Left 4 Dead 2 - now $6.80 on Steam!

[Powerlord]

It'd be great if Valve released more stuff more often for free. But they can't, and they don't, so why whine about it?

They can and they have with Team Fortress 2, a game that hasn't ever been as expensive as L4D: TF2 was originally $50 (now $30) in the Orange Box or $20 standalone.

It'd also be great if someone anonymously deposited a million bucks into my checking account, but that is also not likely to happen. There's no point and no substance to getting upset over either.

If people would quit feeling like the world owes them everything, there are a lot of problems that would go away. If you don't want to buy the game, then don't. But stop complaining that you're going to have to pay for it if you do want to play it. This is how the world/economy works.

I could spend so much time drawing parallels to similar situations that would seem much more ridiculous, but if you're so dense that you can't do that yourself, I'm not going to waste my time.

Right, but as pointed out earlier, Valve has with their other recently released multi-player game.

In the year and a half since Team Fortress 2's release, Valve has added:

3 new game modes

11 new Valve maps

7 new community maps

18 new unlockable weapons/items

235 new achievements

9 new rare unlockable hats (cosmetic only, but still...)

Additional air-blast ability to Pyro's Flamethrower

Upgraded Engineer buildings

Upgraded Spy's invisibility watch (not counting the two new ones)

Improved Spy Disguise handling

Granted, none of this has made it to the Xbox 360 version yet, but Valve says they need to rework some things due to memory constraints and then they'll release it.

On another note, it turns out the Left 4 Dead logo at E3 is fake. I managed to find a link to the real one.

[zircon]

Just because Valve had lots of DLC for Game X doesn't mean they can do it for Game Y. You have no idea what their structure or budgets are like. They have to pay all those programmers something. A likely hypothesis is that HL2 Ep3 isn't going to be out for awhile, but because they're still paying lots of programmers and artists to continue to release DLC for TF2 (which has more staying power) they need something to subsidize that expense... and a full L4D sequel would satisfy that requirement.

Your logic really doesn't make any sense; Jimmy is right. People really need to feel less entitled. You should also remember that the target markets for L4D and TF2 are not the same, nor were they marketed the same way. I didn't see giant TF2 billboards, but I did see those for L4D, a game that appeals to a broader market. It's easier to learn, pick up and play. It's not as competitive a game as TF2 which appeals more to the Counter-Strike / professional gamer crowd.

[Tensei]

(not addressed to anyone in particular)

Geez.

Seriously?

Ever heard of the saying "Give 'em a finger, they'll take the whole hand"?

Valve is doing everyone an incredible favor by adding absolutely free content to their games after they're released. In that respect they're one of the best game dev companies out there IMO. They have absolutely no obligation to add content, and I'd wager they really don't get THAT much extra revenue doing so. Again, adding DLC is NOT an industry standard, it's a luxury.

It's obvious TF2 is getting the most out of it because I'm pretty sure it's the most popular and most played out of their games at the moment. This does not mean Valve can afford to make such content-filled updates for EVERY game on a regular basis.

Imagine for a moment if Valve didn't do DLC at all. Would you be whining about them announcing L4D2 now?

[big giant circles]

Yep, pretty much what they said. Let me edit my post to emphasize some points I think you must have overlooked.

Expecting everything to always be free just because you don't feel like paying for it, or because you've been fortunate enough to receive freebies before is just naive

It'd be great if Valve released more stuff more often for free. But they can't, and they don't, so why whine about it?

[EdgeCrusher]

Yeah, for fuck sake people you bitch about as much as the people on the Steam forums. Wah wah valve didn't give me free shit on this game, wah wah. You know, go back to the days of quake, quake 2, HL1, etc. Did you get free shit then? Yeah, by mod teams. You're lucky that Valve even does free stuff with TF2, mainly cause they are not entitled to do dick for it. You people have been fed from a silver spoon and god forbid someone hand you something in a bronze one or you'll cry.

[The Damned]

http://kotaku.com/5276527/left-4-dead-2-extended-impressions

More details on some new stuff. Like, if you have a shotgun and you think that ax would come in handy, you have to decide. You can't have both a gun and a melee weapon at the same time.

Also, the Charger is designed to break up teams that stack or corner up in tight areas. Sounds like it will run in, push everyone away from each other, and then try to pounce on you like a Hunter.

Also, you may have seen some zombies in those yellow haz-mat suits. Turns out they can't be set on fire, so suddenly we have a problem with using fire to solve all of our problems.

[JCvgluvr]

Yeah, I'm really, really, reaaaaaaly hoping this is an odd-on, or at least you can somehow integrate both versions. I look at L4D, and I wish there was more going for it. I like the game (hell, I had one hell of an awesome laughfest with some guys last night... Survival with sudden "OH SHIT!" moments at the expense of your teammates can really make you crack up), and I do plan top play it as long as I can, but it needs more content. We've had the same four campaigns forever, and the two campaigns they added to Versus should have been there from the beginning.

Sadly, I fear that we will see this as a straight-up stand alone. That sours the whole deal a bit, as it's a lot of money for what other games get for free.

QFT.

You know, I personally wouldn't even want to see L4D2 as free content. I do think it deserves money. But what it does not deserve is to be called a full-fledged sequel and garner yet another $60 purchase! From the get go, this should've been DLC. Yeah, I'd pay 1200 Microsoft points for it, maybe even 1600! But $60 is simply far too much for what is fundamentally the same game! As a consumer, I personally feel taken advantage of!

[Native Jovian]

I'm with JC. I wouldn't have minded so much if it was a download that cost something, or even a full expansion pack. Nor would I have minded if it was a single player game, as I already explained. But a multiplayer-only game you expect to have some staying power and see more support from the developer -- especially Valve, which has a reputation for such things. The fact that L4D is more expensive with less content compared to TF2, and now has been abandoned sooner (much sooner, I'd expect) as well, seems like a legitimate complaint to me -- especially when they've apparently made the content (or are at least in the process of doing so), they're simply releasing it as a full-price separately-released sequel instead of a an expansion pack or DLC.

[DarkeSword]

Left 4 Dead 2 isn't just a couple of new maps and some new weapons. They did a lot of work on the Director AI, there are four new playable characters, two new special infecteds, a massive amount of new dialogue, new gametype, etc. It's not just something you can tack on for free, or even for pay. It's a full blown sequel with some new mechanics.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/06/01/left-4-dead-2-exclusive-rps-preview/

And let's be serious here: they just put out a free content patch that completed the the first one (Dead Air/Blood Harvest in Versus Mode and the survival mode). That's it. It's a full game now.

The problem with Valve is not that they're charging for this stuff; it's that they've somehow managed to spoil PC gamers EVEN MORE by giving them tons of free stuff.

[Native Jovian]

Left 4 Dead 2 isn't just a couple of new maps and some new weapons.

Unless there's a dramatic difference in the engine itself, it really doesn't warrant an entirely new game. A.I. tweaks don't count. New maps and gametypes and weapons and all that are nice additions -- don't get me wrong. But we got all that for free for TF2. It seems reasonable to want the same thing for L4D, doesn't it?

But apparently "expecting the same quality of product as other games made by the company" is "being spoiled" now.

[big giant circles]

Unless there's a dramatic difference in the engine itself, it really doesn't warrant an entirely new game. A.I. tweaks don't count. New maps and gametypes and weapons and all that are nice additions -- don't get me wrong. But we got all that for free for TF2. It seems reasonable to want the same thing for L4D, doesn't it?

But apparently "expecting the same quality of product as other games made by the company" is "being spoiled" now.

That is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Think about Halo. Or Pikmin. Or any other game that has a "2" at the end. Now think about what you just said.

Yes, it's reasonable to WANT the same thing, but how is that any different than wanting, say, free food for the rest of your life? Your post exhibits the very essence of being spoiled. Just listen to yourself man. You cannot deny that free DLC for TF2 hasn't spoiled you. Your stance remains exhaustingly naive and shows very juvenile comprehension (and reasoning) abilities. You clearly have no idea how business works.

[Schwaltzvald]

You clearly have no idea how business works.

I thought he was aiming for the consumer's perspective...

Most early buyers would be pissed if the product they got turned out to be planned for early obsolescence with a Ver.2 of the same product so early; and they didn't know about it in advance. Less so if it was done with a couple of years in between said products.

[DarkeSword]

"Aw man, if I'd have known that Valve was going to release Left4Dead 2 this Fall, I never would have bought Left4Dead and had a load of fun playing a co-op zombie shooter with my friends this past year. I guess all that fun I had was a total waste of my time and money!"

How does Left4Dead 2 make Left4Dead obsolete? You can still play it and it still looks great. It's still fun. Just because the sequel comes out, nobody's going to play L4D anymore? People still play TFC. People still play Quake III. People will still play L4D. In droves.

I'd also like to point out that while people keep citing TF2 as the free support model Valve should be following, TF2 is probably the ONLY game that Valve gives free updates for. Where is the official free Portal content update? What about Half-Life 2? Episode 1 wasn't much more than extra areas and some new enemies. Same with Episode 2. Why didn't they give that to us for free as a Half-Life 2 expansion pack?

Is it just the time? Is it because it's coming out so soon? Aren't these the same people that complain about Valve taking forever to come out with new stuff? So now Valve gets a sequel to a very popular game out in about a year, and people are complaining? Honestly, there's no pleasing people.

[SirChadlyOC]

I think this news would feel pretty awkward if you just bought the GOTY edition of L4D on the Xbox360 for $60. Like, "Oops, shoulda saved your money for 6 more months."

However, for those of us who bought this on the first week of release, I'm ready to pay money for a new one again. I'll especially be ready by November.

[big giant circles]

I thought he was aiming for the consumer's perspective...

I think he was aiming for his own perspective.

[Native Jovian]

That is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Think about Halo. Or Pikmin. Or any other game that has a "2" at the end. Now think about what you just said.

Except for this:

I wouldn't have minded so much if it was a download that cost something, or even a full expansion pack. Nor would I have minded if it was a single player game, as I already explained. But a multiplayer-only game you expect to have some staying power and see more support from the developer -- especially Valve, which has a reputation for such things.

Also what Schwaltzvald said. The fact is that L4D was relatively light on content in the first place. Even with the one update we did get, it's not exactly brimming with content. Most multiplayer games come with a dozen or more different weapons, a good variety of game types, and any number of other mechanics (different character/classes, vehicles, etc) to keep things fresh. L4D has 5 weapons (two of which are just upgrades of two others), three game types (and it started with one-and-a-half), and that's it. Oh, I suppose the specials count as different classes, but they're only available in one game mode and you can't actually pick which one you want anyway. It's a solid base, most certainly, but doesn't have nearly as much content as other similarly-priced games that have a dozen-or-more hour long single player campaign plus multiplayer. Expecting them to release more content for it, especially given their track record with TF2, isn't entirely unreasonable.

I'd also like to point out that while people keep citing TF2 as the free support model Valve should be following, TF2 is probably the ONLY game that Valve gives free updates for. Where is the official free Portal content update? What about Half-Life 2? Episode 1 wasn't much more than extra areas and some new enemies. Same with Episode 2. Why didn't they give that to us for free as a Half-Life 2 expansion pack?

Ignoring the repeatedly-made point that games that are largely or exclusively single player are different from games that are largely or exclusively multiplayer, I'm not even complaining about the fact that you have to pay for it; just the fact that they're releasing an entirely new game for it. A DLC with a fee attached? Sure. An expansion pack? Fine. A whole new game...? Eeeh... It seems unlikely to me that the difference between the two are going to be large enough to justify that. L4D is a good base, but if they're going to add more to it, I want to see them take what they have and add more, not chuck what they started with and replace it with something slightly different (even if it is superior to the original).

[zircon]

They're NOT chucking it. The first L4D is still fun and playable. When Quake II came out, people still played Quake. And people continue to play Quake now (not that many, but hey.) Your L4D experience isn't somehow ruined by there being a new version.

[Native Jovian]

Fine, sloppy wording on my part. I would prefer to see additions to the original game than to see an entirely new game, because it would a) let you use the new features on the old game, and most likely be cheaper. I'm not implying that L4D2 makes L4D bad, I'm saying that L4D1+2 > L4D1 + L4D2, and I see no reason why L4D2 would be better as a seperate game rather than as DLC or an expansion pack.

[zircon]

WTF is the difference between this and, say, Unreal Tournament 2003 to 2004? 2004 to UT 3? Quake 2 to Quake 3? Civilization 3 to Civilization 4? Most game sequels are only evolutionary improvements, keeping the same basic gameplay and shifting around content, adding a few new mechanics here and there. Hell, look at the first 6 Mega Man games.

[Native Jovian]

WTF is the difference between this and, say, Unreal Tournament 2003 to 2004? 2004 to UT 3? Quake 2 to Quake 3? Civilization 3 to Civilization 4?

I didn't pay $60 for any of those, and no one's asking me to pay another $60 for the new version. L4D was overpriced for the amount of content in it, even taking into account the DLC. Another free DLC would have made it worth the cost -- even paying $20 for an expansion pack would have been alright.

Let me put it this way -- I've bought TF2 twice, first for 360, then again for PC just to get the DLC. The DLC by itself was worth the whole cost of another copy of the game. L4D I've bought once, and even with the DLC we got, I don't think it was worth the price. It's a great game, don't get me wrong -- but it feels like half a great game, because there's not actually a whole lot there. Some more maps, some new weapons, some differences in the characters (or at least more new characters characters), new specials, more game modes -- any of that could have been added (en masse or incrementally) and it would have helped a lot. Instead they put it all in a completely new game and ask us to shell out another $60 for it? Without the backwards compatibility offered by a pay-for-DLC or an expansion pack? Bah.

[Rambo]

If I had that joker eating popcorn gif....

[zircon]

I didn't pay $60 for any of those, and no one's asking me to pay another $60 for the new version

Yeah, but you're dodging my point. Those games were all priced at a premium when they came out and so were there sequels. My point is that this is simply standard operating procedure for the video game industry. MOST sequels are like this. They're not groundbreaking at all. Valve has spoiled all of us, because they're so much better than the norm, that when they actually just follow the standard (instead ofd going way above) people complain.

[Rambo]

My point is that this is simply standard operating procedure for the video game industry. MOST sequels are like this. They're not groundbreaking at all. Valve has spoiled all of us, because they're so much better than the norm, that when they actually just follow the standard (instead ofd going way above) people complain.

I'm not a fan of L4D, but this is too true. You'd be paying monthly through the nose for any other game with as much DLC as TF2.

[big giant circles]

I didn't pay $60 for any of those, and no one's asking me to pay another $60 for the new version. L4D was overpriced for the amount of content in it, even taking into account the DLC. Another free DLC would have made it worth the cost -- even paying $20 for an expansion pack would have been alright.

Let me put it this way -- I've bought TF2 twice, first for 360, then again for PC just to get the DLC. The DLC by itself was worth the whole cost of another copy of the game. L4D I've bought once, and even with the DLC we got, I don't think it was worth the price.

THEN SHUT UP AND DON'T BUY IT THEN. Or wait for it to go on sale. Your argument remains completely preposterous. Again, it's based on this whole concept of (false) entitlement that you have. If Valve creates a product, they are obligated to set the price and terms of release to whatever they want (or need), NOT whatever YOU want. If you do not agree with the value they've placed on their product, then don't get it, simple as that. How is that complicated?

It seriously boils down to this: You want L4D2 to be an expansion to L4D1, and preferably a free one. But it's not, and you're throwing a tantrum about it, and you're not going to stop until everyone agrees with you that it should be a free/cheap expansion because you're used to getting free stuff from the same company for another game you like better.

[EdgeCrusher]

First off, I didn't pay "60" bucks for L4D. I got it for pc, you know, a gaming system that the game is made for, unlike some crappy 360 bastardization of a fps. I bought l4d new for 34 bucks at target. I played the crap out of it, and got my moneys worth. So you honestly can't sit there and try to tell us all how L4D was a rip off, cause it sure wasn't for me, and I know others that feel the same way.

L4D2 director is also different, if you had paid attention to the info. Not only is it tweaked, it also can change enviroment now too. So yeah, a map can be altered, pathes changed, etc etc. If that doesn't add some replayability to the game I don't know what would. Plus, there are 3 new special infected, one of them being the Charger shown in the video. Chargers make it able for the breaking up of "corner campers" and shit like that. 5 new campaigns, one interview saying one WILL BE A MALL CAMPAIGN, one yet unannounced game mode, and developer interviews are saying that L4D2 will be the platform for them to expand on now, but also doing more addons to L4D1, including new 4vs4 matchmaking improvements and community map packs announced possibly later this week.

So if you really want to bitch about that, you are a retard.