- Feb 3, 2009
- 502
- 270
This.
L4D2 Finally looking good.
- Thread starter Shoomonger
- Start date
This.
uma plata
L6: Sharp Member
- Jan 20, 2009
- 294
- 93
L4D2 exists because they can't drop any substantial post-release content onto the XBOX for free. That's how the platform is set up. If it was a PC only release, I guarantee they'd be releasing all that content for free
This is also the one and only issue holding up any TF2 updates on the XBOX
This is also the one and only issue holding up any TF2 updates on the XBOX
Caliostro
L6: Sharp Member
- Jul 6, 2009
- 261
- 110
That's a bad excuse... Release it as an update for PC and as a sequel for the xbox. If the Xbox crowd complains, the answer is simple: "Hardware limitations prevent us from doing what we wanted. Sorry. Bitch to Microsoft."
- Nov 12, 2007
- 1,128
- 746
I agree that it's a bad excuse, but it is the reason L4D2 is its own game. Maybe it's politics, maybe there are legal issues, or maybe there are some publishing logistics that make it difficult to make it a full product for one market and an update/expansion for another. For whatever reason, Valve decided to favor the console market over the PC market, and that's why so many PC gamers are rather upset with L4D2.
Fearlezz
L10: Glamorous Member
- May 4, 2008
- 787
- 476
Its because of many reasons that L4D2 is its own game, maybe politics like shmitz said, but also that its too big for a DLC, and as mentioned, they cant release it for free on the xbox. And they cant make it a DLC for PC and a sequal for the Xbox. Thats nonesense
Caliostro
L6: Sharp Member
- Jul 6, 2009
- 261
- 110
Still seems slightly contrived considering the PC market is Valve's main source of income (between their own releases and Steam), not to mention the reason they are where they are today and easily the platform they're most comfortable working with...
At the risk of inciting "scapegoat-ism", I'm looking at Doug Lombardi for this one...
At the risk of inciting "wtf-ism", I'm looking to see people read what I posted 2 minutes ago.
Caliostro
L6: Sharp Member
- Jul 6, 2009
- 261
- 110
The Left4Dead series is developed and published by Valve. Except in very rare cases, Valve keeps it's products in-house, this is specifically to allow them full control over their work.
Unless you think Gabe Newell just gets an extreme hard-on for rushing L4D sequels out the door while cutting everyone else as much slack as they could ever want/need, "publisher pressure" doesn't seem like a legit reason.
Edit: Specially considering how successful L4D 1 was and that it sold for "full-game" price, unlike TF2... And Robin Walker seems to be doing fine.
Last edited:
Am I the only one who remembers that L4D was developed primarily for Xbox, and that the Xbox market is what Valve is still focusing on? L4D... it's got a menu built for consoles, it's got matchmaking, the standard Steam server browser was tucked away, and all the development and PR seemed Xbox-centric. Left4Dead was, in many ways, Valve's attempt to make a big break with console players, and they did- L4D has a huge following.
So, L4D2 is based on that huge console fanbase they developed, and since this stuff cannot be released as DLC or otherwise for consoles, it's a new game.
So, L4D2 is based on that huge console fanbase they developed, and since this stuff cannot be released as DLC or otherwise for consoles, it's a new game.
Rikka
L5: Dapper Member
- Feb 10, 2009
- 208
- 388
Continued support for L4D doesn't cut it for most people because all the new content they wanted is already right there in L4D2. So boycotters are pissed over there whiny boycott reasons and people buying L4D2 want the new game there buying to be the focus.
A lot of controversy could have been avoided by not promising post-release content in the fashion they did. They should have kept it vague, but instead they promised the world.
A lot of controversy could have been avoided by not promising post-release content in the fashion they did. They should have kept it vague, but instead they promised the world.
uma plata
L6: Sharp Member
- Jan 20, 2009
- 294
- 93
You have to keep releases consistent across platforms
If you think the boycott is bad, think of the rage when all the XBOX owners learn they have to pay full retail price for something PC owners get for free
That would be taken as a deliberate 'screw you'. Not something Valve would want to do with their first IP for consoles
Caliostro
L6: Sharp Member
- Jul 6, 2009
- 261
- 110
[CITATION NEEDED]
Doesn't make much sense that L4D was primarily developed for Xbox when they actually brought in an outside team, Certain Affinity, to help them develop the Xbox version and developed the PC version themselves...
Source plx.
Last I checked the PC community is far bigger than the Xbox community, specially if we consider Valve depends a LOT more on it's PC community than on it's Xbox counterpart. So if you're going to piss someone off...
Last edited:
uma plata
L6: Sharp Member
- Jan 20, 2009
- 294
- 93
This is not a real world scenario. Valve is going to choose the path of least resistance, that lets them sell to customers from both platforms.
Did you keep up with L4D's development? Have you not played the freaking game and not noticed the lack of a standard Source-style menu in favor of something you can easily nagivate without a mouse? Have you not noticed that virtually all sneak peeks which contained a HUD, video or picture, where from Xbox? Did you not notice that L4D is the first game Valve has ever bought billboards around the United States for and advertised on television as an Xbox game to draw in Xbox players?
...have you not noticed the matchmaking system, something PC gamers abhor and only works optimally on consoles?
There's not much more to be said. L4D was a big Xbox release.
Mar
Banned
- Feb 12, 2009
- 607
- 63
By Drake Matter:
1. L4D is a multiplayer game. That means that its life span is dictated by how much people want to play it. It's lifespan can be limited to how much variety there is to it, and how much new content is released for it. In general, an almost totally multiplayer game is expected to give more time and enjoyment than many of your single player games. This is why even when I say "This game was worth the 50 dollars I payed for it" it does NOT mean that I got what I WANTED from the game. Paying the SAME COMPANY to REDO the game is not a luxury I give them especially when they've had so little time to do it.
2. Updates to fix glitches and such SHOULD be free. Updates to the maps they promised SHOULD be free. Updates to the weapons they promised SHOULD be free. And so on and so forth for Infected and what not. You know why? Because it's an insurance policy. It's a policy that says "We try to make this game as good as possible for our customers. This is in the hope that you will buy future games from us." Future games should not mean 1 every single year. That is for EA and the sports games. If you're happy to pay that go on ahead. The content offered already in L4D2 IS worth 50 dollars to me. But honestly, it's not worth ANOTHER 50 when they didn't do it right the first time. We shouldn't pay Valve just because they're Valve, we should pay them when they do something right. When they don't fix the glitches, unfairnesses, and general shinanigans in L4D1 how can they be allowed to get away with making a brand new game and expect us to pay more?
1. L4D is a multiplayer game. That means that its life span is dictated by how much people want to play it. It's lifespan can be limited to how much variety there is to it, and how much new content is released for it. In general, an almost totally multiplayer game is expected to give more time and enjoyment than many of your single player games. This is why even when I say "This game was worth the 50 dollars I payed for it" it does NOT mean that I got what I WANTED from the game. Paying the SAME COMPANY to REDO the game is not a luxury I give them especially when they've had so little time to do it.
2. Updates to fix glitches and such SHOULD be free. Updates to the maps they promised SHOULD be free. Updates to the weapons they promised SHOULD be free. And so on and so forth for Infected and what not. You know why? Because it's an insurance policy. It's a policy that says "We try to make this game as good as possible for our customers. This is in the hope that you will buy future games from us." Future games should not mean 1 every single year. That is for EA and the sports games. If you're happy to pay that go on ahead. The content offered already in L4D2 IS worth 50 dollars to me. But honestly, it's not worth ANOTHER 50 when they didn't do it right the first time. We shouldn't pay Valve just because they're Valve, we should pay them when they do something right. When they don't fix the glitches, unfairnesses, and general shinanigans in L4D1 how can they be allowed to get away with making a brand new game and expect us to pay more?
It's doubtful there will be a new campaign though. Notice how, pre-L4D2 announcement, they said they would release new campaigns. Now, they say they will release "DLC", and are very careful to make it vague.
Sure, if they do release a new L4D1 campaign, that's great. But 1 campaign even is NOT enough for me to play L4D1 again. And it's really really doubtful they would release a second new L4D1 campaign, let alone shake up the gameplay enough to fix the problems with it.
Honestly, at this point, I could give a shit if they keep supporting L4D1. All the good stuff is being put in the sequel, which looks to have far better gameplay.