Spoiled brats or savvy consumers? L4D2 boycott discussed

Cliff Forster 23 Jun, 2009 at 3:24am ET Article published in Gaming

Nerd RAGE

E3 2009: famed game developer Valve announces Left 4 Dead 2. Fans of the original rejoice, right? A bigger, better, and more refined sequel that is going to be a surefire hit and a joy to play. Good for us, right?

Well, it appears that as of this writing at least twenty six thousand gamers on Steam are up in arms because they feel that Left 4 Dead 2 being released only a year or so after the original title somehow undervalues the experience they had with the original title. They have gone so far as to promote a group threatening to boycott Left 4 Dead 2. Their demands, as quoted–For Valve to offer “free, continual updates to Left 4 Dead in order to build and sustain the community.”

In fact, to be fair, let me copy the boycott group’s manifesto in its entirety:

WE RECOGNIZE:

• Valve is a company with financial needs and cannot be expected to survive without the release of new games.
• Judgment cannot be passed on the quality of Left 4 Dead 2 until its release.
• Left 4 Dead was, and is, a quality game which deserves the praise of the entire gaming community.

WE ARE COMMITTED:

• To holding Valve to its promise of free, continual updates to Left 4 Dead in order to build and sustain the community.
• To keeping the Left 4 Dead community together in order to improve the quality of online gaming.
• To supporting the model of continual updates Valve has set forth with its staple products like Team Fortress 2.

WE BELIEVE:

• The release of Left 4 Dead 2 as a stand-alone sequel will split the communities and decrease the quality of multiplayer gaming.
• The announced content of Left 4 Dead 2 does not warrant a stand-alone, full-priced sequel and should instead become updates (free or otherwise) for Left 4 Dead.
• Left 4 Dead has not yet received the support and content which Valve has repeatedly stated will be delivered.
• The release of Left 4 Dead 2 will make Left 4 Dead an obsolete purchase and inferior piece of software after only one year since release.

WE REQUEST:

• That Valve honor its commitment to release ongoing periodic content for Left 4 Dead.
• That Left 4 Dead 2 not be released as a stand-alone, full-priced sequel but as either a free update to Left 4 Dead or an expansion with full compatibility with basic Left 4 Dead owners.
• That Left 4 Dead owners be given discounts for Left 4 Dead 2, should it be released as premium content.

There you have it. Over 26,000 gamers seem to think that Valve owes them more than they have already been granted. Now, I have said it before, and it bears repeating: I consider myself an advocate for the consumer. One of my real life heroes is Ralph Nader.

Entire boycott is babies

I firmly believe that corporations should be held accountable by the consumer. It’s one my core values as a living, breathing human being, and somehow this call to hold Valve accountable for more free original Left 4 Dead content is completely lost on me. I just don’t get it. The consumer advocate in me wants to pick up the torch with you and go hunt down some Valve executives and demand justice be served, but when I take a little time to think about what is being suggested, let’s be frank: it’s bullshit.

So I ask the people in Steam’s L4D2boycott group, has Valve not given us enough? You Spoiled Brats!

Let’s take a little walk down memory lane shall we?

1. No developer has openly embraced the mod community, and encouraged more free user-created content than Valve. Counterstrike, one of the most popular multiplayer titles in the history of gaming, got its start as a free downloadable mod to the original Half Life. Garry’s Mod got its start as entirely free content, and it’s a sandbox I know we have all enjoyed playing in.
2. Valve’s Steam Community has always been free. You know that little service Microsoft calls Xbox Live? You have to pay for that, but lucky PC community gaming consumers get the Steam experience for free. Oh, and they let you start groups to openly berate their business practices, and threaten to boycott their upcoming products without charging you a penny to get in.
3. Half Life 2–what more do I need to say? Get a group of PC gamers in a room, at least a few of them will worship this leap forward in first person shooter design. It’s a modern classic, and a contender for the best game ever created, and Valve gave it to you at the regular price, gave you a nice death match game for free later, and ultimately gave you two expansions for a minimal entry fee of $19.99. Based off the reputation of the franchise, Valve could have without a doubt demanded more for the episodic content, but they value their fans and asked a budget price.
4. The Orange Box. Has there been a better deal in the history of gaming? Seriously people, it’s Half Life 2, with both expansion episodes, Portal and Team Fortress 2, and it was a regular priced title when it came out. It’s an even better deal right now! It’s nothing short of thievery.  In my mind, you could argue there is $200 worth of content in there.  It’s all AAA stuff, and Valve practically handed it to us.
5. If you already owned the Half Life games, Portal and Team Fortress 2 were a whopping $19.99 each. Portal may not be exceedingly long, but if quality trumps quantity, that’s a full priced experience if there ever was one. And Team Fortress 2, years later, they are still updating it for free! What more could we ask for?
6. Let’s talk about TF2 for a second: Since early 2008, Valve has spent hundreds of developer hours (developers have salaries, remember?) adding free content to this amazing team-based shooter. TF2 is a gift that keeps on giving. By all accounts, you can score TF2 for anywhere from $10 to $20 right now, and the amount of content they’ve added since it launched is nothing short of staggering. New maps, new weapons, an entire shift in the game mechanic, entire new game modes, and constant bug fixes and improvements. This is a labor of love for Valve, and we get it for an unbelievably low entry price. You can literally get thousands of hours of entertainment with TF2. For $10. Stop your bitching.
7. Steam’s weekly half-priced specials. As gamers, we know rarely do games go on sale. Sure, they drop in price when they are overstocked, or are starting to show their age, but seriously, how often do you go anywhere to find a game you want to buy is less than its suggested retail? You do, however, find this on Steam weekly. Not just Valve titles either, but for the sake of argument we will talk about Valve specific specials I have seen Steam sales on: $9.99 for Day of Defeat Source, Portal for $4.99, $9.99 for the whole Orange Box (I’m not kidding, the Orange box was $9.99 a few weeks back!), Left 4 Dead was half priced for $24.99 a month or so ago. Who else offers you better pricing for such high quality content?

So L4D2boycott group, I ask you: would your energy from 26,000 strong be better spent fighting a true consumer injustice in the world? Perhaps complain about why drinking water costs over $1 a bottle, or complain about the rising cost of gasoline and energy? Perhaps boycott a product from a company that has actually let you down?  Work together to find out why little old ladies can’t afford their medication instead? Why fight Valve, who has given us so much for so little? Here is my suggestion, take that energy you have today, fight a battle worth fighting. Wait for the reviews of Left 4 Dead 2 to hit, and make a decision if it’s worth the asking price to you. Somehow, I bet it will be, it’s Valve we are talking about after all. I dare you to name a PC developer that has consistently wowed us as often as they have.  I dare you to tell me who has dealt with us more squarely over the years than Valve.

I thought so. Class dismissed…

Snarkasm enters…

I think it’s about time we had a point-counterpoint article. Shall we joust?

Let’s start from the top. You consider yourself a clear proponent that corporations should be held accountable–so I’ll have to assume that you mean we should also hold them accountable to their own words. Is that not exactly what this petition group aims to do?

Left 4 Dead writer Chet Faliszek has let loose with some intriguing details on the downloadable content for Valve’s upcoming fast-paced zombie-tastic shooter for PC and Xbox 360. And yes, a flamethrower might be involved.

The company plans to add new scenarios to the game’s initial 4, as well as new bosses and weapons. “There were strong hints at a flamethrower coming not long after launch,” 1UP reported after talking to Faliszek.

The Valve writer also promised that the studio aims to make that DLC available more quickly than they have done with Team Fortress 2. Shacknews

Even Gabe Newell has repeatedly committed to L4D updates similar to their TF2 strategy:

“Doing a sequel in one year is new for Valve. But providing ongoing support for our titles after the initial launch isn’t…

In addition to the recently released Survival Pack, we are releasing authoring tools for Mod makers, community matchmaking, 4×4 matchmaking, and more new content during the coming months for L4D1.” Kotaku

Now let’s compare that to some of the stated goals of the petition:

WE ARE COMMITTED:

• To holding Valve to its promise of free, continual updates to Left 4 Dead in order to build and sustain the community. […]
• To supporting the model of continual updates Valve has set forth with its staple products like Team Fortress 2.

WE BELIEVE:

• Left 4 Dead has not yet received the support and content which Valve has repeatedly stated will be delivered. […]
• The release of Left 4 Dead 2 will make Left 4 Dead an obsolete purchase and inferior piece of software after only one year since release.

WE REQUEST:

• That Valve honor its commitment to release ongoing periodic content for Left 4 Dead. […]

Sounds to me like the majority of the manifesto is just asking that Valve fulfill the promises to which it committed itself. After a year, we’ve gotten Survival mode, some updates to Versus play, and authoring tools, but none of the new campaigns or true new content that were discussed; we’ve certainly not gotten a flamethrower, or new weapons of any kind to date.

As a consumer advocate, Cliff, aren’t you going to insist that Valve fulfill its published promises? It wouldn’t be entirely genuine to take two of the new campaign sequences that would have been DLC (paid or otherwise) for L4D and apply it to L4D2 a year later after pledging community support and content updates.

Let’s have competing numbered lists, too. Fight!

1. You say that nobody has encouraged more user-created content, and Valve certainly deserves that praise, but have you considered the reasons? As you say, CounterStrike started as a mod created by the community… until Valve bought it and started selling it. Sure, it still came with other games as well, but let’s not entirely pretend they gave it out for free to everybody out of the goodness of their hearts. They took a fantastic third party mod, made some polish, and started putting it out themselves to make some money from standalone sales and start building consumer goodwill for bundling a fun, addicting additional game, built on the same base they already had in place.
2. A comparison to Xbox Live is interesting, though perhaps a little insufficient. Xbox Live provides central servers for games to host multiplayer, which Valve only recently began to do (with L4D, no less), multimedia purchasing and streaming capability, Netflix integration, and more. Steam can be boiled down, at its roots, to Valve’s version of DRM. A comparison to Impulse is more apt, as both are game- and game-related content delivery services, and Impulse is also free. It’s in Valve’s best interest that Steam is free; it makes purchasing and policing their games easier.
3. No one will deny that Half Life 2 is among the greatest games in existence, and Valve certainly deserves praise for it–but do they really deserve a pass in other areas because of a past publication? That would be like excusing Ford’s miserable car lineup because at one time they made the GT40 and it won some races. It’s amazing, and deserves praise for a long time, but no sir, it does not excuse the Escape Hybrid. And your two expansions for $20 each? Yeah, those are part of a trilogy–which means a game that would, according to current standards, have gone for $50 at one blow will now cost $60 over time. Valve’s accountants are shrewd–they know money now is worth more than money later, and they found a great way to do it. I can’t say I entirely understand how the existence of Half Life 2 means they should release L4D2 a year after the first, but a counterpoint is a counterpoint!
4. Ah, the Orange Box. It certainly is a good deal, but $200 worth of material? Exaggeration certainly suits you, Cliffy. Half Life 2 was originally released in November 2004, and Episode 1 in June 2006. They could hardly be called full-price when released in the Orange Box in October 2007. That said, because Episode 2, TF2, and Portal were all priced at or above $20 individually, Valve still managed to get almost all of us to buy the Orange Box over just the games. The Orange Box is another example of Valve fostering gamer love, and part of the reason they’re seeing the current backlash they are. I’m sure we’ll revisit that later.
5. TF2 and Portal were $20 at release, as you say, but that wasn’t all that was in the Orange Box. If you already had “the Half Life games,” all you had at that point was HL, HL2, and HL2:Ep1. Episode Two came out in October 2007, exactly when the Orange Box was released. Even if you already had HL2 and Episode One, as mentioned in the pricing above, it still made more economic sense for you to buy the same games again, as the a la carte pricing was far out of line with what was offered in the Orange Box. This can be viewed several ways; I personally prefer to see it as Valve doing a nice thing, giving us a good bundle price, and providing gifting ability so we could get other gamers into the habit. Still, it stands that Valve managed to get you to buy the same content twice so you could give it away and get your friends hooked on the Half Life series. Very clever! And while you ask “what more could we ask for” when TF2’s still being updated, you might consider that they’re asking for nothing but the same treatment for L4D. Valve’s treatment of TF2 is exactly what L4D owners were hoping they’d replicate, since that’s what they claimed they would do when the game was released.
6. You do love yourself some TF2, eh Cliff? Nobody can fault Valve for how wonderfully they’ve treated the game in over two years since the beta. The map and gameplay updates alone are excellent, and the class updates are icing on the cake. Again, however, consider the following: sales of Team Fortress 2 went up 106% following a free update to the game, and they did it routinely. Valve knows what’s up. The content is just awesome for those of us that already own it, but it earns them extra sales every time they update it. The developers are doing just fine for themselves. You might also take into account that half of the maps they release with every map update come from–you guessed it–the community. It’s awesome to get community content, but it also bolsters their updates and means they have to do a little less work and get to feature their users. It’s win-win for them. Once more, with gusto: all the members of the petition want is for the same kind of treatment for Left4Dead.
7. Finally, the half-price specials are certainly awesome for people who have been on the fence for something. I, in fact, purchased L4D because it was down to $25 for a weekend a couple months after release. If anybody’s nailed what PC gamers love, it’s Valve, and it shows even more with these sales. Valve has figured it out. Yet another news flash, though: they don’t just do this philanthropically. At a DICE convention in February, Gabe Newell himself revealed exactly why Valve runs these specials (and runs them frequently):

…[the] half-price sale of Left 4 Dead resulted in a 3000% increase in sales of the game, posting overall sales that beat the title’s original launch performance.

Newell also mentioned that new Steam customers jumped 1600%… Shacknews

None of these are reasons to boycott Valve. They’re reasons, if nothing else, to admire Valve as a company that finally understands gamers. Gabe Newell is a visionary and someone who usually gives me no reason to think his first and foremost care isn’t the gamers for whom he’s working tirelessly. He’s also a business genius:

The crux of the Newell’s [DICE] address focused on the concept that direct communications with customers, transparency, and constant updates are the best ways to maximize profits from a product. In this way, Valve views its products as a service rather than a finished project. When the company shipped Team Fortress 2, work wasn’t done. Rather, the team said, “Now we can start.” The team has then gone on to ship 63 updates–which include anything from bug fixes to new game modes–to the game in just over 14 months… As Newell put it, “When you want to promote your product, you’re going to use your customers to reach new customers.”

… The issue with software pirates isn’t that they won’t pay money for games, he argued. After all, they are willing to pay thousands of dollars for PCs and hundreds more per year on internet connections. “What is the issue, is service. This is where pirates are ahead of us.” When a person can’t easily get access to your product, whether due to retail stores being far away, closed, or in another country entirely, they will look for alternate methods. Pirates offer that service where publishers often don’t. Following this chain of logic, Newell claimed that DRM can encourage piracy because it actually removes service from the product by restricting its use. IGN

The man just understands gaming as a business, and that’s why this L4D2 movement seems so out of place. They shipped 63 updates to TF2 in just over a year. In the 8 or so months that L4D has been out, there’s been a single gameplay update for it. The fans are only logically inferring that content that would have gone to L4D as downloadable content is now being redirected to L4D2, which only serves to enforce the sinking feeling that Left4Dead, when released, may well have been a paid beta test. It’s not often that a game with somewhere between 2 and 8 hours of campaign play (depending on difficulty) commands a full price tag; a second game with what appears, on the surface, to be essentially DLC within a year of the first release also threatening a full price tag is unheard of, and somewhat unnerving for a company we’ve grown to appreciate like Valve.

That said, let’s take a quick look at what, to people that haven’t played the L4D2 beta, it looks like the new game actually entails:

• Some new campaign content
• Four new Survivors and some new Infected
• New weapons, including a melee mode
• Improved AI director

Surely you can see why it looks like this could be a paid DLC pack rather than a brand new game. In fact, I think of all of that, the campaign content is by far the biggest request for L4D owners; weapons and AI would be nice additions. Surely, Valve, can’t you charge us $20 or $30 and call it an expansion pack rather than charging us $50 or $60 for what really doesn’t seem like a lot of content differences?

If you really look at the concerns in the petition and the promises from Valve, they don’t look as unreasonable as you might think. The root wishes out of the group are A) that Valve fulfill their promises to the community for ongoing content, which they’ve already proven a working model, and B) that Valve not fracture the community assembled around L4D so soon in its lifetime. It’s incredibly uncharacteristic of them, but there are reasons to think Valve is still going to do right by the community. Recent news has pointed out that Gabe is, in fact, looking for ways to keep the communities of L4D and L4D2 integrated with one another to avoid splitting either of them, and there’s still a chance they pull back from the “full price” option… or at the very least, show us all exactly what’s holding this back from being DLC of some sort. We’ve heard the updates are too much to stuff in there, Valve–now show us why, and show us you’re still the company we all love and the premiere game-focused company on the planet.

And please, release Half Life 2: Episode 3 already. <3

Comments

1. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 8:50am ardichoke I don't get what the big problem is I guess. I judge a games value on 1) the quality of the game experience. 2) the game's re playability and 3) The number of hours of enjoyment I get out of the game.
   
   As far as L4D goes, they got high marks on all accounts. I put in well over 40 hours in the first week of playing the game. That's more playtime than I've gotten out of any game recently. From the looks of L4D2, the updates are so above and beyond there's no realistic way it could possibly be a paid expansion to the original. Managing who has the expansion and who doesn't and making the expansion backwards compatible with non-expansion games would be a bigger headache than it was worth. As for a free upgrade? Please, there was FAR too much work put into this to expect that. If you ask me the boycotters have been spoiled by Valve for so long that they expect everything to be an upgrade for years. They need to grow up and get real. Valve will continue to treat it's customers well, I have no doubt, but a massive update such as this is clearly something that should generate some revenue.
2. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 9:52am Garg TL;DR
   
   Though I did skim it. If I played L4D, I'd be frustrated that the online play for the two games would be separate.
3. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 10:27am QCH Nice article and nice retort by Snarkasm. I am on the fence. I can see that Valve is a business and needs to fund it's projects and put money in their pockets but I also see that Valve has a rather tough road to competing with itself and TF2. If TF2 hadn't had so many updates for free I'm guessing L4D2 wouldn't be as big of an issue. However, since Valve DID provide so many things for free for TF2 they put themselves into a tight spot by not giving the same to L4D.
4. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 11:52am chrisWhite A bit of hyperbole aside I agree with Cliff but I think Snark has some really valid points as well. This would be entirely a non-issue—and I thought it was one—before I read the quotes Snark posted. It sounds like they do owe it to the customers to bring out some new content because they said they did. But I also feel, like Cliff that Valve has gone so far above and beyond for customers that it's hard to feel that cheated by this situation. I can see both sides.
5. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 12:24pm Thrax L4D2 bundle rumor, L4D2 rumor bundle, counter-strike, counter strike bundle, L4D2 bundled, HL2 EP3 bundle, HL 2 episode 3 bundle, L4D2, left 4 dead 2 bundle, L4D2 bundle EP3
   
   Er, oh hi, Google.
6. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 12:28pm TiberiusLazarus You forgot about: l4d2 flamethrower l4d2 chainsaw l4d2 boomer l4d zoey and hl2 alyx making out
   
   Also, good article. On the one hand I feel I wrung l4d out of most of its enjoyment factor (I got bored very quickly with it) and I feel I got all i wanted from it, but on the other hand there's that feeling of 'maybe this game was meant to be more and it just needs a little tender developer love'. Who knows.
7. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 12:56pm Koreish I'mma delete that post. I feel shamed.
8. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 2:02pm Cliff_Forster Wow, the group has over 35K threatening to boycott part 2 unless Daddy gives them more free content.....
   
   As a follow up, I would love to get a list of each profile in the group and see if they actually follow through on the boycott when the game comes out.
   
   That is the true test, if you don't like it, don't buy it, but somehow, I am fairly certain 90+% of the people in that group will cave in to the joy of more fast paced Zombie slaying combat, and I am willing to bet they will pay for it.
   
   If you believe Snark on point #5 ;*), hey, we are all defenseless against Valve's evil plan to get us hooked on quality games. They gave us the first taste for cheap, or gasp, in some cases for free!! (gifting from the bundle). According to Snark, Valve is in the business of pushing high quality digital dope. Hey maybe Jay and Silent Bob should man the counter at Steam? We obviously will have no choice but to cave to their alluring addicting product.
9. 
   23 Jun 2009 ~ 2:10pm Gate28 Valve makes good games. As long as Valves continues to do so, people (like I) will continue to buy Valve's competitively priced games as long as they live up to the quality of the Orange Box and Left 4 Dead, etc.
   
   Think about it, has Valve ever released a game that was sub-par?
   
   People buy six Guitar Hero games a year at $60 a pop, why are people throwing tantrums when a company well-known for quality games releases a sequel to one of their best games ever with so much more content in it?
   
   I'm sure if Valve could release it as an update or an expansion they would, so why all the crying?
10. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 3:23pm Gldm I think I can counterpoint better.
    
    See when MS tells Vista Ultimate owners "Gee sorry about that Ultimate Extras thing but hey you can buy Windows 7!" it's evil MS trying to screw people. But when Valve says "We're making your game obsolete by releasing its expansion pack as a sequel but we'll make dubious promises to keep releasing stuff for the first one." that's just fine and anyone who says otherwise is a whiny loser with an entitlement complex. Right?
    
    Let's try the numbered points.
    
    1. No developer has embraced the mod community? Didn't iD release source code or did I imagine that? What about Stardock and their encouragement of mods? What about Battlefield, what about Unreal, what about... you know what, nevermind, I don't have time to counter the Valve-blinds of all the CS kiddies and HL worshipers on this one.
    
    2. Yes the Steam "community" is free. So is a freaking website! We should be grateful Valve offers a free "community" aka "easy way to constantly spam you to buy our DRM infested games"? Wow gee thanks for that, you are truly the champions of gamers! Now can I play a game without ever needing a net connection, or do I need to go to Xbox for that?
    
    3. Umm I'll deny that a retread BSP and static radiosity engine with some functive physics bolt-ons is "among the greatest games ever made" if you like. Wow, "free deathmatch"! You mean a feature everyone had been expecting from games for years and getting for free with most FPS demos? Wow how generous. Maybe it was released separate because HL1's DM had such crappy net code it got the game slammed in reviews and Valve was still feeling the hurt? And episodic games were supposed to come out for cheap and often, HL2's expansions were neither.
    
    4. Ah yes The Orange Box. AKA "Crap our 'episodic' expansion took way too long to come out and now people are mad so let's throw in this student project and that mod we've been sitting on for 10 years because we realized we should buy CounterStrike instead and then killed it so as not to compete with ourselves!" Crap why do people rave about the out of the box indy game and the sequel to one of the most popular mods of all time and ignore our vastly more expensive to develop expansion pack for our aging flagship game?
    
    5. Portal and TF2 were "only $19.99" if you had HL2. Well gee CounterStrike and TFC were "free" if you had HL1 ten years ago. This is an improvement? No, this is Steam ramming piecemeal sale of game features down our throat with DRM.
    
    6. Yes let's talk about TF2! I love TF2. It's probably my favorite game since TF1, which I played for hours a day and even helped run a clan for. TF1 was the original quake mod, predating even Threewave CTF, and when Valve saw its success they thought they could buy it. So they did, ported it to the heathen TFC on HL with its crappy net code, and started work on TF2. Which was supposed to have this "amazing new engine" that I believe Intel used an alpha of to showcase the value of SSE (by doing tesselation or something). TF2 was going to be this ultra-realistic team based shooter... and then CounterStrike took off and Valve snapped that up. But oops, now they HAVE an ultra-realistic team based shooter! So they don't want to compete with themselves, an sit on TF2 FOR TEN FREAKING YEARS! Eventually it only sees the light of day by piggybacking on the R&D budget for new animation improvements in the engine, and even then only gets released as a "please take this offering and don't be mad at us for our failure at 'episodic content'" offering and is immediately seen as being worth far more than the episode it came with. And the people behind TF and TF2 have fought hard to continually update the game with new maps (taken from the best user-made ones that appear on servers just like TF did) and new weapons (much like how the original TF userbase would mod the mods), and somehow convince Valve NOT to sell them with micropayments or bundle them into a "sequel" or "update pack" that would kill the game.
    
    7. Yes weekly price specials. Someone has re-discovered the basics of economics and that more people will buy an intangible non-need product if it's priced lower than if it's priced higher. Way to go. Now if only they could start showing that draconian DRM like forced online activation only hurts legitimate customers like Stardock has been saying for years and even EA seems to be realizing.
11. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 3:50pm Cliff_Forster Gldm,
    
    Comparing Valve to Microsoft, come on, seriously??
12. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 3:52pm Snarkasm Weird, they're both companies. They couldn't possibly be worth comparison!
13. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 4:09pm Gate28 L4D2 will no doubt come out for $40. Windows 7 Ultimate will be like $260. It's much easier to pay 40 bucks to a little bit of new stuff than it is to pay almost 300 bucks for a little bit of new stuff.
    
    It's not like making it an expansion will make it any cheaper, anyways. 40 bucks is what a normal expansion pack for a 60 dollar game would retail for new. L4D2 is essentially a stand-alone expansion pack in this sense.
    
    The only problem I see with releasing it as a stand-alone game is needing to switch games to play the original L4D maps.
14. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 4:26pm Cliff_Forster Snark, come on dude, you know that the stinky pit of an OS that was Vista is in now fair way a comparison of the Zombie blasting awesomeness that is Left 4 Dead.
15. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 4:38pm Snarkasm Really? It's quite possible that both of them can be considered beta versions of their new final products - L4D2 and 7. Better AI, more content, some new looks... sort of like better performance, more functionality, some new looks...
    
    
16. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 5:11pm Cliff_Forster

    Snarkasm wrote:

    Really? It's quite possible that both of them can be considered beta versions of their new final products - L4D2 and 7. Better AI, more content, some new looks... sort of like better performance, more functionality, some new looks...
    
    

    
    Snark, do you have an answer for everything
    
    Lets take the whole OS vs. Game argument offline for a second. It will get us nowhere fast, two different animals. Nothing changes that Vista sucked, the L4D does not.
    
    Now, look at the history of game sequels. How many are new level packs for a popular idea? Mega man 1-6, Sonic the Hedgehog 1-3, All the 3D Zelda's change a few things up, but they are variations of the same theme, hell, ID had Quake I and II, then release III as a more realized, polished, and complete multilayer experience that some may have argued should have been an expansion to II. The Metal Gear Solid series feels like a continued variation on the same exact game play. Madden each year. Games based on Pro Wraslin, oh, this years will have more realistic cage physics!! Halo 1-3, 1 innovated console shooters, 2 added online, 3 was just more of the goodness from the prior 2, should Bungie give it away and say, hey, 3 was the game 2 should have been? GTA 3, Vice City, San Andreas, how many ways can you crash and car and murder a Hooker, are we saying RockStar did not have the right to milk an existing franchise? And the mother of all sequel making franchises, Street Fighter!! You have the World Warriors, Turbo, New Challengers, Alpha, Alpha II, Alpha III (my personal fav), III, III thrid strike, I could go on all day on the number of sequels and variations produced, oh, and Capcom vs. Marvel, and 2, all basicly updates on a popular existing idea. Guess what, sequels fuel the game industry, if something is popular, if it sells, you milk the content until people grow tired of it, or in the case of Sega, do something retarded and try to make Sonic work in 3D.
    
    Point being, in games, sequels that add a slight thin coat of paint to an existing idea are as common as opinions on the Icrontic forum. Are we suggesting that Valve does not deserve a slice of the Pie that so many developers milk over and over again? Why not call EA out for nabbing $59.99 yearly for a Roster update (I'm sorry, no amount of fancy marketing in the world can convince me that Tiberon is doing anything truly innovative). Lets ask Capcom to give each one of us that spent on numerous Street Fighter and Mega Man games a freebie because we got it coming. But Valve?? Don't gamers have bigger fish to fry?
17. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 5:16pm Snarkasm Ignoring Madden, since they're a freak of nature, does anybody put these sequels out within a year of the original?
    
    That's all anybody's saying. They want the content Valve promised them, and the lifetime of a normal game, not some release candidate. We bought a normal game; let it live like a normal game.
18. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 5:19pm Gate28 Yeah, Valve makes quality games and sells them for much lower than a lot of worse games out there. They COULD charge sixty bucks per game and still make a killing, but they make them 40, 30, 20, etc.
    
    L4D2 has SO MUCH MORE than L4D! new characters, levels, zombies, weapons, better AI, and the game has only just been announced. Patching the classic L4D with all this stuff would take a very long time, and an x-pack would cost money AND require anyone who doesn't own the original L4D and wants these features to buy it.
19. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 7:49pm ardichoke Snark - It's pretty obvious you don't play sports games. EVERY sports franchise craps out a new game yearly. Just as an example... go to Google product search and search for MLB 09, then MLB 08, 07, etc. There's a different game released each year and there really is little difference between besides roster changes. Occasionally they add a new game mode. Still, much less new content than L4D2 offers and nobody whines and complains about that.
20. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 9:41pm Snarkasm

    Snarkasm wrote:

    Ignoring Madden, since they're a freak of nature...

    
    I was very clearly acknowledging that sports games do yearly refreshes because of the very nature of changing sports teams, rosters, and ratings.
    
    None of those apply to L4D2, so your argument is invalid.
21. 
    23 Jun 2009 ~ 10:01pm ardichoke I disagree... If sports games can release new games just for roster changes without being criticized then I think the L4D2 complaints ring hollow given that there are major updates, much more than I'd ever expect out of a free upgrade or expansion pack. Roster updates and team ratings, that's the kind of thing that's perfect for upgrades/expansions because it's just minor changes. All new weapons, a whole new class of weapons, a major update to the AI engine that runs the games, new characters, entirely new zombie skins and more types of special zombie? That doesn't say expansion pack to me, it says sequel.
22. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 3:06am Snarkasm My point was simply that there's no comparison between recurring yearly sports games - those KNOWN, for a fact, to refresh their game yearly, and the suckers that buy them every year - and your standard fare for computer or console games.
    
    When was the last time that a supposed major title had a sequel released inside a year?
23. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 9:09am Cliff_Forster Serious Sam and Serious Sam the 2nd encounter, came out mere months apart.
24. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 9:55am Thrax Serious Sam wasn't a major title. It was the token gift game bundled with select video cards!
25. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 10:50am Cliff_Forster

    Thrax wrote:

    Serious Sam wasn't a major title. It was the token gift game bundled with select video cards!

    
    Thrax are you suggesting that Serious Sam was not a major leap forward in shooter design? A game with a meat head hero sporting a blond flat top, and shooting massive hordes of aliens, mostly while backpedaling?
    
    Serious Sam was a revolution in shooter design!! (yes, I am kidding)
    
    Okay, I have a real argument this time, and frankly, one that your not going to be able to avoid a fair comparison on.
    
    Call of Duty 4, immensely popular, and a damn fine game, and a community driven online shooter experience. Call of Duty World at War, released exactly one year after 4, while 4 was still immensely popular and had a huge community (I think it was still the most played game on XBL, and it was #2 on PC behind WOW).
    
    Are we saying the Call of Duty 4 community should be crying a river over the fact that World at War probably split part of their community??
26. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 10:53am patrickcabenjamin man, I loved serious sam
27. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 12:31pm Snarkasm

    Cliff_Forster wrote:

    Call of Duty 4, immensely popular, and a damn fine game, and a community driven online shooter experience. Call of Duty World at War, released exactly one year after 4, while 4 was still immensely popular and had a huge community (I think it was still the most played game on XBL, and it was #2 on PC behind WOW).
    
    Are we saying the Call of Duty 4 community should be crying a river over the fact that World at War probably split part of their community??

    
    A) Two different dev teams make up competing Call of Duty streams - Treyarch and Infinity Ward. IW makes the Modern Warfare series, which can easily be considered a different game series compared to the WWII-centric Treyarch-developed Call of Duty 3/World at War/etc. B) Due to the differences in game dynamic (WWII vs Modern Warfare), the audiences for the games are very segregated - those that like WWII gaming like WaW, those that don't like MW.
    
    Next?
28. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 12:48pm Thrax I've heard that if you don't agree with a developer or don't like the game you don't have to buy it.
    
    T [ ] / F [ ]
29. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 1:08pm Cliff_Forster

    Snarkasm wrote:

    A) Two different dev teams make up competing Call of Duty streams - Treyarch and Infinity Ward. IW makes the Modern Warfare series, which can easily be considered a different game series compared to the WWII-centric Treyarch-developed Call of Duty 3/World at War/etc. B) Due to the differences in game dynamic (WWII vs Modern Warfare), the audiences for the games are very segregated - those that like WWII gaming like WaW, those that don't like MW.
    
    Next?

    
    - Some folks, there's just no reasoning with....
    
    Okay, I have you now. Unreal Tournament 2003, then 2004.
    
    Its basically the same game with a new mode thrown in, and some vehicles, developed by the same developer - Epic, and we were promised cross play between 2003 and 2004 for the same DM maps and such, but that did not happen because of "complexities with the net code" I purchased 2003, and no, I did not stage a boycott when 2004 came out, I paid full price. So is Epic guilty as charged? Should we be taking this up with them as well? Thats a fair comparison, why werent people absolutely up in arms about it then? Why is Valve held to a higher standard than famed PC develper Epic?
    
    :kneel:
30. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 2:04pm Snarkasm Yeah, you should probably be pissed at them, too. Valve is more widely loved and talked about than Epic, though; they're probably just a victim of their own awesomeness.
31. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 6:21pm ardichoke The only real reason this is an issue anyway is because L4D is an online, multiplayer game. If this was your run-of-the-mill, story driven, single player FPS the fans would be PRAISING Valve for releasing 2 so quickly since 90% of them would have beaten the game inside of a month and would be drooling for a follow up.
    
    These boycotters are just cheapskates that are worried that everyone will move on to L4D2 and leave them behind, too cheap to buy the new one, stuck playing the old one with the other cheapskates like themself. At least that's how I see it. I don't really think they have much to worry about though, the two games have a vastly different style and I'm sure I'll switch back and forth between the darker, more gritty original and the lighter, more difficult sequel. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of other people do as well.
32. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 9:27pm NiGHTS Finally! I've found someone that doesn't mind dropping $60 on a game!
    
    
    Edit: for the record, I dislike even the idea of L4D2. I think 1 has plenty of potential left and certainly breaks away from the newfound Valve model of give a released game plenty of extras until our fans pee themselves with delight, then give some more.
    
    Signed, a happy 'cheapskate'
33. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 9:31pm NiGHTS

    Cliff_Forster wrote:

    Why is Valve held to a higher standard than famed PC develper Epic?

    
    1) Because the internet and most notably PC gamers hate Cliff
    2) Because it looks like Valve's going back on the 'promise' of further content releases for 1 by releasing a sequel so soon
34. 
    24 Jun 2009 ~ 9:57pm Mr.Pancakes So if I'm going to be joining this conversation, could Cliff please clear up a few questions:
    
    1) In what way are we whiners?
    
    2) Why would we hate sequels?
    
    3) Why do you think we can't even afford lunch?
    
    4) Why do you believe we think Valve "sux"?
    
    I think we'll start with the portrayal of the group first, and work our way onto other things. Perhaps we can get to the bottom of this misconception.
35. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 12:18am Koreish

    Thrax wrote:

    I've heard that if you don't agree with a developer or don't like the game you don't have to buy it.
    
    T [ ] / F [ ]

    
    T [X]
36. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 5:07am Cliff_Forster To clarify for Icrontic, our new friend Mr. Pancakes is running PR for the L4D2 boycott group on steam. I believe in an open dialogue, so I invited him here to defend the groups position.
    
    We had a brief exchange in email, and though I don't necessarily agree with the groups position, I do respect a small group that can organize any movement to thousands of followers.
    
    Mr. Pancakes,
    
    My perception is that many in the group are probably just looking for a corporate handout. Here is the thing, I'd dare you to find ten people that are more concerned about corporate accountability than I am, but trying to say a company like Valve owes its customers more free content? It just seems like an expenditure of energy that could be better spent trying to solve a real consumer injustice.
    
    That being said, you do have the attention of over 36K Steam members, which is impressive.
37. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 8:55am Mr.Pancakes Cliff,
    
    With all do respect, you have still to clarify what is and is not whining.
    
    I think you might be confused as to our position with regard to new content. We are asking for content that was promised, not simply any old content that we'd like to see. We're looking for Valve to include many of the ideas that they spoke about for L4D1 in the original game before we consider the purchase of a sequel.
    
    How is our movement not a real consumer injustice? Could you elaborate?
    
    Additionally, do you believe that holding people to their words is important?
38. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 2:49pm ardichoke Mr. Pancakes,
    
    First, it's with all due respect... sorry... pet peeve.
    
    Second, show me where Valve said how much expansion content they would provide. I'm aware they said there would be additional content. Guess what, the Survival pack is additional content. I haven't seen, so far, any place where they specified how much additional content they would provide. If your argument is based off them saying that they would provide DLC, and you just don't think they have given you ENOUGH DLC, then you are in fact, whining. Now then, I'm open to being proven wrong so please, by all means, show me where Valve said how much DLC they would provide.
39. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 2:54pm Snarkasm Flamethrower.
    
    New campaign content.
    
    Neither of these have been outed or provided. Check my quotes from the article.
40. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 3:05pm ardichoke Fair enough, they didn't deliver those two things. Can you say for certain they won't though just because they are releasing L4D2? How do you know they won't add it between now and November OR after 2 comes out? I mean, they're still updating Counter-Strike even though Counter-Strike: Source has already been released. (Correct me if I'm wrong here as I don't play CS, but CS:S is a sequel correct?)
    
    This is why I don't agree with the boycotters and their position. They don't know what Valve has in the pipeline. All they know is a sequel is coming out and they don't like that because they feel like they haven't gotten enough freebies out of the company. Until they know for certain that Valve will not release any more updates or add-ons for L4D, they shouldn't be whining about them releasing 2. Hell, most game companies don't release any DLC and some barely even try to patch their bugs (I'm looking at you Bioware).
41. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 7:39pm Mr.Pancakes First, sorry about "due", ardichoke. It was early when I wrote that reply.
    
    You can view the content that Valve promised here:
    
    We aren't asking for "freebies" here. Rather, we are asking Valve to come through on their commitments that they made pre-release of L4D1 (which you can view in that video). If a company says they're going to do something, it isn't asking for a "freebie" if you want them to do what they said they would.
    
    While we cannot say for certain when Valve will be releasing, if ever, the promised L4D1 content, we can say that sooner would be better than later. We are consumers who are trying to make educated decisions about whether to buy L4D2 or not. If Valve does not show us that they can fulfill their commitments to L4D1, how can we be certain they'll fulfill their commitments to L4D2? Thus, we'd like to see L4D1 content delivered before we feel L4D2 would be a good bet to buy.
    
    Additionally, how are we whining? We have been more than willing to extend the olive branch to Valve and journalists in order to foster a better understanding. In my experience, the people who are calling us "whiners" typically tend to label argumentation that they disagree with as "whining". Please enlighten us as to your justification for why you think we are whining.
    
    And last, just because Bioware doesn't give DLC for their games doesn't make it right for Valve to do the same. While it may be common practice by many gaming companies to leave games by the wayside, we feel that sort of practice disrespects the consumer--regardless of what company does it.
42. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 8:59pm ardichoke Regardless of what Valve said they would give you, unless you had a legal, written contract with them stating they would provide you with said content then you shouldn't expect to get anything more than what the game comes with at release. In that context, any DLC that they give you is a freebie. It's content, that didn't come with the game as purchased, that wasn't guaranteed and that they gave you for free. That is pretty much the definition of a freebie.
    
    As for your sooner is better than later argument, I couldn't disagree more. For example... was it better that Microsoft released Vista sooner as opposed to putting more development time into it and releasing it later? I think not. Content should be released when it's ready, not on some deadline. I'd rather wait a couple extra months for a game than have to deal with bug-city when playing it. Valve seems to understand that which is why their games are rarely released "on time".
    
    Now then, there's 5 months til L4D2 is released. The first DLC pack came out what... about 6 months after the game was first released? Valve could EASILY drop more DLC between now and November. You are jumping the gun and making an assumption that just because L4D2 is supposed to come out in Nov (I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't come out til Dec or later, btw) that they are not going to release more DLC for 1. You know what they say about assumption.
    
    You're whining because, regardless of what Valve said, L4D is a much better game than most games on the market. It's fun and you probably got 10 times more playtime out of it than most games yet you're bawling about them releasing a sequel instead of giving you more free stuff. I don't care what Valve said, if it isn't in writing you should take it with a grain of salt. You should have bought it for the game as it was not assuming more would be added later. If you purchased it assuming more would be added via DLC, that just shows your naivete as a consumer. If you were expecting more DLC, you should have waited til it was released THEN bought the game. I just wanted the game as was, so I bought it as was and the DLC they released was a pleasant little bonus. I find the two sides of this argument boil down to this: people who expect a handout and people who bought the game as-was, not expecting further handouts. The ones expecting the handouts are the ones complaining now. The people who bought the game for the game as it was are generally pleased with it and looking forward to playing the sequel. Of course, there are the odd people that don't like the game at all... but that's beyond the scope of this discussion.
    
    As for my Bioware argument... I was just making the point that Valve could just stop giving DLC for anything like other companies. You should consider yourself fortunate to get DLC anyway given that just about any other game developer would have released L4D and then never given you any DLC or would have charged you for the DLC.
    
    Now then, you have every right to not purchase L4D2. No one is making you buy it. L4D won't stop working if you don't buy 2. So feel free to not buy it but don't whine about how it's so unfair that Valve is releasing 2 before they sated your appetite for free content. If you only bought the game for the free content that was going to be released later, that's your own fault. I, meanwhile, will be enjoying whacking some zombies with an axe... and if they release DLC for L4D2, hey, cool. If not, oh well, I just wanted to whack zombies with an axe anyway.
43. 
    25 Jun 2009 ~ 11:54pm Mr.Pancakes Ardichoke,
    
    Whether it was in legal writing or not doesn't matter. They shouldn't be going back on their word, period. We as consumers have every right not to buy their product if we feel they should be held to their words. That is why we're boycotting L4D2.
    
    As far as my "sooner or later" argument goes, your counterexample is not applicable. Why? Because Valve set a timetable for release of some of it's content, which it failed to make. If Valve couldn't have met their timetable of a few weeks after launch for an SDK then they shouldn't have promised it. In fact, if Valve wasn't prepared to create the SDK they promised in that time frame, maybe they should have held off on releasing L4D1 till they were prepared to support it like they intended.
    
    I would reply to the rest of your argument, but there isn't much for me to reply to. I think you've overlooked my own arguments, and made some assertions/rantings in place of a full response.
    
    For example, you argument about why we are whiners was hard to follow. I was expecting something like "You are whiners because you are doing [insert example from our messages] and not [insert an example of a valid form of complaint]". Instead, what you wrote was more along the lines of commentary on the enjoyment of L4D.
    
    I'm not trying to be insulting here, although I may be achieving that merely in my criticism of your writing, but I really don't know what to tell you. If you want to argue against us, that is fine. You're more than welcome to form your own opinion. However, please address what people say in a rational manner.
    
    In fact, I think we need some sort of moderator for this discussion to prevent some of the ranting.
44. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 2:10am primesuspect There are no rules being broken. Carry on.
    
    --admin
45. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 4:14am ardichoke Pancakes-
    
    My definition of whining, at least in this case, is complaining because you feel like you're owed something which you're not. Basically the adult equivalent of a toddler throwing a temper tantrum in the middle of the grocery store. Companies say things, they often don't follow through for various reasons, get over it. Valve follows through more often than not. They also usually go above and beyond expectation. You're picking one of the few times that they haven't and making a big deal about it. That, to me at least, can fairly be construed as whining.
    
    Once again, no one is making you buy L4D2. I, for one, will not miss you should you decide not to. I know plenty of other people that are going to buy it because they appreciate the massive amounts of playtime L4D1 gave them and want to support Valve. As I said before, if you bought L4D1 expecting gratuitous amounts of free content, I think you should reevaluate your criteria for purchasing games as you should be doing so on their merits not on hypothetical future DLC/upgrades regardless of whether the company promised them or not.
    
    As for my sooner or later argument, it is applicable. All developers set timetables (some publicly, some privately). Rarely do they actually meet these time tables, unless of course their timetables are absurdly relaxed. There are two basic types of developer out there though, ones that release on the timetable regardless of if the product is ready or not (such as Microsoft did with Vista) and those that push the timetable back so that the product they release is suitably ready for the market (such as Valve). L4D was supposed to come out weeks, if not months before it did, they pushed the release back because it wasn't ready. Half-Life 2 was the same way. If you actually pay attention to Valves releases, you will find that more often than not they delay the release of their games. This is often because they encounter unexpected development setbacks and they want to make sure they release a solid product. As I said before, I'd rather they release a solid product not on time than buggy piece of crap on time. People like you, however, will never be pleased. If they had released on the time table and it had been flawed and buggy, I can guarantee you'd be complaining that they didn't take the time to fix the bugs before releasing and you'd be starting all sorts of groups discouraging people from buying the game until they release patches. That would, of course, be your right. I'd actually probably agree with you in that case since I disagree with releasing buggy products just to meet a deadline.
    
    Now then, I can tell you right now that you're not going to change my mind about L4D2. I got easily over 100 hours of gameplay out of L4D. I'm very satisfied that my 45 dollars (pre-order, 10% off) was well spent. As such, I have absolutely no problem with them releasing 2 this winter and will likely pre-order it as well. It's also quite clear that I'm not going to persuade you that you're wrong. You feel slighted because you clearly bought the game with the expectation that Valve was going to give you all sorts of extra free stuff. Now that you only got a little free stuff you feel sleighted. Nothing I can say will change that. You ranting and throwing a fit on the Internet isn't very likely to change it either though. All I can hope is that this experience teaches you a lesson.... all companies break promises, it's a fact of life. Don't purchase something thinking that improvements are going to be released for it unless the company is contractually obligated to provide them.
    
    Now, if you'll excuse me, I have some zombies to kill. Gotta keep my aim sharp. I hear L4D2 is going to be quite a bit more challenging and I intend to be ready for it from day 1.
46. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 4:26am Koreish The only way to solve this is a fight to the death.
47. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 4:36am ardichoke I guess it's a good thing that I brought my knife, isn't it?!?!
    
    
48. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 12:10pm Mr.Pancakes ardichoke,
    
    We're only boycotting because of things which Valve DOES owe us, not things which Valve doesn't owe us. Therefore, you argument is flawed.
    
    We bought L4D1 under the rightful impression that Valve would be following through on it's word. Valve failed to follow through, and so we can choose to not buy L4D2 unless Valve gives L4D1 priority--viz, by releasing the content they spoke of pre-launch of L4D1.
    
    Additionally, just because Valve delays the launch of their games or content does not mean it is right for them to do that. You've said nothing about the ethics of the situation, and only focused on the precedent of what Valve has done.
    
    I hope that you learn a lesson from this as well. Namely, that you cut down on your blatant assertion and ranting and focus more on the arguments at hand. Try taking a look at this site: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ It contains a list of logical fallacies which are common mistakes in argumentation. It might be worth looking over
49. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 1:55pm ardichoke No, Mr.Pancakes, Valve doesn't owe you anything. That's where YOU are mistaken. This is why YOUR argument is flawed. If you don't have a contract with them stating that they owe you something, they don't owe you a damn thing. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp. OMG, I purchased this game with no guarantee that they would actually release DLC, and they did... but not enough to satisfy me! SHOCK, AWE, AMAZEMENT, OUTRAGE!
    
    I'm not going to waste any more time debating with you. Additionally, as for your fallacies, I'm familiar with them having taken communication courses in the past. I tried as best as could be done in a debate about an opinion, such as this is, to avoid them.
    
    Now then, I have better things to do with my weekend than argue with Mr. Entitlement. There are houses to be looked at after all.
50. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 2:07pm BuddyJ /me throws a Yellow Flag on the field.
    
    
    Ardichoke, that comes off a a personal attack. No roughing the debater!
51. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 2:08pm primesuspect Yep, personal attacks cross the line.
52. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 2:13pm ardichoke Yeah, my bad. I still think it's true but I shouldn't have said it.
    
    Either way, I'm done with this. Pancakes feels Valve somehow owes him something and nothing I say will change that. Pancakes, I hope, realizes that no matter what he says, I'm not going to share his feeling of entitlement. Once again, as I said a number of posts ago, it comes down to buying the game on some promise of future added content vs. buying the game simply because it's awesome and not expecting more.
53. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 2:32pm Mr.Pancakes ardichoke,
    
    You said "I'm not going to waste any more time debating with you." No complaints here
    
    It's about time someone stepped in to deal with these personal attacks too.
54. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 3:50pm Cliff_Forster

    Mr.Pancakes wrote:

    ardichoke,
    
    You said "I'm not going to waste any more time debating with you." No complaints here
    
    It's about time someone stepped in to deal with these personal attacks too.

    
    For the record, even if I don't agree with the position, I have gained some respect for the movement. Its interesting to see a few people start something like this and watch it grow. Consumers have a right to express their dissatisfaction weather I or anyone else feels that it is a worthy issue or not.
    
    In a wider sense, isn't this one of the things that is truly magic about the internet? To have an open forum, to debate, to discuss, to bring a group of people together. 36K in a group over a couple of weeks, that is impressive. I just wish we would see this groundswell of outrage on more things that actually matter.
    
    Lets all agree on one thing, no matter what happens here, Valve's treatment of the L4D community is not going to change the world one way or the other, so while its an interesting debate on what is owed to a gaming community in terms of long term support, its also worth noting that we all have far bigger fish to fry as citizens.
    
    Mr. Pancakes, I thank you for your time and efforts here. I don't fundamentally agree with the cause, but I do respect you as someone that could bring a group of people together to organize and attempt to hold a corporation accountable. No matter the outcome, I hope you will continue to do the same when you feel a group of your peers is being mistreated. Your entitled to express your point of view on Icrontic.com, or anywhere else as long as its done with respect, and I belive you have conducted yourself in a very respectful mannor.
55. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 5:25pm Thrax I bought L4D. I greatly enjoy it. It's one of the most enjoyable games I've played in a long time; I don't think Valve "owes" me anything. The firm is well within their right to move ahead with L4D 2, and I do not feel short-changed by the move.
56. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 7:39pm Koreish Both arguements seem to be flawed at this point. Valve did give a verbal contract promising us new content, maybe not signed but a contract none the less. After checking the L4D blog it seems that they are releasing some content so it looks like they're keeping that promise.
57. 
    26 Jun 2009 ~ 9:20pm NiGHTS Hey now, Business Law 101 entering the fray!
58. 
    29 Nov 2009 ~ 4:42pm heyjoshdotnet Hey just checking in with the boycotters...
    
    Now that the game is out, was all this worth it?