64 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >
 |
| 44. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 15:30 |
Elessar |
|
|
Dagok - It's their job to promote their games. Where do you gather the theme of this story is them promoting their games? Again, the quote released was strictly related to them fucking up. It's a sorry excuse for an excuse. Drop the excuses, release the updates for L4D1 and do what you gotta do for L4D2. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 43. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 15:12 |
Verno |
|
|
People wanted to see quicker releases from Valve
Somehow I think there's a middle ground between 5 year devs cycles and 1 year EA style dev cycles, gimme a break with the hyperbole man.
If Valve released a map a month for a year and then stopped, people would just bitch instead of being thankful for what they did get.
Some people might. I guarantee it wouldn't be as many people as are complaining about L4D2 right now though.
L4D2 has a ton of content and changes to it, and if people can't see that for themselves, no amount of debating will convince them of that.
I like how you say you're tolerant of other opinions previously then go right and say something like this. Well yeah they can't see it for themselves, the game isn't even out and the preview material certainly hasn't been enough for me to come to a conclusion and I think I'm pretty reasonable about the whole situation compared to most. Second, how does that change the fact that they're angry about L4D1, not 2? No one is upset at L4D2: The Game. People are upset at it coming so quickly after the first game hasn't received what they think is adequate product support.
You can call them names or label them unreasonable but regardless, they are consumers with money to spend. They are entitled to get worked up into a frothing rage and not buy any Valve games ever again if that's what they really want. The more reasonable people will weigh the second game versus the cost of the first and how much time they spent with it and make a decision from there.
Put simply it doesn't make me unreasonable just because I'm not yet convinced the second game was warranted only a year after the first, especially considering the lack of paid DLC or expansion packs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 42. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:54 |
Krovven |
|
|
People wanted to see quicker releases from Valve...they got it...then others bitch. Valve can't win, no matter what they do.
If Valve released a map a month for a year and then stopped, people would just bitch instead of being thankful for what they did get.
L4D2 has a ton of content and changes to it, and if people can't see that for themselves, no amount of debating will convince them of that. I've even seen posts on others forums from people commenting after the GTV interview, that they were once shy of the idea of L4D2 so soon, but they are now seeing that there is far more than DLC, warranting a new game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 41. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:47 |
Verno |
|
|
But Ive never seen such a public freak-out over something that really is minor.
Have they ever announced a sequel so soon after failing to deliver on features in a product? Not hard to see why people are "freaking out". I don't think I'm freaking out personally, just being weary and I think that's healthy as a consumer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 40. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:41 |
Krovven |
|
|
Uh, said what? It is specific to L4D
They've said plenty of things that didn't come true too.
You can't figure out your own quote? That's what you said. It does not apply to just L4D. They have said things about their plans for all their games in the past that haven't panned out for one reason or another. But Ive never seen such a public freak-out over something that really is minor.
You claim people like me ignore Valve's side of things and should focus on what they say yet ignore what they have already said?
That doesn't mean they can't form their own opinion and that doesn't mean their opinion is invalid if they don't agree with yours.
I never said they couldn't and I never said their opinion is invalid. Ive actually said multiple times that I agree with some things and have my own issues on top of that (some Ive posted about before). But I'm tired of reading the same crap "they promised...", without taking into account what they have said since then and just letting it go and see what happens? I've said this many times.
No amount of bitching is going to change that L4D2 is coming out in November. They have said they are working on integration between the two games, as well as additional content for L4D1, along with other things they haven't talked about yet. Have a beer, smoke a joint or whatever your pleasure is and chillax. See what happens in the next 4 months.
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 14:46. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 39. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:31 |
Verno |
|
|
And its not specific to L4D. I even said this in my post earlier.
Uh, said what? It is specific to L4D, they were quite specific in saying many things about the game that haven't come true. You claim people like me ignore Valve's side of things and should focus on what they say yet ignore what they have already said?
You're using backwards logic to tell everyone else to be quiet because you don't like what they're saying is the bottom line.
Valve said many things, people shouldn't blindly believe them nor should they blindly accuse them of things. That doesn't mean they can't form their own opinion and that doesn't mean their opinion is invalid if they don't agree with yours. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 38. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:26 |
Krovven |
|
|
So what, they said stuff? They've said plenty of things that didn't come true too.
And its not specific to L4D. I even said this in my post earlier.
You should have learned years ago that they have a tendancy to change gears very quickly, often putting things on hold while they focus on something else or just redesign whatever it was because it wasn't working out as they wanted.
So why continue to harp on and on about it? THINGS CHANGE. Hell, Valve have even said publicly several times over the last couple months that maybe they should have handled things differently, but they hope once people see the big picture they will understand. It's not like they have dropped support for anything, despite claims by some. Pull the thong out of your ass and move on. Either play what they release or don't.
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 14:27. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 37. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:13 |
Krovven |
|
|
They need to let it go, move on and quit bringing attention to their fuck up.
It's their job to promote their games.
Maybe the people complaining and stating they have no interest in L4D2 should "let it go and move on".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 36. |
Re: L4D DLC Was for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:11 |
Verno |
|
|
Actually all the mentions of this was BEFORE the game was released. They have also made it clear they are working on ways to marry the two games so as to not segregate the community. They have said this many times, yet continues to go ignored, instead people focus on things said in interviews a year ago before the game was even released.
So what, they said stuff? They've said plenty of things that didn't come true too. So I guess both sides are right going by your logic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 35. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 14:08 |
Krovven |
|
|
Most of your player base that 'does not care' will leave L4D and go solely to L4D2.
Really? They have also made it clear they are working on ways to marry the two games so as to not segregate the community. They have said this many times, yet continues to go ignored, instead people focus on things said in interviews a year ago before the game was even released.
Also I can not fathom how people can just ignore the fact that Valve still promised new guns, new people, new campaigns for L4D months after release...
Actually all the mentions of this was BEFORE the game was released.
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 14:11. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 34. |
Re: L4D DLC Meant for Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 11:12 |
Verno |
|
|
LMN8R - Man, you whiney bitches are still going on and on about what they promised before the game came out? Plans change, shit happens, move on
Hey if they're going to keep spamming PR stuff all the time then I'm going to keep commenting that I'm unhappy with the game. If you don't like it then I'm sorry but life isn't fair much like the way L4D1 was handled. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Faster Than Light, Tales of Graces F, Fire Emblem 3DS
Watching: Ghost in the Shell, Hannibal, Oblivion |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 33. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 10:12 |
Elessar |
|
|
LMN8R - Man, you whiney bitches are still going on and on about what they promised before the game came out? Plans change, shit happens, move on. I know the concept of being on topic in a thread is hard for some people, but questioning the sincerity that this story reports on, is pertinent.
The quote from Valve is a pathetic display of backtracking. They need to let it go, move on and quit bringing attention to their fuck up. It's beginning to look like they have a guilty conscience about it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get." |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 32. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 10:06 |
Dev |
|
|
I rarely play custom maps, but last I checked it went something like: you clicked an L4D option to show you custom games going on, you clicked one it gave you a link to download it, then you double clicked the downloaded file which auto installed (its some special L4D file extension that auto installs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 31. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 09:39 |
Veinman |
|
|
| Have they got it to the point where you can auto-download new content right from the game? That might get me playing again... I can't really be bothered to go download maps that may or may not ever get played online. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 30. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 06:38 |
The PC Warrior |
|
|
| The Pro-L4D people always seem more interested in bullying people into buying the followup as opposed to hearing what anyone has to say. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 29. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 05:10 |
Dev |
|
|
LMN8R:
I don't fully agree with this statement:
LMN8R "By the same token, if Left 4 Dead 2 looks interesting to you once it's out, on its own merits, fuck this historical nonsense bullshit, then buy it."
Part of a game's merits is which company is releasing it. For instance, you can usually be pretty sure if a company like Blizzard or Valve release a game, they will at a minimum fix showstopper bugs, and likely patch games for years after.
You can't always be sure about that with other companies. For instance, there was a fairly well known dual core showstopper bug with one of the Need for Speed games. A few fans of the game put enourmous effort into tracking down the bug (debugging etc) so that EA would be able to take the information and fairly easily fix it.
EA's response boiled down to:
"sorry, but we are taking that information to fix the sequel we have in the works, we aren't going to bother releasing a fix for the game you already paid for. If you want a working game, buy the sequel"
So if EA puts out a game, I wait to see reviews and comments by players. They can and DO ignore showstopper bugs (in addition to lots of other problems with EA).
So, that being said, a company's historical track record on support DOES matter and is PART of a game's merits. I'm thinking it likely that many people (especially console owners) ignore that factor and occasionally get bitten in the behind when that kinda thing rears its ugly head.
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 05:11. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 28. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 04:54 |
Dev |
|
|
LMN8R:
LOL, if you can't add weapons then why did they say they would before the game's release? Obviously they didn't agree with you.
And if the comparision between TF2 and L4D doesn't hold up, as I just said and quoted a couple of posts down, why did Gabe Newell (and other valve employees) make it?
Also, it wouldn't take "years". They could have added it as a mod or something if they wanted to go that route, to get something separate from the main game. And the obvious answer to "omg they can't add weapons/special infected to existing campaigns" is that there could be new campaigns with those weapons/special infected.
Now, they obviously made the smart business decision going the route to release all the new content as a separate game. They will make piles of money on it, whereas making DLC doesn't make them nearly that much money. My problem is thier broken promises about L4D1 DLC. Its quite obvious they took the work they were planning and promising to do for L4D1 and turned it into a full game. If they had kept thier mouths shut about extra weapons, characters, etc for L4D1, then I would almost certainly pre-order L4D2. But now? I'll probably wait for a sale.
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 04:58. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 27. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 02:58 |
Caveman |
|
|
| Well said LMN8R, if you buy a game based on vague, future promises, you're an idiot plain and simple, buy it based on what you see, not what you would like to see. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 26. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 02:56 |
elefunk |
|
|
Man, you whiney bitches are still going on and on about what they promised before the game came out? Plans change, shit happens, move on.
I don't care how much they've supported Team Fortress 2. TF2 is an awesome game, I love it, but it was worth the $30 they charged for it individually, outside the Orange Box, long before they ever added anything to it. Left 4 Dead is an entirely different game. Plays completely different, developing for it is completely different, and the comparison just doesn't hold up. What they've said about planning for DLC makes sense.
You can't just add a new boss infected here one at a time, or add a new weapon there. It would completely unbalance the games, the existing campaigns wouldn't properly support them without significant overhauls, and more. What they've shown for Left 4 Dead 2 so far would be IMPOSSIBLE to add as DLC for L4D in the same timeframe. Even if they took years, it would be impossible. Doing everything in one massive release is the only way to make content for this.
And at that point, they're not just going to release one massive DLC pack that's significantly larger than Left 4 Dead itself completely for free. That's just fucking absurd.
Buy games for what they're worth at the time of you buying it. If you bought a game on a promise, and were disappointed, it's your own fault. By the same token, if Left 4 Dead 2 looks interesting to you once it's out, on its own merits, fuck this historical nonsense bullshit, then buy it.
They also said new weapons and characters were due out as well. Putting out a vague statement is very different to announcing specific content. What the fuck, man? You specifically said, exactly: "So they "didn't think to mention" that they were working on the first major DLC for L4D?"
And I pointed out "yes, they did"
And then you say it doesn't matter?
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 02:57. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 25. |
Re: L4D DLC Was Meant to be Pre-E3 |
Aug 20, 2009, 02:45 |
elefunk |
|
|
.
This comment was edited on Aug 20, 2009, 02:50. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
64 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
