around for a while. I like this place!

Look. Left 4 Dead 2 is coming out. Full stop. Valve have already sunk enough development hours and resources into developing it that they WON'T be releasing it for free, or as an update, or an expansion pack or whatever at such a late stage. It just isn't going to happen.

I get what you and all the other boycotters are getting riled up about. It's that Valve promised to release L4D and then just slew out DLC for it, and you lot all think that they've abandoned the whole fanbase by simply deciding to release a L4D2 instead, making all of you spend more money.

But simply trying to get people to "not buy the game" (and this is what I presume you're doing if you're posting a massive long essay on an internet forum) is pretty pointless: the unknowing, frat-boy idiot demographic WILL buy L4D2. Just like they WILL BUY Modern Warfare 2. And the way they WILL BUY the next FIFA, or Grand Theft Auto, or whatever. What will really influence sales amongst the more intellectual crowd is more the critic's reviews: if L4D2 is in fact crap and not worth any money, then you can be sure it won't sell well amongst the crowd which Valve is ACTUALLY aiming at. A classic case in current weeks: gamers are buying WiiSportsResort over some other titles like The Conduit, because WiiSportsResort is actually getting good reviews!

So in the end, "justice" will be done: if L4D2 is in fact better than its predecessor and worth the cash, then reviews will show that, and so will sales and support and all the rest. If it isn't then sales will drop, less people will have it and so your point will have been proven.

Regardless, support will still continue with the original L4D, people will still release new maps and mods etc, people WILL still play, so it's not liek they're completely rendering the game useless.

 

[soulasylum85]

ok heres my opinion l4d was fun, its one of my favorite xbox games. l4d2 is bigger and better than l4d which to me means more fun and i would rather have a whole new game of new content than a few tweaks or a new level to an existing 1. also how can u say that the content of l4d2 should just be dlc and not a new game? valve has been very slowly leaking info so there is probly a whole lot that no one but valve knows about this game.

 

[Caliostro]

My hint: You're a Valve fanboy

My hint: Fanboy implies unconditional love and support for something. I'm pointing out I don't agree with what they're doing now, and providing a valid reason, as much as such concepts may elude you. I don't love Valve unconditionally. I like Valve since they've long proven I can get the most bang out of my buck from them. When I spend 20, 40, 60 bucks on a Valve game, I have the background, the past experience, to trust I'm getting my money's worth of entertainment.

...Which is the whole point of this L4D issue.

who cannot accept the fact that they are a company and need to make money in order to survive.

Really? Didn't I start by saying my issue is not with pricing at all...? Did you even read my post? Did you quote the wrong person? Did you just simply fail to understand the meaning of the words I posted...?

YES, they "promised" to bring new DLC for Left4Dead. To be honest, I cannot even recall that, and I've been following the game's development pretty much from the beginning, because I thought it was a great concept - but that is not the point now.

You really [http://www.videogamer.com/news/valve_details_post_left_4_dead_launch_plans.html] should do your homework [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQWylFmqnwM].

(ignore the stupid additional "drama" on the second one)

The point, and I've said it earlier before, is that so many people are just so in love with Valve that they were living in a weird kind of world in which Valve was the white knight of the industry fighting the evil wizards like EA and Activision, who do not try to make great but to ruin your life with bad ones. You said it yourself. "Valve standards".

I don't care about them being a white knight, but as I said before, I haven't bought anything from Activision or EA in a long time for a reason... I have bought everything Valve has done so far for a reason. Despite your seemingly limited capacity to evaluate situations, perhaps you should consider that maybe it's these "Valve standards" that make users comfortable enough to spend their money every time. When L4D came out, I was on the proverbial fence, but due to my background with them, due to "Valve standards", I felt I was getting my money's worth, even buying it at full retail price instead of buying it on a 50% weekend. You should, perhaps, consider that Valve has a legion of "fans" for a reason. Because they have always proven that their business philosophy is along the lines of "if the costumer is happy, if they feel they get their money's worth, they'll come back for more, and more, and more."

L4D felt like a complete rift in everything Valve has done so far. So we're complaining. We wanna what the hell happened there.

If you're still too thick to get it: Everyone's waiting for a new Half Life or Portal. Nobody would complain about paying full price for either if they came out TOMORROW. Because they're not online games. My original complaint, which you missed entirely, would not be true in their case, and we can't wait for them. But an online game lives of it's community, and with that, has different standards and necessities.

The comparisons between Counter-Strike and CS:S also lack, because there are most definetly other reasons for people to quit playing a game. You can't just assume less people play the original Counter-Strike because they've moved on to Source.

Oh there are other factors, but none as significant as that. And counter strike is the best example actually. Once Source came out, the number of users online basically split, then shifted entirely.

Edit: Your argument isn't any more valid because of your grammar and vocabulary, no need to feel better than others.

"And that's why you should never make assumptions, because you make an ass out of yourself... and mumptions."

I'm not attempting to use "difficult" words for it's own sake, but I equally refuse to dumb down my vocabulary so it suits other people. If you need assistance, may I recommend dictionary.com [http://dictionary.reference.com/]? It's an amazing tool. I use it myself from time to time. Give it a spin.

 

[UncleOvid]

DISCLAIMER: I've never owned, played, or seen Lemons4David (beyond the inevitable clips for review or whatever), and have no plan to own, play, or have much if anything to do with its nominal sequel. But I find this here debate kinda fascinating, and so offer my quote-unquote unbiased view of the arguments, however pointless.

The story, as I gather, is this: A heretofore highly respected game developer (Valve), renowned in particular for paying more than average attention to the interests and suggestions of its audience, released a game (Licks4Dicks) a year ago that was a) decidedly flawed in both content and technical issues, and b) surprisingly fun and popular. Faced with a sudden, large community, they, in keeping with history and reputation, issued DLC support to address these issues (for nominal fees, of course) and then announced a sequel (Locks4Docks 2) in short order -- a sequel which most seem to agree is more a collection of updates and add-ons than a ground-up, redesigned installment to a series.

The arguments of the boycotters seem to be as follows: 1) releasing a bunch of bug fixes, maps, and AI updates is, at best, an expansion pack, and not worthy of being titled -- and more importantly priced -- a "sequel." Having paid full price (not inconsiderable these days) a year ago for a game they feel was incomplete, they are now being asked to pay full price again for a slightly larger and more complete game. 2) There will of course be DLC support for this new version (at nominal fees, of course), which -- in keeping with standard practice of game companies these days -- will likely be at the expense of support for the earlier version, which the boycotters feel is still incomplete. 3) This implies a greater breach of trust by a company that historically took a more personal interest in the suggestions of its fans, and which now is baldly adopting the "planned obsolescence" strategy of more mainstream/less reputable companies.

Am I missing anything?

Anyway, the counter-arguments seem to be: 1) Don't fix what ain't broken, and do fix what is. There's enough retooling to justify Laundering4Dummies 2 as a full sequel, and anyway, if you liked Lying4Democracy, Liberals4Duke 2 is mostly more of the same, so you'll probably like that too. 2) Welcome to capitalism. Don't panic. Yes, there will probably be more DLC for Laughing4Days 2, because that's what they're doing now. But Valve's still issuing stuff for some of its older titles even after newer and more popular versions have come out, so you'll still likely be able to get stuff for Life4Dimebags (for nominal fees, of course). 3) Trim your own nose hair. So Valve isn't quite the paragon of consumer empowerment as we hoped. They're still miles better than EA. Don't punish them for being awesome after being super-awesome for so long. And besides, you can still mod in Zoey with her tits out.

My own view is this: fuck DLC. In particular, fuck DLC that you have to pay for. Seriously, I don't want to shell out a Grant for a game I have to buy more stuff for later. That, in my opinion, is the definition of incomplete -- and underhanded. It's like if Shakespeare came out at the end of Hamlet and said, "Hey, you guys want to come back in a couple months for a few bucks more? I'm totally gonna give Ophelia a brother and kill off her dad halfway through!" Some of the best money I ever spent on a game was GOTY Morrowind. I wish I could chalk it up to patience and foresight rather than dumb luck that I picked up a game that was nearly twice the size of the original for $40 less than the suckers who paid for each extra installment, but hey, the warm glow of superiority makes up for it.

As an obvious corollary: fuck sequels that aren't sequels. No, a year isn't enough to make a new game, not one that's worth the money. Christ, take the fucking time. Terrence Malick has made six movies in 40 years, and I'll take any of them over the glunge Michael Bay shoots out every time he cops a squat. (Yes, I realize that's a ridiculous comparison. It's late and I'm tired.)

Now if I may address a side argument.

I object to calling this a 'boycott'. Like it actually matters. Like it has even anywhere near the same significance as something like the Montgomery bus boycott. Fucking ridiculous.

I'm sorry if you were promised something, then it turned out to be not true... welcome to real life. If you expect a company whose main concern is making money to care about some half assed promise, then I feel sorry for you.

If nothing else, your uninformed argument stating EA as "the greedy, money-making developers" when they are in fact PUBLISHERS and, in case you didn't know, we live in a CAPITALIST SOCIETY, where corporations want to MAKE MONEY.

Each and every one of you are just bitter and pissed off because Valve scrapped the idea of DLC in favour of developing a new game and you don't want to cough up the cash.

Actually, I see you guys as the bitter and pissed off ones. It's sad to me that you resign yourselves to the idea that we should allow companies to intentionally release shoddy products because somehow "they have to make money" is an acceptable excuse. You know, that money comes from somewhere, and, at least when I buy things, I expect them (call me nuts) to be good, rather than pay people to bend me over without complaint. As an alternative to this rather fatalistic way of thinking, I would propose as a synonym to "capitalist society" the term "consumer culture," where the emphasis is on the obligation to the end-user who actually uses what someone sells, rather than the fuck-em-all high score mentality of the already-haves. In this light, I say boycotts, even symbolic ones like this, are at least a way of voicing dissatisfaction with a company's policies. It's no Rosa Parks, sure (it is just a video game), but Jesus, aren't we owed something?

I get what you and all the other boycotters are getting riled up about. It's that Valve promised to release Lucy4Desi and then just slew out DLC for it, and you lot all think that they've abandoned the whole fanbase by simply deciding to release a Luke4Darth 2 instead, making all of you spend more money.

But simply trying to get people to "not buy the game" (and this is what I presume you're doing if you're posting a massive long essay on an internet forum) is pretty pointless: the unknowing, frat-boy idiot demographic WILL buy Lady4Day2. Just like they WILL BUY Modern Warfare 2. And the way they WILL BUY the next FIFA, or Grand Theft Auto, or whatever. What will really influence sales amongst the more intellectual crowd is more the critic's reviews: if L4D2 is in fact crap and not worth any money, then you can be sure it won't sell well amongst the crowd which Valve is ACTUALLY aiming at. A classic case in current weeks: gamers are buying WiiSportsResort over some other titles like The Conduit, because WiiSportsResort is actually getting good reviews!

So in the end, "justice" will be done: if Lincoln4Douglass2 is in fact better than its predecessor and worth the cash, then reviews will show that, and so will sales and support and all the rest. If it isn't then sales will drop, less people will have it and so your point will have been proven.

Well, at least I know where it comes from. And it's a good point, granted. Too bad, I was looking forward to calling you out as a first-class cretin. At least I have this guy:

noone cares the whole groups a bunch of idiots bet half of you end up buying the game anyways...how arrogant though you dont even work for a game developer you think you know better than one of the best?

Please stick your head in your ass and breathe deep. I mean, I'm sorry, but I don't put much stock in the "argument by authority." Just because someone says they know better doesn't automatically mean they do. That's how dictators are made. And religion. Sorry, sorry...

Oh, and one more:

Edit: Your argument isn't any more valid because of your grammar and vocabulary, no need to feel better than others.

Why not? I do.

 

[Gladion]

My hint: You're a Valve fanboy

My hint: Fanboy implies unconditional love and support for something. I'm pointing out I don't agree with what they're doing now, and providing a valid reason, as much as such concepts may elude you. I don't love Valve unconditionally. I like Valve since they've long proven I can get the most bang out of my buck from them. When I spend 20, 40, 60 bucks on a Valve game, I have the background, the past experience, to trust I'm getting my money's worth of entertainment.

...Which is the whole point of this L4D issue.

So you're saying you're disappointed by Valve, because you thought you would get more content for your money. That's what you call a valid reason.

who cannot accept the fact that they are a company and need to make money in order to survive.

Really? Didn't I start by saying my issue is not with pricing at all...? Did you even read my post? Did you quote the wrong person? Did you just simply fail to understand the meaning of the words I posted...?

Very impressive rhetoric questions. I'm not implying you think L4D2 is too expensive. I was implying Valve needs money, thus need to charge you for the content they provide you with. People often say "we don't want that much content for free but we want less for free". Still, it takes time and money to make even a single chapter of a campaign.

YES, they "promised" to bring new DLC for Left4Dead. To be honest, I cannot even recall that, and I've been following the game's development pretty much from the beginning, because I thought it was a great concept - but that is not the point now.

You really [http://www.videogamer.com/news/valve_details_post_left_4_dead_launch_plans.html] should do your homework [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQWylFmqnwM].

(ignore the stupid additional "drama" on the second one)

Okay, you've got me on that one, I must have missed it. But why should I ignore the additional drama on the second one?

The point, and I've said it earlier before, is that so many people are just so in love with Valve that they were living in a weird kind of world in which Valve was the white knight of the industry fighting the evil wizards like EA and Activision, who do not try to make great but to ruin your life with bad ones. You said it yourself. "Valve standards".

I don't care about them being a white knight, but as I said before, I haven't bought anything from Activision or EA in a long time for a reason... I have bought everything Valve has done so far for a reason. Despite your seemingly limited capacity to evaluate situations, perhaps you should consider that maybe it's these "Valve standards" that make users comfortable enough to spend their money every time. When L4D came out, I was on the proverbial fence, but due to my background with them, due to "Valve standards", I felt I was getting my money's worth, even buying it at full retail price instead of buying it on a 50% weekend. You should, perhaps, consider that Valve has a legion of "fans" for a reason. Because they have always proven that their business philosophy is along the lines of "if the costumer is happy, if they feel they get their money's worth, they'll come back for more, and more, and more."

L4D felt like a complete rift in everything Valve has done so far. So we're complaining. We wanna what the hell happened there.

If you're still too thick to get it: Everyone's waiting for a new Half Life or Portal. Nobody would complain about paying full price for either if they came out TOMORROW. Because they're not online games. My original complaint, which you missed entirely, would not be true in their case, and we can't wait for them. But an online game lives of it's community, and with that, has different standards and necessities.

I never stated Valve's reputation came out of nowhere. I know they deliver, even if it takes long. They make great games. Whether the games are as great as the development time implies, you have to decide for yourself, but that's a different story. I just stated that they are, and have always been a game company who try and need to make money. Many people seem to have forgotten that. If that isn't the case for you, I cannot prove you wrong but look all over the internet.

The comparisons between Counter-Strike and CS:S also lack, because there are most definetly other reasons for people to quit playing a game. You can't just assume less people play the original Counter-Strike because they've moved on to Source.

Oh there are other factors, but none as significant as that. And counter strike is the best example actually. Once Source came out, the number of users online basically split, then shifted entirely.

Okay, let me question this point from another perspective:
Whenever I pop in a game of Counter-Strike, I find at least a billion servers with people playing on them. There might be less than before (for whatever reason) but there are still plenty. I thought your point was that you feared people would leave the original L4D entirely in order to play the sequel, but why shouldn't there still be plenty of people playing the game (e.g. people who boycott the game or who cannot/do not want to afford another game that's pretty identical to the one they've already got)?

Edit: Your argument isn't any more valid because of your grammar and vocabulary, no need to feel better than others.

"And that's why you should never make assumptions, because you make an ass out of yourself... and mumptions."

I'm not attempting to use "difficult" words for it's own sake, but I equally refuse to dumb down my vocabulary so it suits other people. If you need assistance, may I recommend dictionary.com [http://dictionary.reference.com/]? It's an amazing tool. I use it myself from time to time. Give it a spin.

I never said I didn't understand what you were saying. But I still apologize for not being a native speaker, it seems neccessary to you. Believe it or not, the internet is being used in every part of the world, and not everybody is equally good in speaking English.

 

[Lycaeus_Wrex]

UncleOmid:

Your side argument neatly summed up in far better terms what I was just typing. I'm quite glad I pressed 'refresh' now. It seems odd that when people challenge the status quo for any reason regardless of how menial, they are automatically subject to ridicule by their peers. This is made doubly confusing by the fact that, in the slim chance the challenge is successful, those very same people who ridiculed and abused their peers will be the ones that benefit from it.

Oh, and in response to Sessler, disregarding the probable fact that as a member of a games website/show/whatever he hasn't had to pay for a video game EVER anyone who uses the term 'higgeldy-piggeldy' (sp?) as an opening for an argument loses all credibility there and then.

L .Wrex

 

[InfectingTheCrypts]

Well sir, I did enjoy reading your incredibly long, occasionally witty but mostly full of bullshit argument. I just have to pick up on this one particularly large deposit of diarrhoea:

Actually, I see you guys as the bitter and pissed off ones. It's sad to me that you resign yourselves to the idea that we should allow companies to intentionally release shoddy products because somehow "they have to make money" is an acceptable excuse. You know, that money comes from somewhere, and, at least when I buy things, I expect them (call me nuts) to be good, rather than pay people to bend me over without complaint. As an alternative to this rather fatalistic way of thinking, I would propose as a synonym to "capitalist society" the term "consumer culture," where the emphasis is on the obligation to the end-user who actually uses what someone sells, rather than the fuck-em-all high score mentality of the already-haves. In this light, I say boycotts, even symbolic ones like this, are at least a way of voicing dissatisfaction with a company's policies. It's no Rosa Parks, sure (it is just a video game), but Jesus, aren't we owed something?

HOOLLDD UP ONE SECOND DOOOD. When did anybody label L4D as a "bad" or "shoddy" product? I, for one, find it to be a rather good game, as did most critics, the general public and (presumably) the boycotters themselves. Certainly I (and many others) got our money's worth from the hours playing online and replaying the campaign.

What brings my piss to a boil is reading game news and forums and whatnot littered with these boycott crusades (not just the OP here but in a few other forums too, albeit with quite a bit more profanity) in an attempt to stop people from buying a game WHICH HASN'T BEEN FUCKING RELEASED YET.

Seriously, these people do need to grow up and stop being such presumptuous dickheads by carrying the rumour that the new Left 4 Dead game will just be a bunch of bug fixes. NO ONE HAS PLAYED IT YET, MORONS. Valve, the company that brought us the Half Lifes, Counter-Strike and the king of value for money, The Orange Box, has pretty good quality control (if tradition has us to believe) and they probably wouldn't just skimp out on L4D2. If Valve do as they have done before, there should be enough to justify the price.

Nevertheless, no one here has played it, so no one can ***** about the price. Valve has GIVEN YOU THE TOOLS TO MAKE EXTRA STUFF FOR THE FIRST GAME. They aren't pulling support. And above all, no one is forcing you to buy it. Therefore, no need for any boycotting or complaints.

 

[dallan262]

Well, at least I know where it comes from. And it's a good point, granted. Too bad, I was looking forward to calling you out as a first-class cretin. At least I have this guy:

noone cares the whole groups a bunch of idiots bet half of you end up buying the game anyways...how arrogant though you dont even work for a game developer you think you know better than one of the best?

Please stick your head in your ass and breathe deep. I mean, I'm sorry, but I don't put much stock in the "argument by authority." Just because someone says they know better doesn't automatically mean they do. That's how dictators are made. And religion. Sorry, sorry...

just realised you wernt the original poster and therefore my response is this:

ok, good for you *yawn*

EDIT: and my names david can i get some lemons?