Left 4 Dead 2 Demo Details

[YokaI]

Edit: correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like the only people who want l4d2 to be an update/expansion are people who didn't enjoy, or didn't play much of l4d.

You're wrong. I enjoy the game as much as I enjoyed L4D, but it doesn't change the fact that it could have been applied to l4d1.


Zip, you keep saying people don't complain about other games, but the reason why is because those "other games" I didn't like in the first place anyway. And many people do complain in retrospective to sequels like these. (See Megaman Series)

This is probably the 30th time I've said both of those, so I'm just going to end it now. The game was good, it would be better if it was priced reasonably for the content added. A sequel improves the game mechanics in a way that are seperate to the old game mechanics. I.E. Half Life 2 in comparison to Half Life, Physics were implimented and the game focused more on the outdoor environments and traveling from a to b. I don't necessarily think HL2 did a better job, but the game is different enough to make it a new experience.

I mean, it's just like how I expect half life episodes to be priced at about 30 dollars, I expected this amount of content to be about 30 dollars. It's a good game but maybe priced unreasonably for the changes from the first one. If you didn't play L4D1, I would recommend L4D2 over it which is a shame because I personally prefer L4D1 characters but...

[Phott]

This is probably the 30th time I've said both of those, so I'm just going to end it now. The game was good, it would be better if it was priced reasonably for the content added. A sequel improves the game mechanics in a way that are seperate to the old game mechanics. I.E. Half Life 2 in comparison to Half Life, Physics were implimented and the game focused more on the outdoor environments and traveling from a to b. I don't necessarily think HL2 did a better job, but the game is different enough to make it a new experience.

I mean, it's just like how I expect half life episodes to be priced at about 30 dollars, I expected this amount of content to be about 30 dollars. It's a good game but maybe priced unreasonably for the changes from the first one. If you didn't play L4D1, I would recommend L4D2 over it which is a shame because I personally prefer L4D1 characters but...

CoD1-3 are barely different from each other, same weapons basically, few graphical changes and new campaigns... Just like L4D2 compared to L4D1, I think L4D 2 adds more content then CoD2 adds from CoD1.

[The Wanderer]

You're wrong. I enjoy the game as much as I enjoyed L4D, but it doesn't change the fact that it could have been applied to l4d1.

Most sequels could be applied to the original, but L4D2 is LARGER than L4D1, so why the hell would they do that?

Also why don't you go get some friends together and buy a 4 pack, its 30 dollars then!

[stoopdapoop]

Edit: correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like the only people who want l4d2 to be an update/expansion are people who didn't enjoy, or didn't play much of l4d.

You're wrong. I enjoy the game as much as I enjoyed L4D, but it doesn't change the fact that it could have been applied to l4d1.

Don't take it as an attack, I was genuinely asking if the people who didn't like l4d1, were the ones asking for l4d2 to be an expansion.

Plus you're not only person who has to repeat things around here. I keep saying you can't just destroy the way the original is played in an expansion pack, it doesn't work, nobody likes it. the last time I saw that happen was with supreme commander, and it fractured the community. This changes the fact that it could be applied to l4d1

Reasonable pricing, sure, maybe that's a valid point, if you want to keep ignoring the fact that you can get it for 34 dollars, or if you Really can't find 3 other friends to buy it with you. But Seriously, an expansion would be a bad idea.

[Jman]

I don't think it would be wise to apply >4 gigs of content to the first L4D, especially with all the gameplay changes.

[YokaI]

Plus you're not only person who has to repeat things around here. I keep saying you can't just destroy the way the original is played in an expansion pack, it doesn't work, nobody likes it. the last time I saw that happen was with supreme commander, and it fractured the community. This changes the fact that it could be applied to l4d1

Reasonable pricing, sure, maybe that's a valid point, if you want to keep ignoring the fact that you can get it for 34 dollars, or if you Really can't find 3 other friends to buy it with you. But Seriously, an expansion would be a bad idea.

1) Didn't take it as an attack. And yes, that's a side they take more often, but it's dumb to generalize.

2) Plenty of Xpacks change the way a games played. My own example, starcraft, added medics in their expansion, a unit that changed the entire aspect of competitive starcraft. Every WoW or MMO expansion changes the fundamentals of the game. Most first person shooting expansions also add new guns that change the way the game is played. Saying that no expansion changes the fundamentals of a game is pure garbage, and I personally feel xpacks are just as important as an individual game, seeing how a developer can take a game and change it to make it better and unify two experiences into one package. If you don't want the new gameplay changes, you just don't buy the Xpack and play the classic.

3) 4gigs is nothing in modern game standards. Most games I get these days start at about 10 gigs. Not to mention if you subtract duplicated material from the first L4D, the size would probably be reduced by quite a bit. I would say 4 gigs is about what I would expect from a modern game expansion.

I get the idea though, people don't want it to be an xpack, I guess I should just leave it there.

edit:

Also why don't you go get some friends together and buy a 4 pack, its 30 dollars then!

FFS people, a game's price isn't the fucking deals a store has it selling at. The price of the game is what it is if I went to bestbuy, picked up the game, wanted to buy it at that moment, and bring it home. That would be like me saying that Windows Vista is cheap because when you buy the 4 pack with your friends it's a slight reduction in price. It doesn't make windows vista cheap, it just makes it "on sale" by the distributor. Regardless of the sale, it's still a 50 dollar game. There's no changing that ever.

Obviously I have the fucking game, so stop talking about getting the 4 pack because that shit has already happened, but that doesn't mean I am not going to call it a 50 dollar fucking game because THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

[Phott]

2) Plenty of Xpacks change the way a games played. My own example, starcraft, added medics in their expansion, a unit that changed the entire aspect of competitive starcraft. Every WoW or MMO expansion changes the fundamentals of the game.

This is wrong, expansions only adds more content (For wow at least), it doesn't change the entire experience from the earlier levels, it just adds new area and expands the level cap (Except for the upcomming expansion Cataclysm which I think is a horrible mistake).

[YokaI]

2) Plenty of Xpacks change the way a games played. My own example, starcraft, added medics in their expansion, a unit that changed the entire aspect of competitive starcraft. Every WoW or MMO expansion changes the fundamentals of the game.

This is wrong, expansions only adds more content (For wow at least), it doesn't change the entire experience from the earlier levels, it just adds new area and expands the level cap (Except for the upcomming expansion Cataclysm which I think is a horrible mistake).

Besides the fact that each class got redone talents, achievements, new professions and etc for all levels. It also appears that someone hasn't experienced relic weapons which give EXP boosts to lower characters, and altered statistics such as armor penetration and various others that were buffed.

"With the release of The Burning Crusade, critical strike, defense, hit rate, spell critical, and dodge stats as well as a new stat, resilience, changed from being absolute percentages to ratings, with each player level requiring more rating points to achieve the same absolute percentage.[8] ..."

"The talent trees were also greatly expanded and revised...."

Shamans and Paladins were allowed on the opposite factions... (which changes leveling and partying experience on the way up.)

three changes, more but too lazy to look them all up, coming from a player of said game since the original, it really is not wise to say the games basic mechanics and statistics have not changed. Many statistical changes have been made, and also some minor abilities such as character customization via haircuts.

Regardless, my starcraft and fps example both stand.

[Zipfinator]

1) Didn't take it as an attack. And yes, that's a side they take more often, but it's dumb to generalize.

2) Plenty of Xpacks change the way a games played. My own example, starcraft, added medics in their expansion, a unit that changed the entire aspect of competitive starcraft. Every WoW or MMO expansion changes the fundamentals of the game. Most first person shooting expansions also add new guns that change the way the game is played. Saying that no expansion changes the fundamentals of a game is pure garbage, and I personally feel xpacks are just as important as an individual game, seeing how a developer can take a game and change it to make it better and unify two experiences into one package. If you don't want the new gameplay changes, you just don't buy the Xpack and play the classic.

3) 4gigs is nothing in modern game standards. Most games I get these days start at about 10 gigs. Not to mention if you subtract duplicated material from the first L4D, the size would probably be reduced by quite a bit. I would say 4 gigs is about what I would expect from a modern game expansion.

I get the idea though, people don't want it to be an xpack, I guess I should just leave it there.

That's a good point that every MMO and other games change the core mechanics of the game in the xpack. That's a negative for me and many other people. I want to play the game the way it was made the first time in most cases. Take WoW for example. I've played it on and off since it came out and I can easily say that I'd rather play back in the first few months it was out compared to how it is now since BC and WOTLK. Another more extreme example is TF2. It's changed a lot since it was released. There's new weapons that can basically create a new class in extreme cases and core changes to the other weapons and maps. I'm not someone who thinks this is bad, but some people would much rather play it in the simplified completely balanced form it was in when it was released.

The storage thing isn't really a big issue for filesize, but it's an issue for Valve as a business. I know that you shouldn't think of a studio as a business, but they do have to pay their employees somehow. If they released it for DLC people would complain that they are charging for it based on their history of never charging for DLC on computer releases. If people were somehow fine with that, then I'm guessing for the size of content it would be spread out over a few DLC's priced at 10 dollars each. That would come out to 20-40 dollars once all DLC's are released depending on how much each one is priced and how many there are. That's either $10 more or less than buying it in a 4 pack. I know this argument has been used to death, but people keep forgetting about it or ignoring it. The deal is there for you to take advantage of and I have a hard time believing that you can't find 3 other people to buy it with either offline or online.

[Kremator]

Well this has certainly been a rather fiery debate - let me just drop a line here and say that while most of these points are valid the subject of what constitutes an expansion/game is not really quantifiable. Some expansion gives nearly as much content as a full game while others offers measly rations.

L4D2 felt more like an expansion because that's how it is for me, I did not dislike it but at the same time it didn't contain as many changes as I would've liked - perhaps its DLC will justify the price tag. I also despised this ongoing usage of OH BUY IT WITH 3 OTHER PEOPLE AND YOU'LL GET THIS FOR LESS - like Yokai, I already bought it - this point is mute. I also don't recall this offer being available in the early stages of pre-order which is when I bought it but I could be wrong and I simply do not feel like calling a $50 game a $30 one because there is an option to buy it as that if you do it with someone else. Sure it's a great option but the original price for those poor saps who doesn't have people to buy with (ie. me) would still be $50.

To summarize : L4D2 is good but could've added more stuff/been cheaper IMO.

kekekeke

[Zipfinator]

I guess the DLC argument is really completely opinion based other than the Valve gives away DLC fact. Everyone has their own opinions on how much content should be included in a sequel and what that sequel should include, whether they should change core mechanics of the original compared to making it a sequel, etc...

And the cost argument is also valid. You shouldn't be expected to buy it in a 4 pack to get it at the price most people think it should be at. I don't really mind handing over another $20 to help out Valve though. They need to make money somehow and they are one of my favorite studios, so I don't mind supporting them. Besides in 3 years are you going to remember the fun times you had playing the game with your friends or are you going to remember having to pay $20 more than you wanted to for it?

[AverageJoe]

$20 is alot of money for alot of people. Not the majority, but still alot, like me and a couple others I see around here.
That bit in some cases can make or break a sale, but those sales evidently don't merit a price drop.

[Zipfinator]

$20 is alot of money for alot of people. Not the majority, but still alot, like me and a couple others I see around here.
That bit in some cases can make or break a sale, but those sales evidently don't merit a price drop.

A majority of people is really all that matters. It's really not much money at all except to 12 year old kids who can't get a minimum wage job to earn that $20 in 3 hours. They shouldn't be buying an M rated game anyway, but if they were really desperate I'm sure they could find a few odd jobs around town to pay for it. I haven't seen people on here complaining about not being able to afford it, they are just complaining about the price/expansion issue.

[Terr]

$20 is very little once you've got a full or part-time job paying your own bills for housing and food. (And of course, some variation due to geographic cost-of-living.) I certainly appreciate that a large chunk of gamers are younger than that point, but you could probably mow a neighbor's lawn once or twice...

[Zipfinator]

$20 is very little once you've got a full or part-time job paying your own bills for housing and food. (And of course, some variation due to geographic cost-of-living.) I certainly appreciate that a large chunk of gamers are younger than that point, but you could probably mow a neighbor's lawn once or twice...

I'm never sure if you're being sarcastic or serious in your posts... You're the only person I've really ever had that problem with.