Left 4 Dead sequel announcement invokes . . .boycott?

[General Zod]

LOL

Whatever your view is of internet boycotts, Left 4 Dead might be the first critically acclaimed franchise whose announcement of a sequel was answered by nearly 10,000 fans pledging not to buy it.

Since the game was unveiled June 1 at E3, a Steam group called L4D Boycott (NO-L4D2) has assembled 9,742 members as of Saturday, and seems to be growing. Far from being enthused about a new game, they have nine complaints, most of which concern L4D2 obviating the need for, and undermining the value of, L4D1 - and just a year after the fact:

• Significant content for L4D1 was promised, and never delivered
• Valve put little faith in L4D1 since they almost certainly started working on L4D2 right after release
• The fact that L4D2 is nearly identical to L4D1 will decimate the community for both games
• The announced date is not nearly enough time to polish content or make significant gameplay changes
• The new character designs seem bland and unappealing so far
• L4D2 is too bright to fit in with L4D1's visual aesthetic
• The fiddle-based horde music is extremely disliked, though the differently orchestrated music is otherwise welcome
• L4D2's release will result in a drop in quality and frequency for L4D1 content, even compared to before
• The community has lost faith in Valve's former reputation for commitment to their games post-release

There are accusations and recriminations that Valve forum posts referencing the boycott have resulted in sanctions, removals, and banishments (or "points" accrued toward such action.) And you can tell a movement has hit its stride when it gets a Hitler-Downfall Meme video (which is, all things considered, kind of funny. Especially the bit about achievements).

When L4D2 was announced at E3, my first thoughts held cheap my copy of the first game. Even after reading McWhertor's extended impressions, I'm not really seeing how this sequel doesn't do something a series of DLC packs couldn't also accomplish. Maybe I'm not a game developer; so are a supermajority of L4D players, and so Valve will have to answer these questions right up to its release date, and then some.

For in all its justifications of L4D2, Valve is going to be faced with its own history regarding Team Fortress 2, one of the standard-bearers for how DLC can help evolve a game and sustain fans well after its release. Even if TF2 began as (and its updates remain exclusive to) a PC game, argumentatively, everyone will ask why the same thing can't be done with L4D, or at least its PC version.

That's about as down-the-middle as I can play it, because I do respect Valve's perfect right to do what it wishes with its own IP, and anyone in the industry would agree the success of L4D fairly demands a sequel. But doing it so soon, and in this form and context, one of the most respected and evangelized brands in gaming risks taking a dent to its reputation. The game we see in November must be night-and-day different from the original, and I don't mean new maps set in the New Orleans sunshine.

This is the single most lulzy consequence of a sequel at E3. I like how the fanboys are just now discovering that Valve is out for a quick cash grab, because taking a fan mod and releasing it as a full game was totally not a cash grab.

[ray245]

This is the single most lulzy consequence of a sequel at E3. I like how the fanboys are just now discovering that Valve is out for a quick cash grab, because taking a fan mod and releasing it as a full game was totally not a cash grab.

A mod has certain limitation, such as the fact that modifying a game .exe files is prohibited for example. A mod for example might not have the 'Director AI' that helps to improve the gameplay.

[Narkis]

The first line is blatantly false. I know there are idiots who say they'll boycott Diablo 3 unless Blizzard caves in to their vision of how a true sequel should look like.

[LMSx]

• L4D2 is too bright to fit in with L4D1's visual aesthetic
• The fiddle-based horde music is extremely disliked, though the differently orchestrated music is otherwise welcome

I WILL NOT BUY THIS GAME

THERE IS TOO MUCH FIDDLE. AND I CAN SEE EVERYTHING!!!!

[Mr Bean]

Taken out of context it does seem silly, but it together and it does make twisted sense. Aside from possible engine changes this very much could be a expansion pack and I thought it was an expansion pack when I first saw the trailer, the "2" threw me because I was at the time guessing it was L4D :Louisiana or maybe L4D : Southernstain not L4D 2.

I'll buy this game like I bought the original, when it hits twenty dollars.

[Oskuro]

L4D has hit 20$ already? Or is that just on the consoles?

As for the article, I agree with most of the points presented, as they are the reason I'm dissapointed with the current state of the gaming industry. Of course, I'm also aware that the consumer base won't boycott, and will gladly pay for whatever is offered at them, so I see these calls for action as little more than futile flailing and attention whoring.

[DarkSilver]

you can find L4D on STEAM every couple weekends for half price.

I fully expect L4D2 to do the same, multiple times over.

[Mr Bean]

L4D has hit 20$ already? Or is that just on the consoles?

Steam runs sales and it has hit 21.99$ and 24.99$ in the past. I grabbed it at the 21.99$ mark which was fine for the two weeks I played the game.

[Stark]

I have to echo Bean. LOL.

That list of 'problems' is solid gold. Valve really has nerds fooled.

[Lord Relvenous]

While I won't go out and boycott it, I probably won't buy L4D2. L4d is fun, but not so much fun a new locale is enough to get me to shell out the money again. Sure I'm disappointed Valve didn't release a lot of what they said they would with L4D, but I'm not surprised by it.

Either way, L4D wasn't good enough to justify a repackaging being sold at full price.

[Death from the Sea]

really, after looking at the developers walkthrough demo video, I don't see anything that couldn't probably be an expansion pack kind of thing.

And I would rather keep following the original survivors I think, than a new group.

[GuppyShark]

Wont' be buying it, only bought L4D a few months ago and it didn't justify its price tag.

[Oskuro]

Oh, Steam. I'm an old-fashioned type of guy that likes to have the game on its box and all.

Regarding this whole L4D2 fiasco, that's mainly the reason I wait for a while before investing in a game, I let it mature and see how the publishers handle it. Considering that L4D is a multiplayer game, it probably means I won't get it, cause I do agree that the release of L4D2 will decimate its player base, and the need for Steam makes it worthless as a LAN game.

Here's to hoping the economic crisis brings an end to the teenager-with-holes-in-their-pockets demographic, so game companies can't keep pulling this crap (also known as the EA strategy).

[ray245]

Oh, Steam. I'm an old-fashioned type of guy that likes to have the game on its box and all.

Regarding this whole L4D2 fiasco, that's mainly the reason I wait for a while before investing in a game, I let it mature and see how the publishers handle it. Considering that L4D is a multiplayer game, it probably means I won't get it, cause I do agree that the release of L4D2 will decimate its player base, and the need for Steam makes it worthless as a LAN game.

Here's to hoping the economic crisis brings an end to the teenager-with-holes-in-their-pockets demographic, so game companies can't keep pulling this crap (also known as the EA strategy).

Not only that, it will serves as a further incentives for people to pirate L4D or its sequel if you need steam to play a LAN game. A large number of LAN shop down here make use of piracy to allow people to play on LAN.

[Oskuro]

Yeah, I know, it is pure win when you have to crack a game you legally own so you can play offline LAN with a friend who also legally owns the game. But hey, causing frustration to legitimate clients is a small price to pay in order to enhance ineffectual anti-piracy actions.

Although I wouldn't want to derail this thread into a DRM debate, there's enough of those around already.

[Bluewolf]

To be honest, I find that releasing L4D2 now and having it as a sequel is a bit of a cow milking on Valve's part. On top of that I think many people see Valve as some kind of god while EA as kind of devil, therefore this move probably shatters that idea into many fine bits and makes them angry/upset. L4D will lose its player base die to this too so it feels like a copout to pay for another game.

A boycott will do jack shit though and some of those complaints just make me laugh.

[chitoryu12]

Let's take a vote: How many of you think that the people who claim to be boycotting L4D2 will buy it anyway? Just like.....pretty much every game people shout that they will "never buy" when they hear they don't like its features?

*raises hand*

[Nephtys]

I'm sure people will still buy it, but it'll curb enthusiasm for it, current L4D players, and prospective L4D players.

The game is pretty damn bare bones as it is. You have two bombs, two utility items, and five guns. You run around on four whole campaigns (5 with the DLC right?), and shoot the same 3 enemy super-zombies, or the 1 boss zombie.

If anything, this is the kind of game that demands DLC to stay relevant beyond the 'fun minigame' stage before you've beaten every campaign a few times, and played as infected to grief some people. It needed introducing new weapons, levels, modes and infected types to really stay relevant, in the same way TF2 did with multiple class updates, new game types, many new maps...

[Covenant]

I like L4D and I think it's got great value for a discount download title--it's not a game on it's own, but as a Commercial Mod, it's a very worthy game. It's worth 25 bucks, I'd say. 25 bucks is cheap, it's when it becomes 45, 55, 65 that games really require a lot more value (since buying two 25 dollar games lets me rotate off and on and get a lot more enjoyment out of one single 50 dollar game I beat in a week and then stare at). What L4D really needs is more of an emphasis into the stuff it already did interestingly--dynamic play, atmospheric elements, multiple paths, tempo control.

What it doesn't need is an entirely new game, it's going to destroy trust between buyers and retailers that when you buy a DLC-heavy game that you'll be getting a lot of longevity from that. Micropayments are a great way to milk people for a long time, so there's really no reason to release a new L4D, it won't even make them more money. Charge them for each new character, new level, new weapon (IE, have the game drop all the weapons, but people with the weapon unlocked get to use 'em), and so forth. You'll make more money that way.

[Stark]

Come on. Everyone with a brain (ie, less than 10% of the gaming public, probably less than that on Steam since they didn't have it until recently) knows that 'DLC' is a giant boondoggle. Either corps aren't structured to like it (ie they prefer shots of money short-term to slow sales long-term) or it simply doesn't work (ie, by magic, selling horse armour isn't profitable). The non-music games with DLC are exceptional, not the rule, and big-name games that were 'promised' DLC and recieved none/one 'expansion' are very common.

You'd think they could just do an XBL and sell maps/characters/whatever for years, pushing game updates for free like XBL, but it's not surprising they haven't. The whole 'splitting community' thing isn't really surprising either; it's only surprising that people honestly thought Valve was too smart/too 'good' to do it. Just like how people were surprised Harmonix did a Guitar Hero Metallica.

My biggest LOL here is people decrying L4D2 as a mod... of a mod. Oh noes they couldn't patch it for the new features... er... somehow...

[Nephtys]

I don't see an issue with selling some cheap content packs for 10 bucks or something. Whatever. It doesn't cost nearly as much as the dev costs sunk into making a game, and uses most of the same resources anyway.

I think people are trying to think of how TF2's DLC has been very well received (lots of new maps, equipment, and gametypes on a semi-regular basis), while L4D got a grand total of one, right before the sequel was announced. While yes, quality DLC is an exception (luls at FO3 and Mass Effect 'DLC'), at least TF2 did have enough to keep people satisfied.

Also, as an aside. Haha at anyone who thinks HL2: Ep3 is going to come out in the next decade

[Richard Sharpe]

Come on. Everyone with a brain (ie, less than 10% of the gaming public, probably less than that on Steam since they didn't have it until recently) knows that 'DLC' is a giant boondoggle. Either corps aren't structured to like it (ie they prefer shots of money short-term to slow sales long-term) or it simply doesn't work (ie, by magic, selling horse armour isn't profitable). The non-music games with DLC are exceptional, not the rule, and big-name games that were 'promised' DLC and recieved none/one 'expansion' are very common.

You'd think they could just do an XBL and sell maps/characters/whatever for years, pushing game updates for free like XBL, but it's not surprising they haven't. The whole 'splitting community' thing isn't really surprising either; it's only surprising that people honestly thought Valve was too smart/too 'good' to do it. Just like how people were surprised Harmonix did a Guitar Hero Metallica.

My biggest LOL here is people decrying L4D2 as a mod... of a mod. Oh noes they couldn't patch it for the new features... er... somehow...

I don't think so. With DLC, companies can release a surprisingly little amount of content (Like, say, Broken Steel for Fallout 3) without having to find a publisher beyond online distribution AND they can markup the crap out of it. And horse armour not being profitable? Dude, the minimal cost it took to code and skin horse armour is severely offset by the people who bought it for $3 or however much it was. DLC is essentially all profit, and I think one day it will replace retail-sold expansion packs.

[Stark]

So explain why they don't do so, shithead. There must be a reason why even games structured for DLC recieve fuck all, even when the devs wanted to at some point and other projects make money off it.

It's not hard to do a Gears/Halo3 and just blow out the map packs (and L4Ds structure gives more options than these games with characters etc) but they didn't for whatever reason. As Neph says, they could totally have charged $5-$10 for basically nothing and people would have bought it. So ... why does it happen so seldom?

[Richard Sharpe]

So explain why they don't do so, shithead. There must be a reason why even games structured for DLC recieve fuck all, even when the devs wanted to at some point and other projects make money off it.

It's not hard to do a Gears/Halo3 and just blow out the map packs (and L4Ds structure gives more options than these games with characters etc) but they didn't for whatever reason. As Neph says, they could totally have charged $5-$10 for basically nothing and people would have bought it. So ... why does it happen so seldom?

No reason to be so hostile,

DLC's a fairly new concept, as far as releasing content beyond bug fixes over the Internet is concerned. Some Devs don't think it's worth the effort, others want to move onto other projects and not look back. But so far, the climate has been fairly DLC friendly. Fable 2, Halo 3, Killzone 2, the aforementioned Fallout 3 all have DLC of some kind. Big release games tend to have it, and it's making cash on very little development costs.

[Stark]

It's NOT a new concept, and games are charged with 'OMG DLC' marketing during development. On consoles, it even doesn't cost the developer infrastructure and it's in MS's interests to encourage it. It SEEMS like a licence to print money given a sizable installed base. So... why the hell are games like Burnout Paradise so rare?

If you think the 'climate has been DLC friendly' you're cherry-picking and have no perspective. 'Having DLC' is NOT living up to the supposed licence to print money nature of teh DLC/microtransaction framework. Let's laugh at all the games touted as having DLC that got ONE mini expansion or map pack.