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.
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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'
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
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.
T [X]
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.
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?
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.
New campaign content.
Neither of these have been outed or provided. Check my quotes from the article.
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).
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.
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.
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.
--admin
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.
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
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.
Ardichoke, that comes off a a personal attack. No roughing the debater!
Ardichoke, that comes off a a personal attack. No roughing the debater!
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.
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.
Now that the game is out, was all this worth it?