Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 279
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

According to the RPS interview with L4D2's project lead, it's because L4D was mostly made by Turtle Rock, external to Valve, but the internal Valve guys really loved the concept and wanted to expand on it, make it their own work, but there wasn't much time for them to do it. They had so many ideas and so many different directions they wanted to go in that the total of the ideas was far past what L4D entails, so they approached Gaben and asked him to OK a full sequel, and he reluctantly said OK.

that still doesn't really justify making it a full-priced sequel though, at least not for a valve game. i downloaded dod for free back when it was still a beta, then valve bought it and developed it into dod 1.0/retail, with as far as i can tell 100% new content, even the sounds and hud were completely replaced. but because i had the mod installed, i got dod 1.0 and all its updates completely free. if they're saying the new features wont work with the L4D engine, they ported the entirety of dod:s over to the orange box not that long ago so that's not a valid reason either.

if the old content is included and l4d owners get a discount then i wont mind paying for it as much, i don't like the new characters (except nick) but new campaigns is what everyone wanted all along. i don't see that happening though since they'd need so much new dialogue for the original 4 survivors for the new campaigns and any conversations with the new characters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DOD:S has had better service than l4d.... i mean they kept that up to date with the engine and tested their new character style + did their first cinematic with it \:

L4D got survival mod. which is nice... but this game should be 10-20 bucks at most \:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think calling the original 'barren' is way, way wide of the mark. Each campaign takes roughly an hour to play through; 4 campaigns = 4 hours of gameplay right there. Some single player games last 4 hours start to finish while lacking any kind of replayability. When you play with three friends, L4D is eminently replayable; all of the maps are high quality. More to the point, I've seen the same 4 maps play out in markedly different fashions. The directory can completely change the way you play the map (e.g. no tier 2 weapons versus a tank) and it helps keep the game fresh. I've played well over 200 hours and I'm only now beginning to tire of it, and even then it's not down to the lack of level content.

The lack of weapons is definitely a bummer, but the weapons present are solid and satisfying. To whoever said that TF2 is 'better value' because of the amount of stuff in it: I've got TF2 and despite the infinite choice, character and variety on offer, I find L4D to be better value 'cause I've played it more :). TF2 is cool, but it doesn't make me want to play it anymore. There's nothing like booming a whole team followed by someone getting smoked off the edge, then two hunter 25s in the face. :D

My criticisms of L4D (most of these probably are to do with versus)

- Match making is abysmal. People constantly rage. There is no way to match up 4 v 4 or do anything of that sort. E.g. yesterday we waited 30 mins to get a game going. We played against some clan who were obviously looking to 'pub stomp'. After 3 maps of them failing to incap any of us or come close to putting us in trouble, they just stood in spawn and then shut their server down. The human element is worse than any of the game mechanics.

- It really sucks at letting players join games sometimes. You can have one game where it works flawlessly (someone quits, another joins within 5 seconds!) and others where it fails to function at all (5 maps of 4v3).

- Ironically, I think the length of the campaigns has been part of L4D's downfall. More isn't better. Committing to an hour+ long game isn't easy, especially when one team is getting comprehensively beaten. The really long game times are great when you're having an evenly matched game, but when it's a mismatch, it drags on for the losing team. I think most folk are used to 15-20 minute round times. Dip in, dip out. 5 maps and 1 hour+ is too much of a stretch. IMO they'd be better off structuring it around a 3 or 4 map stretch.

- Cheap tactics. Lots of the panic events can be bypassed or nullified through the use of questionable tactics. It totally removes the sense of urgency and tension when teams do this (e.g. closet camping, shooting alarmed cars and running inside, rushing crescendos breaking the director / AI)

- The scoring system is fairly muddled.

My interest in L4D2 is centred on whether Valve has done anything to correct these problems. It's the matchmaking and people issues that let L4D down. Overall I'm not sure about Valve releasing this as a full game so quickly simply because I don't know what changes they're making. If it's just a superficial change with some new weapons and levels, it'll be hard to buy into. They obviously know what they're doing and I'm going to buy it regardless, but I feel they may have misjudged people's expectations. I am fully satisfied with my L4D purchase purely because of the fact that I've played it to death and loved it (200 hours = ~10 pence per hour of entertainment), but if a lot of folk are not happy with the amount of stuff L4D came with, they're probably not going to shell out another 30 quid on L4D 2 if it looks like more of the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- Ironically, I think the length of the campaigns has been part of L4D's downfall. More isn't better. Committing to an hour+ long game isn't easy, especially when one team is getting comprehensively beaten. The really long game times are great when you're having an evenly matched game, but when it's a mismatch, it drags on for the losing team. I think most folk are used to 15-20 minute round times. Dip in, dip out. 5 maps and 1 hour+ is too much of a stretch. IMO they'd be better off structuring it around a 3 or 4 map stretch.

I actually agree with this more than anything. I love playing the game but it's such a time investment to do a full round, especially in VS. I've considered dabbling in a campaign off and on and the number one thing I've decided if I do is it'll be 3 maps instead of 5, and probably shorter ones at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think calling the original 'barren' is way, way wide of the mark. Each campaign takes roughly an hour to play through; 4 campaigns = 4 hours of gameplay right there. Some single player games last 4 hours start to finish while lacking any kind of replayability.

so just because stealing is popular, it is automatically legalized? and even if that statement wasn't a logical fallacy, i still wouldn't expect this sort of dick move pulled from a company of valve's stature.

also the issues you mentioned are not reasons enough for a new game; they are reasons for an update to some of the systems used by l4d (you should know this as a programmer).

a clue towards the conception of l4d2 in the first place may be that the original l4d wasn't made by the core valve team, but by turtle rock studios (who valve decided to buy at some point for whatever ridiculous reason in their heads).

Link to post
Share on other sites

so just because stealing is popular, it is automatically legalized? and even if that statement wasn't a logical fallacy, i still wouldn't expect this sort of dick move pulled from a company of valve's stature.

Come again? :P (didn't understand that.)

Anyway, the point that I was trying to get across is that despite its apparent lack of content compared to the likes of TF2, L4D is a fantastic game and has delivered the most fun gaming times I've had in years. Maybe I'm just some sort of weirdo who latches onto certain games in a big way, though (that makes all of my L4D buddies weirdos too, though :)).

Furthermore, I think quite a lot of folk have got used to the fact that Valve goes above and beyond what most other companies commit to in terms of supporting their games. Over the years, the amount of stuff they've added to the likes of CS, TFC, TF2 and various other titles is bordering on the ridiculous, so the moment they don't show such a commitment, folk are very quick to criticise.

also the issues you mentioned are not reasons enough for a new game; they are reasons for an update to some of the systems used by l4d (you should know this as a programmer).

The matchmaking stuff, certainly. The rest of the things I mentioned are gameplay problems that are non-trivial to fix. Valve has made several good tweaks to the gameplay after community feedback, so I'm not going to criticise them too much in that respect (e.g. booming ignores commons, smoker's tongue fixes and so on).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw even if I didn't purchase L4D I joined the L4D2 Boycott steam group which reached more than 15 000 members. The group is on top 50 now and represent more than 10% of the official L4D official group. I joined coz I think that L4D2 is clearly dedicated to consoles. Consequently consoles kill my cpu. Look: Crytek made a engine especially for consoles (but isn't it what did you expect for CE3!?), Splash damage is currently working on Brink and oblige theirs employees to play with f***ing paddles... Seriously wtf !? I still want play Pc games not Consoles games adapted on Pc! And seeing VALVe (one of my favorite company), always dedicated to Pc falling on Microsoft and their f***ing partnership with EA trap make me really angry! :mad: Consoles is bullshit, playing games with paddle give me headache. :fist:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want your favorite developers to be around in 5 years you shouldn’t curse consoles, making great AAA games these days usually takes allot of time and money, without 80% or so of the possible market buying your game it’s hard to justify the outgoing cost. At least you still get a PC version :)

It's here to stay so get used to it if I where you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, wow this thread is still going. To be honest then I think people are overreacting a bit too much over this. Sure, its kinda uncommon for Valve to release a full on sequel a year after the originals release, and I would definitely have preferred them to take a crack on a new IP instead, but to flip out like this with boycotts is going a bit too far in my opinion. I'm sure Valve wouldn't release something if they didn't think it would be up to their standard.

Plus if releasing L4D2 means them getting the extra monies needed to make Episode 3 and Half-Life 3 as amazing as possible then I'm totally for that :D

Now that I think about it, then Valve has really done themselves a disservice by being as generous as they have with the community for this long, was just a matter of time before people were gonna start biting the hand that feeds them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want your favorite developers to be around in 5 years you shouldn’t curse consoles, making great AAA games these days usually takes allot of time and money, without 80% or so of the possible market buying your game it’s hard to justify the outgoing cost. At least you still get a PC version :)

It's here to stay so get used to it if I where you!

Sorry Chris but I can't swallow all of this. Sorry If I'm going out of the main subject but I think that all of what I quoted belong "Crytek though" instead of you. Crysis sold well but Crytek has been victim of massive piracy...

Well, commercially, we had hopes that were not met. But the real expectations were actually met. As a developer we made a profit, so we're happy. Critically, we achieved goals. The [reviews] were slightly under the critique-level that we wanted to have, but that's life. We may have failed a little here and there, but overall Crysis I would say it didn't do excellent, but it did good. - Cevat Yerli

But instead of to resolve the main problem Crytek go round of it!

When Cevat said we would not create new PC exclusives, he was referring to any new projects we will start in the future. Of course Warhead has been under development for quite some time, and we had no desire or intention to disappoint our loyal PC fans. So, after some careful consideration, we decided to continue our support for the PC Crysis franchise with this release. But yes, all new franchises we develop in the future will be created with a cross platform strategy in mind. - Harald Seeley

Consequently, Crytek develop new franchises for cross platforms (which mean pc and consoles). I didn't mean that making new license from a cross platforms engine is bad or whatever, by far, I think that this is brilliant for casual gamer. But I doubt that Crytek will be protect from console piracy as far as I know.

By example here hows my neighbor use to play for free on Xbox360 (french): link. And I'm sure that there is other way to do the same whatever with the whole platforms!

So I think that switch and make pc games for console will not resolve the problem that "My favorites company" have. I don't blame Crytek I love them I love playing their game and I'm faithfully their customer. I just don't want to see the game industry to oblige us to buy console and expensive game. That's why I gave my two cents to yell VALVe keep going with your success and keep making awesome games but keep cool and don't try to make me believe that L4D2 is a separate game from L4D. The whole content will be compatible with the first so L4D2 is a mod! Why are you trying to sell it to me!? Moreover when you talk about a sequel of a game we used to think new sequel = new engine = new gameplay features whereas new sequel = new weapons = new skins and maps and... Bullshit!

Hopefully L4D is the only VALVe's games I didn't purchase because of the matchmaking which were bullshit when I played beta...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw even if I didn't purchase L4D I joined the L4D2 Boycott steam group which reached more than 15 000 members. The group is on top 50 now and represent more than 10% of the official L4D official group. I joined coz I think that L4D2 is clearly dedicated to consoles. Consequently consoles kill my cpu. Look: Crytek made a engine especially for consoles (but isn't it what did you expect for CE3!?), Splash damage is currently working on Brink and oblige theirs employees to play with f***ing paddles... Seriously wtf !? I still want play Pc games not Consoles games adapted on Pc! And seeing VALVe (one of my favorite company), always dedicated to Pc falling on Microsoft and their f***ing partnership with EA trap make me really angry! :mad: Consoles is bullshit, playing games with paddle give me headache. :fist:

Got overreaction? L4D was developed for the PC and 360 and I have absolutely no problem with it on the PC. The controls and gameplay are fine. What makes you think it won't be the case with L4D 2?

Anyway let's face it, these 'boycott' groups mean nothing. The main way to take a stand against something is to not buy the product. However, I'm willing to bet that half of the people in that group end up buying L4D 2 anyway (in the same way that everyone used to bitch every week about every single CS patch, yet CS got more and more popular and the folk raging on forums continued playing).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of interest, how many hours do you all think you played Left 4 Dead up to this point?

Because I really think that some people here are overreacting. "this game should have been 10-20$ at most" .... I don't know about that... I played it for probably well over 200 hours. A movie costs 20-30$ and lasts 2 hours on average. Other games last 10 hours and you pay a 60$.... so I think the pricing was justified. I also think making a sequel was justified by Valve, but I do agree that the timing of this is really poor because they haven't yet exhausted all the potential the first L4D still has to offer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the main problem is the "2", if they would have called it an expansion pack, instead of a sequel, i think almost no one would complain about, just look at S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky, Crysis Warhead, Red Alert 3: Uprising, World in conflict: Soviet Assault, etc etc. L4D2 definitely feels more like an expansion than a new game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got overreaction? L4D was developed for the PC and 360 and I have absolutely no problem with it on the PC. The controls and gameplay are fine. What makes you think it won't be the case with L4D 2?

Defrag you know that VALVe's games are first made with pc for pc and then exported for x360. Source is from Goldsrc and get its origins from computers. The ability to compile for the x360 platform has been implanted before the release of the Orangebox. I don't have any problem neither with controls nor the gameplay with L4D, what I mean is that VALVe has been traped by their partnerships and looks like they're going to release the content of L4D2 as commercial mostly to honor their contract than for who made VALVe. I mean you and me the game community!

Maybe this is what you call "overreaction" but this is necessary I think to warm games company that we are not dumb at all.

Btw the group have now overclassed the official Portal group and Pcgamer group with more than 17 600 members. :mario:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...