Am I the only person who kind of hates Valve?

[Titan Buttons]

Well to be fair with the L4D 1 maps need to be remade to accomidate the new special infected, I've played both maps of both games and while as a wholt the maps are the same there a many ntoicable differences, such as in the No Mercy final they have taken out an entire room that was next to the radio and put the stairs to the roof outside.
Value is a company that likes to take it's sweet time in making anything, regaurdless of whether or not the community wants to earlier.

Also there is no such thing as being the only one.

 

[SilverUchiha]

I hate Valve, mainly due to Steam and how shit it is.

See, I don't get this. I've had steam for nearly three to four years (I don't remember for sure) and I've enjoyed the experience. I love the sales steam will have on big newer titles like Just Cause 2 or Arkham Asylum so I don't have to pay full price. I love the digital storage for certain games. And I like the friend-system. The only fault is it requires a stable internet connect, which isn't a problem for me. Aside from that, while it isn't perfect, it's probably one of the best online gaming services out there, from what I've seen anyway.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

but a game like left for dead has no place on consoles. it is a game about coordination and PRECISION (key word here)

Okay, my very first post and I'm already disagreeing strongly... (start as you mean to carry on, eh?)

Regarding L4D, that's an utterly absurd thing to say. Firstly, you're wrong. Secondly--- well, I have no need of a secondly.

I rate Valve very highly, and I was hooked on L4D from my fist taste of the demo on 360. I'm not sure I've ever had more fun on a shooter before. You cannot define other players subjective experience. Were I to outline what the game is "about", y'know what I'd say? Giggles. That's right, amusement and mirth. Be it Advanced or Expert, I couldn't give a fig about "PRECISION", all I care about is having a laugh with co-op friends (that's not to say I don't intend to kick-ass, I do).
Besides, I'm fairly sure every single FPS I've ever played has demanded a modicum of "PRECISION". Do you think you bag Halo headshots by aiming at the sky or something?

L4D deserves to exist on any system that can support it, 'cause it's a cracking game. Fact is it's a superb experience on 360 (plus, I prefer a pad for FPS's).

Oh, as for the whole Valve thing? No hate from me, only [almost] unconditional love. I'm fairly sure Half-Life 2 is a bona fide uber-classic (that's probably not been matched or surpassed), and the Episode's weren't bad either.

 

[Engarde]

I do, however, quite dislike their ravenous cultish fanbase that believes everything they do is amazing, perfect and beyond reproach.

There's all this talk about that but I don't think I've EVER met someone who thinks Valve are unable to do any wrong. Even on here.

Seriously, can you point out one of these people? I'd really like to prove him wrong

Damn right, they made the strange caber cost me seven refined metal! What kind of rip is that!? Valid point however. I find a ton of Valve is good in some areas bad in others, generally liked, don't like Steam, etc, etc.

 

[A Free Man]

This may sound kind of backwards, and it is, but while I like their games, as developers they wouldn't be in my Top 5.

This is mostly because they just don't seem to know how to make a console game if their lives depended on it. Sure Valve's PC releases are great and all (Although I know quite a few people that say TF2 is a pile of shit now), but their (they're?) console release record is pretty damn spotty.

Yes, I know, Microsofts update/DLC policies are kind of shit. But when you can't even get a map pack out, that's pretty sad. What really annoys me is that for years they've been pointing the finger at Microsoft (And Sony) going "It's not us! It's them! They won't let us!" whilst other, more competent developers are able to get out a ton of DLC with little fuss. I mean, they announced the next bit of DLC for L4D2 around January. And it's not like they're building entirely new maps, they're just porting some old L4D1 maps. Any other developer could have knocked that out in a few short months. How is it other developers like Bethesda and Gearbox and even Infinity Ward/Treyarch are dependent enough to get out a good amount of DLC and updates for their games yet Valve can only get out, what? 2 bits of DLC for L4D2? Over almost two years? Both using the exact same last map to boot!

I've tried to criticism Valve in the past and am usually met with a tidal wave of hate because "They made Steam!" or "They made Half-Life/TF2/Portal!" Everybody seems to give them a free pass and I just find it shameful.

Can I ask you a question? What do you think? If you honestly had an estimation what do you think the odds are of you being the single person in the whole world (approximately 6,775,235,700 people) who dislikes Valve, a major games design and distribution company? Maybe you should rephrase your topic so it is something less idiodic. Sorry for the rant but I don't like threads that are basically entitled "Am I the only " and other generic posts.

 

[Ldude893]

"This is mostly because they just don't seem to know how to make a console game if their lives depended on it." This line right here made me laugh out a tiny tear. Who cares? They are a PC developer.

Afaik the reason they have trouble with DLC is because MS has decided that ALL DLC shall cost money on xbox live NO MATTER WHAT. And Valve wants to give us their DLC free.

Is this actually true? Because I call bullshit on this. I don't download a lot of DLC but I have downloaded free content for Split/Second

If you seriously manage to fault Valve for that there is no convincing you.

Valve recently released DLC for Portal 2. For free. They are releasing MOD TOOLS so players can make their own levels. Instead of bleeding customers for a few extra buck with shit content like some other developers.

Valve are not gods, they are not infallible, but they are damn well lightyears ahead of IW/Treyarch!

Um, explain to me, what this is?
http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Mann_Co._Store

It kinda looks to me like, a company that's "bleeding customers for a few extra bucks with SHIT content".

It's called CUSTOMER'S CHOICE. They want it, they'll buy it. It's their money, and it's not as if you have to buy from the store in order to play the game.

 

[knuckleduster]

Ok, time for a PC gamer to speak up.

first: steam on the ps3 is just so that you can make a friends list with ease and keep your PC friends too.

second: Valve puts great quality and support into there games, they are still releasing updates to CS:S, do you know how old that game is? they just rebuilt the stats system for that game and it looks awesome.

third: steam does not manage the DRM, i own quite a few steam games that have no DRM. Just because they sell games that have it doesn't mean that they support it too.

finaly: If you are going against a company because it tries to make money off of you then you must not like every company you have ever worked with/bought from. They are all trying to do the same thing!

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm sorry, but how is getting a free hat in Fable 3 even remotely the same as expecting Valve to release 20+ maps for Left 4 Dead 2 for free? (and yes, it's 20+ maps. 5 campaigns, between 4 and 5 maps each)

It's not. Fortunately, a free hat is not the only example of free content.

Microsoft has a policy that DLC or other content beyond a certain file size requires the developer of the DLC to pay for the hosting rights and storage space on the Microsoft servers.

[citation needed]

Über seemed to think otherwise, as they had some pretty decent sized free DLC. And they're a small group. You telling me there's a huge restriction a small maker of one a couple niche games could handle but Valve couldn't?

As such, Valve would have to pay, an not-so-insignificant amount of money, to keep the files hosted on Live. (which is expected and I have no issue with) Not to mention Microsoft requires a certain amount of profit from DLC sales.

Which is why Koei gave away a ton of stuff.

This means, were Valve to make the DLC available for free, that they'd have to foot one hell of a large bill. Thus, even though they're still one of the more gamer friendly devs out there, they're still a company. And venturing into something that is literally just a money sink with no returns is just bad.

EA manages to venture into that money sink. It can't be that bad a situation if EA, a purely profit-driven company, is willing to do it.

They've worked out deals and workarounds before. For example, Left 4 Dead 1 got it's first DLC free because Valve reprinted and then re-released the game discs with the new DLC on them. Thus forcing Microsoft to offer the DLC as an "update".

[Citation needed]

And please don't cite valve. They lie about patches and DLC.

Even so, this doesn't address the bigger issue. And that is with updates.

Yeeeeees...*grabs popcorn*

See, Microsoft has yet another policy wherein developers are only allowed a certain amount of file space per update. Likewise, the developer is only allowed to release an update on Live after a certain amount of time has passed since the last update.

Unless you're EA, of course, because otherwise that would be false. The EA exception, therefore must exist, with large updates to several of their games. Burnout: Paradise had multiple patches with game-changing content (including free stuff) that changed the way the game worked, PLUS bugfix updates, several times a year.

Occam's Razor. It takes far more extra steps to introduce this system where some devs can break all the rules than it does to just admit Valve lies.

This rule applies to all games on Live. However, the more prolific or popular a title is (i.e. COD), or if the title is a first-party game from Microsoft (i.e. Gears, Halo) these file size and time restrictions are much more lenient. Ergo, seeing as, say, Left 4 Dead 2 doesn't sell as many titles as Halo: Reach, L4D2 doesn't get as many "leniencies" in it's support as Reach would. This ties Valve's hands as they have a very organic and fluid update method. This is why it often takes so long for an update to hit Live.

Wait, so Army of Two sold significantly better than the Left 4 Dead titles? Sweet.

So, unlike some, my dislike of Microsoft isn't some attempt at being "trendy".

It's just being "misinformed," which is exactly what I brought up. If you wanted to quote the poster I quoted, you should have gone back and quoted them. "Trendy" was never my line.

Oh, and Hydrophobia didn't really get an "overhaul", it was replaced by new game code that was the original game optimized for Live/360. They effectively removed the old game and replaced the stored code on Microsoft's servers with the new code. That's why the update was so large yet is still "free". This isn't something that's possible with a physical media copy of a game since a majority of the game files are on the disc and any patches have to be downloaded to the hard drive.

Selectively impossible. Gotcha!

 

[irani_che]

I mean, they announced the next bit of DLC for L4D2 around January. And it's not like they're building entirely new maps, they're just porting some old L4D1 maps. Any other developer could have knocked that out in a few short months. How is it other developers like Bethesda and Gearbox and even Infinity Ward/Treyarch are dependent enough to get out a good amount of DLC and updates for their games yet Valve can only get out, what? 2 bits of DLC for L4D2? Over almost two years? Both using the exact same last map to boot!

two years for porting a map pack?
how long has it been for Half life 3 now?

 

[silasbufu]

You're never the only one, Valve has made many contributions to the gaming industry to earn people's respect, you are never the only one, you are entitled to your opinion, you are never the only one, this thread will devolve into flaming in approximately three posts by my estimate, YOU ARE NEVER THE ONLY ONE.
/thread

Might I add "you are never the only one!!!" .

 

[Something Amyss]

Ehm... what about CD project who is saying the exact same thing as valve is with there being a limit on how many updates MS will let you make before they insist it must be sold as dlc?

Evidence? I didn't find anything with a quick google search, but then again, I really don't care that much.

not to sound cynical, but a lot of other companies are putting out sizable free DLC or frequent updates without any apparent restriction on how often they can do so. Either the update limit is extremely lenient, or the two companies whining are lying.

As to what motive CD Projekt has, I don't know. I also don't know what motive truthers who claim no planes hit the two WTC buildings on 9-11 have for saying that, but since we saw two planes hit, we can still ascribe them as false.

I do know why Valve wants it. They're a monopoly pushing to expand. This is the Wal-Mart effect, and Wal-Mart had similar tantrums when they didn't get things their way.

 

[The Lunatic]

In all honesty, it really is almost entirely Microsoft's fault.

You only need to look as far as their history with the Iplayer to see how this is the case.

If the biggest broadcasting company in the world can't host something for free on Xbox Live, what makes you think a rival company to microsoft can?

 

[tzimize]

"This is mostly because they just don't seem to know how to make a console game if their lives depended on it." This line right here made me laugh out a tiny tear. Who cares? They are a PC developer.

Afaik the reason they have trouble with DLC is because MS has decided that ALL DLC shall cost money on xbox live NO MATTER WHAT. And Valve wants to give us their DLC free.

Is this actually true? Because I call bullshit on this. I don't download a lot of DLC but I have downloaded free content for Split/Second

If you seriously manage to fault Valve for that there is no convincing you.

Valve recently released DLC for Portal 2. For free. They are releasing MOD TOOLS so players can make their own levels. Instead of bleeding customers for a few extra buck with shit content like some other developers.

Valve are not gods, they are not infallible, but they are damn well lightyears ahead of IW/Treyarch!

Um, explain to me, what this is?
http://wiki.teamfortress.com/wiki/Mann_Co._Store

It kinda looks to me like, a company that's "bleeding customers for a few extra bucks with SHIT content".

Well, I dont play TF2. But I've heard some crap about those hats. And while I think they are the most stupid DLC content to date, they are also completely useless (afaik). You dont suddenly become unable to play with a big chunk of the community because you dont buy the latest "I'm with stupid"-hat. Neither do they give in-game bonuses (again, afaik).

Little different with for example CoD. If you dont buy the latest map pack, you cant play on those maps, or with the people that play on those maps, thereby cutting you off from a part of the community if you dont want to pony up the dough for crap content.

If you dont want to buy hats, NP.

 

[Ryotknife]

but a game like left for dead has no place on consoles. it is a game about coordination and PRECISION (key word here)

Okay, my very first post and I'm already disagreeing strongly... (start as you mean to carry on, eh?)

Regarding L4D, that's an utterly absurd thing to say. Firstly, you're wrong. Secondly--- well, I have no need of a secondly.

I rate Valve very highly, and I was hooked on L4D from my fist taste of the demo on 360. I'm not sure I've ever had more fun on a shooter before. You cannot define other players subjective experience. Were I to outline what the game is "about", y'know what I'd say? Giggles. That's right, amusement and mirth. Be it Advanced or Expert, I couldn't give a fig about "PRECISION", all I care about is having a laugh with co-op friends (that's not to say I don't intend to kick-ass, I do).
Besides, I'm fairly sure every single FPS I've ever played has demanded a modicum of "PRECISION". Do you think you bag Halo headshots by aiming at the sky or something?

L4D deserves to exist on any system that can support it, 'cause it's a cracking game. Fact is it's a superb experience on 360 (plus, I prefer a pad for FPS's).

Oh, as for the whole Valve thing? No hate from me, only [almost] unconditional love. I'm fairly sure Half-Life 2 is a bona fide uber-classic (that's probably not been matched or surpassed), and the Episode's weren't bad either.

i can define the experience when the game is coop focused with 4 people. if you are playing with just friends, then fine you can do whatever you want. but most people play online with random people, and the game has a very high potential for griefing. what you may call "giggles" is more often than not translated into "griefing" in pug games. and friendly fire is the biggest source of griefing. there is a certain code in these type of games so that everyone can enjoy it (not just you at the expense of others), and someone riddling their ally by accident or by design with bullets breaks the fun factor for others.

hell, in portal 2 me and a friend grief each other all the time. although nothing ever really happens with dying in that game. teamkilling in portal 2 really doesnt matter unless you take it WAY overboard.

i remember one time in counterstrike where a guy kept teamkilling (and for some reason we couldnt boot him). after while another member of my team would shoot him in the beginning of the match, and accidentally also killed someone else. fast forward a few rounds and now the entire terrorist team is involved in a free for all brawl at the beginning of every match. and it was a lot of fun. but even though all of us on the terrorist team consented to this "giggles" even then we were in fact griefing. we were griefing the CTs, and that is not right.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

Ryotknife - (my 'giggles' are not griefing in any way, btw; I'm usually laughing hardest when I'm on the floor, buried under a Horde and/or Tank) Perhaps it's a difference between PC and 360 MP culture (I doubt it), but I never play L4D without friends. So everyone's on the same page, as it were.

What I was refuting was your declaration that L4D had no place on consoles, or that its controls somehow hampered it - neither of which are valid remarks, regardless of whether you play with people you know or randoms.

 

[Ledan]

Valve is a really good developer. A bit slow, but good.
I hate steam though.... because it is terrible when you are moving around, takes up to much space, region locks, can't play games while updating, etc. But as a developer they are usually alright.
I'm surprised that you HATE them. Any reasons other than that they don't make good console games? Sounds like a stupid reason to hate a company.

 

[Ryotknife]

Ryotknife - (my 'giggles' are not griefing in any way, btw; I'm usually laughing hardest when I'm on the floor, buried under a Horde and/or Tank) Perhaps it's a difference between PC and 360 MP culture (I doubt it), but I never play L4D without friends. So everyone's on the same page, as it were.

What I was refuting was your declaration that L4D had no place on consoles, or that its controls somehow hampered it - neither of which are valid remarks, regardless of whether you play with people you know or randoms.

console controls are not as precise as pc controls, at least where aiming is concerned. pit a PC gamer against a console gamer in a FPS shooter game with one on the pc and the other playing on the console (not that there are any FPS games that i know of that allow such crossover), and the PC gamer will eat the console gamer ALIVE. the console gamer would be forced to use some sort of rushing or spray and pray spec just to be competitive. And ive played a bunch of shooters on consoles (red faction 1, killzone 2, every halo game, black ops), the controller is no where near as precise or nimble in its targeting reticle as a mouse. it is however better at weaving through corridors/objects at breakneck speeds.

not saying that the console player has less skills, just that pcs have their strengths. and l4d, unless you want to start teamkilling, then you have to be very precise. if there was no friendly fire in l4d on the consoles then i would retract my statement.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

I only own and play S.T.A.L.K.E.R., Deus Ex:IW and a heavily modded Morrowind on PC (well, plus Mass Effect 2 but that was free), and I frikkin' loathe PC controls. This has nothing to do with precision or differences in control, just preference. And so, again, your point is mute; as you said, cross-platform VS isn't exactly the norm. If it was? You'd be right.

As it is, keys'n'mouse players go head to head with their own, and pad players do likewise.
L4D on PC is awesome. L4D on 360 is awesome. You may prefer one, I prefer the other - which is all it comes down to for the lack of 360 vs PC modes.

As for friendly fire? Psh, that's down to who you're playing with. When I was regularly playing, I was with console gamers who knew how to use a pad properly and weren't trigger happy; f/f was never an issue.


(also, this isn't relevant to the main point, but L4D for me is almost exclusively a co-op not a VS game. I was drawn to it for its insistence on actual co-operation, as VS FPS'ing just bores me)

Btw, how strict is this place with thread derailing? Though I am happier with the minutiae of L4D than people slagging Valve off... I mean come on, what's Gabe Newall ever done to YOU, huh?! ;-)