I don't think anyone is saying that this "game" should be a free patch, but marketing it as a new game implies it will be priced accordingly. That is my gripe with it at least.
<!--quoteo(post=1709671:date=Jun 2 2009, 06:10 PM:name=Wither)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wither @ Jun 2 2009, 06:10 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709671"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't think anyone is saying that this "game" should be a free patch, but marketing it as a new game implies it will be priced accordingly. That is my gripe with it at least.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> L4D2 is coming out with more stuff than L4D, which was full price, so shouldn't L4D2 be full price?
BadMouthIt ceases to be exclusive when you can have a custom member titlJoin Date: 2004-05-21Member: 28815Members
My gripe is this. L4D2 is coming out too soon after L4D. And it's a multiplayer game with essentially the same gameplay, albeit a few tweaks here and there. It's kinda like you buy something, and the next day they are selling something better at the same price. You kick yourself for not waiting that one day, even though you had no idea the better item would come out the next day. And L4D is multiplayer. If theres singleplayer then its different, because theres a story and I want to see how the story progresses. I would rather L4D2 be an expansion than a whole new game.
<!--quoteo(post=1709680:date=Jun 2 2009, 06:40 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TychoCelchuuu @ Jun 2 2009, 06:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709680"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->L4D2 is coming out with more stuff than L4D, which was full price, so shouldn't L4D2 be full price?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
By that logic, adding any single feature to an existing game means that game should cost just as much as the original. No? I don't see how you can argue with what everyone else has been saying - L4D came out in November 2008, major patch came out in April (free, btw) -- and I might add that this patch added some of the things that L4D2 is also adding. New campaigns (and thus new maps), new game mode.. and now L4D2 is set for release less than a year after L4D? They need to take a Blizzard approach here and market this like Starcraft: Brood War rather than an entirely new game. I'd be less pissed if they did, in any case.
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
Yes, of course L4D2 is a full game, and thus could be sold as a full game.
Only problem?
It is still a ###### Move.
Sure, we expect it from EA with a new Madden every year, but not from Valve. Valve is a company that tends to be fairly good to their fans (lots of content patches to TF2 and stuff like that), and this seems counter intuitive to us. Thus, we don't like it, and hope that they do something to rectify their ###### Move (like release L4D2 as an expansion for a reasonable price).
Stick said it best.
we bought this game, and then less then 1 year latter they release the same game just Better, with features that would have been awesome in the first game, thus making us all a little bit ticked off for getting suckered into paying full price for what was essentially a beta test.
Personally, I am not going to buy the game unless it is at a good discount.
The_Real_QuasarHas the I.Q. of 12,000 P.E. TeachersJoin Date: 2002-11-26Member: 9998Members
I'm quite annoyed, as I only bought L4D a few weeks before this announcement... I'd have waited otherwise. I was even planning on looking at the new L4D SDK, but I don't really see the point now as anything anyone makes is unlikely to be transferrable.
Valve have a great reputation as one of the best game developers out there, but with this move they seem to be losing favour very rapidly. I really do hope they come around and give those with the original game a discount, after all they've gone back on decisions that upset players before, like when they added the milestone achievements for sniper and spy.
<!--quoteo(post=1709805:date=Jun 3 2009, 06:23 AM:name=Wither)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wither @ Jun 3 2009, 06:23 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709805"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->By that logic, adding any single feature to an existing game means that game should cost just as much as the original. No? I don't see how you can argue with what everyone else has been saying - L4D came out in November 2008, major patch came out in April (free, btw) -- and I might add that this patch added some of the things that L4D2 is also adding. New campaigns (and thus new maps), new game mode.. and now L4D2 is set for release less than a year after L4D? They need to take a Blizzard approach here and market this like Starcraft: Brood War rather than an entirely new game. I'd be less pissed if they did, in any case.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, adding a single feature would not make it an entirely new game. L4D2 has more stuff than L4D <i>and none of the original stuff</i> except for a few weapons, sounds, and infected designs. If you paid $50 for however many campaigns and weapons there are in L4D, doesn't it make sense to pay $50 for <i>more</i> campaigns? I mean, L4D if anything is worth LESS than L4D2 because L4D2 is theoretically supposed to be improved.
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1709834:date=Jun 3 2009, 10:21 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TychoCelchuuu @ Jun 3 2009, 10:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709834"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->No, adding a single feature would not make it an entirely new game. L4D2 has more stuff than L4D <i>and none of the original stuff</i> except for a few weapons, sounds, and infected designs. If you paid $50 for however many campaigns and weapons there are in L4D, doesn't it make sense to pay $50 for <i>more</i> campaigns? I mean, L4D if anything is worth LESS than L4D2 because L4D2 is theoretically supposed to be improved.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Still a ###### move.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1709666:date=Jun 2 2009, 11:49 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TychoCelchuuu @ Jun 2 2009, 11:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709666"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->This too. They're splitting the community into those who buy L4D2 and those who don't. Nobody wins. Except Valve, sort of, but they've basically got an eternal spot in the winner's circle so everything from Half-Life up until today has just been varying degrees of them winning.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
*Valve <i>South</i>, AKA Turtle Rock Studios.
Also I don't get this sequel/expansion argument. You're saying that what makes a sequel is whether it uses a new engine or not?
L4D2 has:
New maps (and more of them than the original) New gameplay (with new infected and subtle changes to various events making you play differently) New enemies New weapons (not "this assault rifle is a different model", but a melee weapon system) New player characters, complete with new character interactions (a favourite in L4D) New game mode Furtherence of the story of L4D, which while some apparently don't care, I (amongst others; you should check the steam L4D forums for threads on the story and speculations on backstory etc...) do.
The fact that it doesn't use a new engine doesn't make it any less of a sequel. It's a new game, worthy of the sequel title.
One set in a shopping mall? That'd be great fun. Maybe you'd have a great big siege area in a food court, and everyone would want to hide behind the burger counter due to there being a good choke point, but you prefer the sandwich shop because the graffiti on the wall is better.
One in a TV studio? Battling between sets? Zombified running runners? Lorraine Kelly as a boss battle?
<!--quoteo(post=1709834:date=Jun 3 2009, 10:21 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TychoCelchuuu @ Jun 3 2009, 10:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709834"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->L4D2 has more stuff than L4D <i>and none of the original stuff</i> except for a few weapons, sounds, and infected designs. If you paid $50 for however many campaigns and weapons there are in L4D, doesn't it make sense to pay $50 for <i>more</i> campaigns? I mean, L4D if anything is worth LESS than L4D2 because L4D2 is theoretically supposed to be improved.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The difference is in the value perceived. L4D1 was a brand new IP and a brand new gaming experience. It was worth the full purchase price since nothing had really been done quite like L4D1 before. L4D2 is more or less L4D1 in a different setting with different characters, but it's going to be a very similar gaming experience, hence it's not perceived to be worth as much. Especially when you factor in the very short development time. It would be like buying a sandwich for $5 that was made out of only bread and ham, eating it, then having the sandwich maker say "Now do you want one with bread, ham, peppers, cheese, lettuce, onion, and tomatoes?" My response would be "what the ###### bud, why didn't you just offer that to me first?" Granted, you can't take that analogy and apply it literally but it feels the same.
And you're right. L4D1 is now worth less because L4D2 is on the horizon, and that's another major problem. Instead of fixing and improving their maps, which is certainly possibly, they're just going to ignore it and allow the corner camping and other lame strategies that are being addressed for L4D2. It just feels like they're abandoning L4D1, which is not Valve's style.
Another annoying thing is that Valve assumes people want all the trash they're trying to pile on L4D2. I personally don't give a ###### about co-op mode, interlinking story lines, extra characters, or extra weapons (melee and otherwise). The only thing I want is more versus maps and more boss infected. However, if the only option is to pay another $50 for these things then I'd imagine a significant percent of their playerbase being upset.
I guess I got lucky and got L4D1 on sale for 20$ yea, 20$. Though this was 2-3 weeks ago I believe. Still, It makes me upset that I just get into this game and 'wham' here comes a not an update to fix all the exploits but a sequel. This frustrates me to no end. I really see no point in buying L4D2 because in a year what are they gonna do, come out with L4D3?.
I have lost alot of confidence within Valve, they really dropped the ball with me on this and TF2's stupid updates. Yes, there is my opinion shining in on a different game, TF2.
...But I digress, while I refuse to ever pay the full price for the game... If it does come on sale for half price n'such I will definitely get it.
To me, it aint worth the full price of a game when they are just handing you the other half of the sandwich that you deserve to have in the first place.
My big complaint is Valve is looking at including L4D1 with L4D2 (from the IGN article I am too lazy to find and link). If they do that, they better offer L4D2 free to people who own the first, else it's just a huge smack in the face to the people who bought the first version.
They'll probably let you give away your extraneous copy of L4D1 though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Which is of course useless because we would all be playing L4D2 instead of L4D with the friend we just gave the copy to.
<!--quoteo(post=1710099:date=Jun 4 2009, 12:53 PM:name=Thansal)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thansal @ Jun 4 2009, 12:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1710099"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Which is of course useless because we would all be playing L4D2 instead of L4D with the friend we just gave the copy to.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Making your second L4D copy something you'd only ever give to your enemies.
I'm mostly thinking that it has more do to with the console version than anything else. Every time Valve wants to update a console version they have to pay Microsoft tens of thousands of dollars for it to go through compliance checks and if they don't want to charge for it (and let Microsoft take a cut) they still have to pay Microsoft for their bandwidth. My flatmate (the more console-inclined of the two of us) was playing TF2 on the 360 the other day. They <i>still</i> don't have the Kritzkrieg. They're missing a ton of map updates, unlocks, fixes (I saw people building teleporters through the doors on Dust) because it's expensive to deliver the service we get on the PC through Microsoft.
So, yes, in theory Valve could do L4D as updates, or they could do it as DLC, but they have to pay Microsoft more money if they do this. If they sell the same as a fresh disc they only have to pay someone else for the advertising space and the distribution, all the other costs can be absorbed by Valve.
[Edit] Not to mention the 360 only has a puny 512MB of RAM. All of the extra content like weapon models, textures and sounds are all loaded into RAM when you start a game. So if Valve want to mix extra content together and have it in the game at the same time (i.e. new weapons + old weapons; new Special Infected + old Special Infected), they would need to find a way to compress it all into no more than 512MB at a time. This isn't as much of a problem on the PC where anyone who can run L4D needs at least 1GB RAM (this is the minimum spec on the box). Valve have also cited this reason for why the 360 DLC for TF2 (with the weapon unlocks and maps) is taking so long.
So Valve is between a rock and a hard place because they wanted a bigger piece of the pie and they wanted a presence on the consoles, but it seems like doing this is making them compromise the awesome relationship they have built with their PC customers. This is the root of much of the ill feeling: the PC customers know this can be done as DLC and it doesn't need to cost the same as a full-price game; we know this should be <i>L4D: The Survivor Diaries</i> and not L4D2. They could give the DLC free or cheaper to PC customers, but then they would piss off the console customers. They didn't have to worry about this as much with the OB customers because they were getting an awesome deal anyway with 5 games in 1. Or maybe their market research is telling them that the console customers are pissed they can't have the updates the PC customers get, so they wanted to make it more 'equal'. Anyway, I don't see how Valve can do this without pissing one of their customer bases off, unless they absorb the cost of DLC on the consoles or give PC customers an almighty Steam-only discount.
Are there any console L4D players here? It might be interesting getting your opinions on what you expected from L4D when you bought it, and what you think of paying a full game price for L4D2.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited June 2009
That rock and hard place, might even become indestructable if they decide to sell it for full price game and the sales are way below of what they expected (with people not willing to pay the full price). Lowering the price at that time will piss of the people who bought L4D2 for full game price... It could happen...
Ah well, if they are going to release at the general same time as NS2. Valve/turtle rock will not have any chance at all J/K
<!--quoteo(post=1710178:date=Jun 4 2009, 06:02 PM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Jun 4 2009, 06:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1710178"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Ah well, if they are going to release at the general same time as NS2. Valve/turtle rock will not have any chance at all J/K<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->Maybe someone convinced UWE that getting a bunch of pre-orders in now before the competition in the run-up to Christmas was a wise idea. I'd tend to agree.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
Speaking of L4D2 including L4D1, if I recall correctly (I can't be bothered reading through everything), they were talking about the possibility of including the L4D maps in L4D2. Whether that means they'll just include L4D in L4D2, or if they'll have the L4D maps with L4D2's gameplay (the new characters and zombies etc...) I dunno. The reasoning was that if you're playing L4D2 and then fancy a run through of No Mercy, it's a ###### to close L4D2 and open up L4D.
If they *do* include the whole of L4D (as it is now) with L4D2, I would be kinda pissed off. It would reaffirm my opinions as stated above.
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
<!--quoteo(post=1710195:date=Jun 4 2009, 12:47 PM:name=X_Stickman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (X_Stickman @ Jun 4 2009, 12:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1710195"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Speaking of L4D2 including L4D1, if I recall correctly (I can't be bothered reading through everything), they were talking about the possibility of including the L4D maps in L4D2. Whether that means they'll just include L4D in L4D2, or if they'll have the L4D maps with L4D2's gameplay (the new characters and zombies etc...) I dunno. The reasoning was that if you're playing L4D2 and then fancy a run through of No Mercy, it's a ###### to close L4D2 and open up L4D.
If they *do* include the whole of L4D (as it is now) with L4D2, I would be kinda pissed off. It would reaffirm my opinions as stated above.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My ideal solution would be if they offered L4D2 for $10-20 off for L4D owners, and included the original with it. I don't have any problem paying money for new content, I just still want to be able to play L4D with a decent sized community.
This was posted by a forum member (DIE 75) over at the nuclear dawn community. I'm reposting it because it provides great info I would have otherwise missed.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Shack: What price-point should we expect?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Doug Lombardi: This is a full sequel.
Shack: So full price?
Doug Lombardi: Yeah. At the end of the day, this is going to be a bigger game than Left 4 Dead. Its five campaigns versus four; all five are playable in Versus mode, Survival mode out of the box, the new multiplayer game mode. Plus over 20 new weapons and items. It's a full sequel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's pretty obvious L4D2 was born from the updates meant for L4D. Even Gabe knew it was against the company character.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So the team brought their concepts and ideas to create a sequel to Gabe Newell, and even he was skeptical about the idea. According to Faliszek, he expressed his doubts, and claimed this move was against the character of the company. "To Gabe's credit, and he's a great guy to work for, he said if this is what you want to do, if this is what you're excited about, go do it."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As far as still supporting L4D, I just don't see that happening. IMO, they will finish off what little they were working on (4v4 multiplayer, SDK, community map support) and be done with it.
Really, what's the use in supporting L4D once the sequel is released? Adding content is normally used to entice people to purchase your game. Why would someone who doesn't own L4D want to purchase it when they could just purchase the new and improved L4D 2?
The whole mess has really pissed me off. Hell, I just bought this game a little over a month ago!!!
EDIT: Looks like I just had to wait a bit more to get the real idea of L4D support now that L4D2 has been announced.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But what about Left 4 Dead, which some players expect to fall by the wayside in the wake of its sequel?
Leonard declined to commit to there being more Valve-created content for the game, instead pointing out some upcoming functionality tweaks and the potential in user-created levels for the PC version. "We are doing updates across the summer, adding new matchmaking features, and new features to facilitate user maps after the SDK is out," he said. "Certainly, user maps will be part of the ongoing Left 4 Dead 1 experience."
"Additionally, those maps can be transported into Left 4 Dead 2. With regard to more content, it's hard to say, because the timeline for Left 4 Dead 2 is so sensitive, and the team has a head of steam right now for the game."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That pretty much ends the question of more DLC for L4D...
-------------
I'm glad Valve knows the fans are pissed, I'm not glad they have no plans of changing their actions. I'm really interested in seeing how L4D2 sells. I actually enjoy L4D1 and I know for a fact I will not be buying L4D2, <i>especially</i> now that it's been confirmed to be at full retail price. The console players, however, are accustomed to getting these Madden-esk games every year. I predict L4D2 will be below Valve's expectations on the PC but about on par for what they expect on the consoles. What I find funny is how they call it a whole new game, rather than a continuation of L4D1 with some improvements since that would clearly place it in the "expansion pack" category. I don't know about you guys, but when I think of a "new game" I don't think of a game experience I had just one year ago, unless I'm playing sport games on the console.
I think my biggest gripe is still how utterly lame the new characters look. If only they'd stick to the original four, I think I wouldn't be quite as bothered by this.
<!--quoteo(post=1710485:date=Jun 5 2009, 04:48 PM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ Jun 5 2009, 04:48 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1710485"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think my biggest gripe is still how utterly lame the new characters look. If only they'd stick to the original four, I think I wouldn't be quite as bothered by this.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The fat guy and the con man look pretty good to me, and the Scout is a cool TF2 character so it's nice that he's in there.
<!--quoteo(post=1709981:date=Jun 3 2009, 10:55 PM:name=SentrySteve)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SentrySteve @ Jun 3 2009, 10:55 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1709981"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The difference is in the value perceived. L4D1 was a brand new IP and a brand new gaming experience. It was worth the full purchase price since nothing had really been done quite like L4D1 before. L4D2 is more or less L4D1 in a different setting with different characters, but it's going to be a very similar gaming experience, hence it's not perceived to be worth as much.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
moultanoCreator of ns_shiva.Join Date: 2002-12-14Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
edited June 2009
10,000 member boycott on steam: <a href="http://steamcommunity.com/groups/L4D2boycott" target="_blank">http://steamcommunity.com/groups/L4D2boycott</a>
Comments
L4D2 is coming out with more stuff than L4D, which was full price, so shouldn't L4D2 be full price?
By that logic, adding any single feature to an existing game means that game should cost just as much as the original. No? I don't see how you can argue with what everyone else has been saying - L4D came out in November 2008, major patch came out in April (free, btw) -- and I might add that this patch added some of the things that L4D2 is also adding. New campaigns (and thus new maps), new game mode.. and now L4D2 is set for release less than a year after L4D? They need to take a Blizzard approach here and market this like Starcraft: Brood War rather than an entirely new game. I'd be less pissed if they did, in any case.
Only problem?
It is still a ###### Move.
Sure, we expect it from EA with a new Madden every year, but not from Valve. Valve is a company that tends to be fairly good to their fans (lots of content patches to TF2 and stuff like that), and this seems counter intuitive to us. Thus, we don't like it, and hope that they do something to rectify their ###### Move (like release L4D2 as an expansion for a reasonable price).
Stick said it best.
we bought this game, and then less then 1 year latter they release the same game just Better, with features that would have been awesome in the first game, thus making us all a little bit ticked off for getting suckered into paying full price for what was essentially a beta test.
Personally, I am not going to buy the game unless it is at a good discount.
Valve have a great reputation as one of the best game developers out there, but with this move they seem to be losing favour very rapidly. I really do hope they come around and give those with the original game a discount, after all they've gone back on decisions that upset players before, like when they added the milestone achievements for sniper and spy.
Valve: Prove me right!
No, adding a single feature would not make it an entirely new game. L4D2 has more stuff than L4D <i>and none of the original stuff</i> except for a few weapons, sounds, and infected designs. If you paid $50 for however many campaigns and weapons there are in L4D, doesn't it make sense to pay $50 for <i>more</i> campaigns? I mean, L4D if anything is worth LESS than L4D2 because L4D2 is theoretically supposed to be improved.
Still a ###### move.
*Valve <i>South</i>, AKA Turtle Rock Studios.
Also I don't get this sequel/expansion argument. You're saying that what makes a sequel is whether it uses a new engine or not?
L4D2 has:
New maps (and more of them than the original)
New gameplay (with new infected and subtle changes to various events making you play differently)
New enemies
New weapons (not "this assault rifle is a different model", but a melee weapon system)
New player characters, complete with new character interactions (a favourite in L4D)
New game mode
Furtherence of the story of L4D, which while some apparently don't care, I (amongst others; you should check the steam L4D forums for threads on the story and speculations on backstory etc...) do.
The fact that it doesn't use a new engine doesn't make it any less of a sequel. It's a new game, worthy of the sequel title.
What levels do you think will come with it?
One set in a shopping mall? That'd be great fun. Maybe you'd have a great big siege area in a food court, and everyone would want to hide behind the burger counter due to there being a good choke point, but you prefer the sandwich shop because the graffiti on the wall is better.
One in a TV studio? Battling between sets? Zombified running runners? Lorraine Kelly as a boss battle?
The difference is in the value perceived. L4D1 was a brand new IP and a brand new gaming experience. It was worth the full purchase price since nothing had really been done quite like L4D1 before. L4D2 is more or less L4D1 in a different setting with different characters, but it's going to be a very similar gaming experience, hence it's not perceived to be worth as much. Especially when you factor in the very short development time. It would be like buying a sandwich for $5 that was made out of only bread and ham, eating it, then having the sandwich maker say "Now do you want one with bread, ham, peppers, cheese, lettuce, onion, and tomatoes?" My response would be "what the ###### bud, why didn't you just offer that to me first?" Granted, you can't take that analogy and apply it literally but it feels the same.
And you're right. L4D1 is now worth less because L4D2 is on the horizon, and that's another major problem. Instead of fixing and improving their maps, which is certainly possibly, they're just going to ignore it and allow the corner camping and other lame strategies that are being addressed for L4D2. It just feels like they're abandoning L4D1, which is not Valve's style.
Another annoying thing is that Valve assumes people want all the trash they're trying to pile on L4D2. I personally don't give a ###### about co-op mode, interlinking story lines, extra characters, or extra weapons (melee and otherwise). The only thing I want is more versus maps and more boss infected. However, if the only option is to pay another $50 for these things then I'd imagine a significant percent of their playerbase being upset.
I have lost alot of confidence within Valve, they really dropped the ball with me on this and TF2's stupid updates. Yes, there is my opinion shining in on a different game, TF2.
...But I digress, while I refuse to ever pay the full price for the game... If it does come on sale for half price n'such I will definitely get it.
To me, it aint worth the full price of a game when they are just handing you the other half of the sandwich that you deserve to have in the first place.
They'll probably let you give away your extraneous copy of L4D1 though.
They'll probably let you give away your extraneous copy of L4D1 though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which is of course useless because we would all be playing L4D2 instead of L4D with the friend we just gave the copy to.
I'm mostly thinking that it has more do to with the console version than anything else. Every time Valve wants to update a console version they have to pay Microsoft tens of thousands of dollars for it to go through compliance checks and if they don't want to charge for it (and let Microsoft take a cut) they still have to pay Microsoft for their bandwidth. My flatmate (the more console-inclined of the two of us) was playing TF2 on the 360 the other day. They <i>still</i> don't have the Kritzkrieg. They're missing a ton of map updates, unlocks, fixes (I saw people building teleporters through the doors on Dust) because it's expensive to deliver the service we get on the PC through Microsoft.
So, yes, in theory Valve could do L4D as updates, or they could do it as DLC, but they have to pay Microsoft more money if they do this. If they sell the same as a fresh disc they only have to pay someone else for the advertising space and the distribution, all the other costs can be absorbed by Valve.
[Edit] Not to mention the 360 only has a puny 512MB of RAM. All of the extra content like weapon models, textures and sounds are all loaded into RAM when you start a game. So if Valve want to mix extra content together and have it in the game at the same time (i.e. new weapons + old weapons; new Special Infected + old Special Infected), they would need to find a way to compress it all into no more than 512MB at a time. This isn't as much of a problem on the PC where anyone who can run L4D needs at least 1GB RAM (this is the minimum spec on the box). Valve have also cited this reason for why the 360 DLC for TF2 (with the weapon unlocks and maps) is taking so long.
So Valve is between a rock and a hard place because they wanted a bigger piece of the pie and they wanted a presence on the consoles, but it seems like doing this is making them compromise the awesome relationship they have built with their PC customers. This is the root of much of the ill feeling: the PC customers know this can be done as DLC and it doesn't need to cost the same as a full-price game; we know this should be <i>L4D: The Survivor Diaries</i> and not L4D2. They could give the DLC free or cheaper to PC customers, but then they would piss off the console customers. They didn't have to worry about this as much with the OB customers because they were getting an awesome deal anyway with 5 games in 1. Or maybe their market research is telling them that the console customers are pissed they can't have the updates the PC customers get, so they wanted to make it more 'equal'. Anyway, I don't see how Valve can do this without pissing one of their customer bases off, unless they absorb the cost of DLC on the consoles or give PC customers an almighty Steam-only discount.
Are there any console L4D players here? It might be interesting getting your opinions on what you expected from L4D when you bought it, and what you think of paying a full game price for L4D2.
Ah well, if they are going to release at the general same time as NS2. Valve/turtle rock will not have any chance at all J/K
If they *do* include the whole of L4D (as it is now) with L4D2, I would be kinda pissed off. It would reaffirm my opinions as stated above.
If they *do* include the whole of L4D (as it is now) with L4D2, I would be kinda pissed off. It would reaffirm my opinions as stated above.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
My ideal solution would be if they offered L4D2 for $10-20 off for L4D owners, and included the original with it. I don't have any problem paying money for new content, I just still want to be able to play L4D with a decent sized community.
---------
<a href="http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=1138" target="_blank">http://www.shacknews.com/featuredarticle.x?id=1138</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Shack: What price-point should we expect?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Doug Lombardi: This is a full sequel.
Shack: So full price?
Doug Lombardi: Yeah. At the end of the day, this is going to be a bigger game than Left 4 Dead. Its five campaigns versus four; all five are playable in Versus mode, Survival mode out of the box, the new multiplayer game mode. Plus over 20 new weapons and items. It's a full sequel.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's pretty obvious L4D2 was born from the updates meant for L4D. Even Gabe knew it was against the company character.
<a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/06/before-its-time-valve-explains-left-4-dead-sequel-to-ars.ars" target="_blank">http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/06...quel-to-ars.ars</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So the team brought their concepts and ideas to create a sequel to Gabe Newell, and even he was skeptical about the idea. According to Faliszek, he expressed his doubts, and claimed this move was against the character of the company. "To Gabe's credit, and he's a great guy to work for, he said if this is what you want to do, if this is what you're excited about, go do it."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As far as still supporting L4D, I just don't see that happening. IMO, they will finish off what little they were working on (4v4 multiplayer, SDK, community map support) and be done with it.
Really, what's the use in supporting L4D once the sequel is released? Adding content is normally used to entice people to purchase your game. Why would someone who doesn't own L4D want to purchase it when they could just purchase the new and improved L4D 2?
The whole mess has really pissed me off. Hell, I just bought this game a little over a month ago!!!
EDIT: Looks like I just had to wait a bit more to get the real idea of L4D support now that L4D2 has been announced.
<a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23911" target="_blank">http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23911</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->But what about Left 4 Dead, which some players expect to fall by the wayside in the wake of its sequel?
Leonard declined to commit to there being more Valve-created content for the game, instead pointing out some upcoming functionality tweaks and the potential in user-created levels for the PC version. "We are doing updates across the summer, adding new matchmaking features, and new features to facilitate user maps after the SDK is out," he said. "Certainly, user maps will be part of the ongoing Left 4 Dead 1 experience."
"Additionally, those maps can be transported into Left 4 Dead 2. With regard to more content, it's hard to say, because the timeline for Left 4 Dead 2 is so sensitive, and the team has a head of steam right now for the game."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That pretty much ends the question of more DLC for L4D...
-------------
I'm glad Valve knows the fans are pissed, I'm not glad they have no plans of changing their actions. I'm really interested in seeing how L4D2 sells. I actually enjoy L4D1 and I know for a fact I will not be buying L4D2, <i>especially</i> now that it's been confirmed to be at full retail price. The console players, however, are accustomed to getting these Madden-esk games every year. I predict L4D2 will be below Valve's expectations on the PC but about on par for what they expect on the consoles. What I find funny is how they call it a whole new game, rather than a continuation of L4D1 with some improvements since that would clearly place it in the "expansion pack" category. I don't know about you guys, but when I think of a "new game" I don't think of a game experience I had just one year ago, unless I'm playing sport games on the console.
The fat guy and the con man look pretty good to me, and the Scout is a cool TF2 character so it's nice that he's in there.
Half-Life 1 --> Half-Life 2
Uh... I'm not sure of the point you're trying to make here. Entirely new engine, delivery system, models, textures, sounds, everything.
<b>Oh and six freaking years.</b>
--Scythe--
Same IP, but totally different gaming experience.
Holy ######.
My 2 cents: Valve's ###### it's fans over.