More Left 4 Dead DLC after 'Crash Course,' says boycotter


Recommended Posts

gam_crashcoursedlc_5803423.jpg

by Ben Gilbert

When Left 4 Dead 2 boycott co-leader Walking_Target visited Wonka's chocolate factory Valve Software recently, he saw the most fantastical things. Though he can't go into too much detail per a verbal agreement with Valve, the lucky gent drew upon his inner Keighley to deliver a few scant details about "more DLC for Left 4 Dead coming after Crash Course" on his blog.

According to Walking_Target, the upcoming content could be "a new special infected, a new campaign, or new weapon(s)." Considering the fact that the Crash Course DLC lands this month, and Left 4 Dead 2 shambles into stores on November 17, that leaves one empty month in between for this mystery content -- that is, unless Valve plans on releasing it after L4D2. This would of course put us in a compromising position: Buy Left 4 Dead 2 and potentially miss out on the original game's DLC, or download the first game's DLC and maybe permanently delay a purchase of the sequel? We've contacted Valve for more details to help us (and you!) solve this particularly problematic predicament.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/09/11/more-lef...says-boycotter/

Seems like Valve are doing their best to keep L4D1 buyers happy. It probably wasn't even planned imo until after the whole L4D2 announcement/outcry happened and Valve had to put something together to shut them up.

Whatever the reason, who cares, it's coming and that's what matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said from the beginning they were going to have dlc and they are doing just that, I don't get where people are getting this "LOL THEY ONLY PLANNED DLC AFTER THE BOYCOTT" crap from.

And l4d2 looks a lot better than a bunch incremental dlc updates ever could be. All the new stuff in l4d2 works together, if they put any of that stuff in one at a time it would be completely unbalanced. Balance is extremely important in this game and its where l4d1 falls short, they are paying a LOT of attention to balance in 2 from what I've seen and its going to be a much better game.

Imagine if they just added the new SI/melee weapons to l4d1 1 at a time or something? It would utterly unbalance the game.

People need to get of their high horses and stop bitching. I for one am glad they are doing a whole new game, the one thing I do agree with the boycotters with is valve has been really slow with bug fixes for l4d.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more stuff they add to the original the less and less important the sequel becomes. I really don't see why they have even bothered making a sequel at this point just release a paid DLC with all the sequels contents at a fair price. ($20-$25 would be fair not $50)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The boycott in general is nonsense to me. So Valve decided to make a sequel... big deal! I know there's some people out there that just can't stand moving on, but for crying out loud, Valve is giving you what you want - just under a new name. It's still more of the same but with a different look. Is that such a big deal? I can understand it's a little soon and maybe people just don't have the cash to buy a whole new game, but nobody is forcing you to buy it and places like Walmart will be selling it for quite a while. No need to rush. Oh, and L4D has a modding community, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said from the beginning they were going to have dlc and they are doing just that, I don't get where people are getting this "LOL THEY ONLY PLANNED DLC AFTER THE BOYCOTT" crap from.

And l4d2 looks a lot better than a bunch incremental dlc updates ever could be. All the new stuff in l4d2 works together, if they put any of that stuff in one at a time it would be completely unbalanced. Balance is extremely important in this game and its where l4d1 falls short, they are paying a LOT of attention to balance in 2 from what I've seen and its going to be a much better game.

Imagine if they just added the new SI/melee weapons to l4d1 1 at a time or something? It would utterly unbalance the game.

People need to get of their high horses and stop bitching. I for one am glad they are doing a whole new game, the one thing I do agree with the boycotters with is valve has been really slow with bug fixes for l4d.

I don't remember wording my comment like that in the OP? :laugh: Maybe you should logout and go calm down for a while. You have some issues!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing how Team Fortress 2 cost less and has provided much more DLC and effort... I am really disappointed in valve on L4D. They have barely kept up with it, and even before a year after its release, they state they are making a L4D2, which is really just an addon, like another yearly release of madden..... There is plenty of reason not to be happy for L4D2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said from the beginning they were going to have dlc and they are doing just that, I don't get where people are getting this "LOL THEY ONLY PLANNED DLC AFTER THE BOYCOTT" crap from.

And l4d2 looks a lot better than a bunch incremental dlc updates ever could be. All the new stuff in l4d2 works together, if they put any of that stuff in one at a time it would be completely unbalanced. Balance is extremely important in this game and its where l4d1 falls short, they are paying a LOT of attention to balance in 2 from what I've seen and its going to be a much better game.

Imagine if they just added the new SI/melee weapons to l4d1 1 at a time or something? It would utterly unbalance the game.

People need to get of their high horses and stop bitching. I for one am glad they are doing a whole new game, the one thing I do agree with the boycotters with is valve has been really slow with bug fixes for l4d.

What you say is valid, but at the same time, so do the boycotters. The fact is, we who bought L4D paid ?30 for a game that came with 6 levels (4 co-op campaigns and 2 versus campaigns). You can buy games for half the price with twice the levels (Braid, or CS:S for example). We bought the game on good faith that Valve would give us more levels because we didn't get great value for money originally. We got a recycled source engine game with some fancy AI.

So now Valve have told us that L4D had a lifespan of exactly 1 year, making it one of the shortest lived multi-player games in history. That made the L4D1 players feel like they were (to an extent) just beta-testers for the "real" game.

To add to that, the "DLC" that they originally released was seen by some as a slap in the face, making the fans of the game wait eagerly for all of 2 "new" versus campaigns (which were essentially two existing campaigns with infected ladders added), and a game mode that simply added a timer to the crescendo events and broke them so they never ended.

The worry for me personally though is that the release of L4D2 is going to destroy the online community that has been created. L4D doesn't have the biggest community as it is, struggling to maintain 15,000 players at peak times. Assuming that 50% of those players migrate to L4D2, that leaves both games with 7,500 players at peak times, and as a result, less players than Counter-Strike Condition Zero, and a lot of half-empty lobbies.

I've got no personal problem with the amount of content being added to the original game, but I do worry that L4D2 is going to ruin both games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you say is valid, but at the same time, so do the boycotters. The fact is, we who bought L4D paid ?30 for a game that came with 6 levels (4 co-op campaigns and 2 versus campaigns). You can buy games for half the price with twice the levels (Braid, or CS:S for example). We bought the game on good faith that Valve would give us more levels because we didn't get great value for money originally. We got a recycled source engine game with some fancy AI.

So now Valve have told us that L4D had a lifespan of exactly 1 year, making it one of the shortest lived multi-player games in history. That made the L4D1 players feel like they were (to an extent) just beta-testers for the "real" game.

To add to that, the "DLC" that they originally released was seen by some as a slap in the face, making the fans of the game wait eagerly for all of 2 "new" versus campaigns (which were essentially two existing campaigns with infected ladders added), and a game mode that simply added a timer to the crescendo events and broke them so they never ended.>

The worry for me personally though is that the release of L4D2 is going to destroy the online community that has been created. L4D doesn't have the biggest community as it is, struggling to maintain 15,000 players at peak times. Assuming that 50% of those players migrate to L4D2, that leaves both games with 7,500 players at peak times, and as a result, less players than Counter-Strike Condition Zero, and a lot of half-empty lobbies.

I've got no personal problem with the amount of content being added to the original game, but I do worry that L4D2 is going to ruin both games.

QFT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you say is valid, but at the same time, so do the boycotters. The fact is, we who bought L4D paid ?30 for a game that came with 6 levels (4 co-op campaigns and 2 versus campaigns). You can buy games for half the price with twice the levels (Braid, or CS:S for example). We bought the game on good faith that Valve would give us more levels because we didn't get great value for money originally. We got a recycled source engine game with some fancy AI.

So now Valve have told us that L4D had a lifespan of exactly 1 year, making it one of the shortest lived multi-player games in history. That made the L4D1 players feel like they were (to an extent) just beta-testers for the "real" game.

To add to that, the "DLC" that they originally released was seen by some as a slap in the face, making the fans of the game wait eagerly for all of 2 "new" versus campaigns (which were essentially two existing campaigns with infected ladders added), and a game mode that simply added a timer to the crescendo events and broke them so they never ended.

The worry for me personally though is that the release of L4D2 is going to destroy the online community that has been created. L4D doesn't have the biggest community as it is, struggling to maintain 15,000 players at peak times. Assuming that 50% of those players migrate to L4D2, that leaves both games with 7,500 players at peak times, and as a result, less players than Counter-Strike Condition Zero, and a lot of half-empty lobbies.

I've got no personal problem with the amount of content being added to the original game, but I do worry that L4D2 is going to ruin both games.

Yes, BINGO!

I have always supported valve, and they have never let me down, Until L4D:((

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you say is valid, but at the same time, so do the boycotters. The fact is, we who bought L4D paid ?30 for a game that came with 6 levels (4 co-op campaigns and 2 versus campaigns). You can buy games for half the price with twice the levels (Braid, or CS:S for example). We bought the game on good faith that Valve would give us more levels because we didn't get great value for money originally. We got a recycled source engine game with some fancy AI.

It has 4 campaigns but the campaigns each have 5 maps which are bigger than CS:S maps. A LOT of work goes into making a l4d campaign too, go ask any l4d mapper. Much more work than a cs:s or ft2 map. There was a thread on the steam forums where some mappers detailed this very well, I will see if I can find the posts.

The worry for me personally though is that the release of L4D2 is going to destroy the online community that has been created. L4D doesn't have the biggest community as it is, struggling to maintain 15,000 players at peak times. Assuming that 50% of those players migrate to L4D2, that leaves both games with 7,500 players at peak times, and as a result, less players than Counter-Strike Condition Zero, and a lot of half-empty lobbies.

You fail to account for people who did not buy the first game getting l4d2 and many other factors... I'm sure it will have the same amount of players if not more.

Also I speculate almost everyone in the 'boycott' will end up getting l4d2:pp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has 4 campaigns but the campaigns each have 5 maps which are bigger than CS:S maps. A LOT of work goes into making a l4d campaign too, go ask any l4d mapper. Much more work than a cs:s or ft2 map. There was a thread on the steam forums where some mappers detailed this very well, I will see if I can find the posts.

No point in arguing about what maps are harder to make etc. The point is that L4D was released with very little content and most people assumed that more was going to be added in the future. There was also a thread on the steam forums with a list of loads of reviews saying that L4D was lacking in content upon release.

You fail to account for people who did not buy the first game getting l4d2 and many other factors... I'm sure it will have the same amount of players if not more.

He's talking about L4D1 losing a lot of players who move on to the sequel. Effectively killing the game off early.

Personally, I'm not as bothered about the lack of content but more the lack of overall support. There's a lot of bugs and balance fixes that need to be changed in L4D and I expected Valve more than anyone to provide that kind of support. They haven't and L4D has been left in quite a bad state for several months. I love playing L4D and I'm sure L4D2 will be even better, but I won't part with my cash until Valve step up and start supporting the original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.