L4D2 Boycott Considered Harmful

[Jumplion]

the 40,000 or so people who failed to believe a company was telling the truth.

I laughed at that statement, I really did.

I won't argue on the success or failure of the boycott. Personally, I was for it, but not for the main reasons you'd think.

Here's how I see it; if over 40,000 people (which is a pretty big fucking number) can band together over something as "small" as L4D not getting the support that was promised/suggested, just imagine how many people can band together for a real issue like DRM. I believe a petition [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/93471-German-Videogame-Ban-Derailed-by-Internet-Petition] prevented a country-wide ban on video games.

I don't really see the L4D2 boycott as a "failure". Really now, with all the absolute hate that they got, as shown by you and 90% of the posters in this thread, you'd think it'd barely scratch 1000 people, but it got 40,000 members joining. Granted, who knows how many of them would buy L4D2 regardless, but irregardless it worked.

Are you saying that the 200,000 wanting LAN play [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/93919-Thousands-Sign-StarCraft-2-Petition] (at the time of this writing) for people who have crappy internet access makes them "Self entitled brats"? Really, who wouldn't want such a fundamental feature from the original Starcraft back? That's an absolutely huge fucking number, whatever the circumstances may be, and just push that into protests of DRM and the like and you've got a force to be reckoned with.

 

[Husky.Gnoll]

the 40,000 or so people who failed to believe a company was telling the truth.

I laughed at that statement, I really did.

I won't argue on the success or failure of the boycott. Personally, I was for it, but not for the main reasons you'd think.

Here's how I see it; if over 40,000 people (which is a pretty big fucking number) can band together over something as "small" as L4D not getting the support that was promised/suggested, just imagine how many people can band together for a real issue like DRM. I believe a petition [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/93471-German-Videogame-Ban-Derailed-by-Internet-Petition] prevented a country-wide ban on video games.

I don't really see the L4D2 boycott as a "failure". Really now, with all the absolute hate that they got, as shown by you and 90% of the posters in this thread, you'd think it'd barely scratch 1000 people, but it got 40,000 members joining. Granted, who knows how many of them would buy L4D2 regardless, but irregardless it worked.

Are you saying that the 200,000 wanting LAN play [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/93919-Thousands-Sign-StarCraft-2-Petition] (at the time of this writing) for people who have crappy internet access makes them "Self entitled brats"? Really, who wouldn't want such a fundamental feature from the original Starcraft back? That's an absolutely huge fucking number, whatever the circumstances may be, and just push that into protests of DRM and the like and you've got a force to be reckoned with.

Ditto,
In my personal opinion, the should of atleast made it into a expansion pack, because it was a quick sequel with not much new material.

 

[slarrs]

I think the Left 4 Dead boycott failed because it was a horrible idea to begin with. The general idea was saying "I love this game so much I refuse to buy the sequel." Despite the sequel being packed with new content, enemies, campaigns, characters, etc. They added far more content then most FPS's add with their sequels (*cough* halo *cough*) and people were mad. I think it failed because the concept is utterly horrible.

Alright, maybe you feel Valve didn't give you the content you were hoping for and expected, but, last I checked, I downloaded crash course and payed a few bucks. I downloaded survival mode and didn't pay. The other two campaigns were added to verses. Bugs were fixed. Still, think about it. They did what they should have, that is, give us support and content. They'll do what everyone does with sequels. Keep the online up, even do bug fixes for a while, and eventually move on. Gaming is technology based. Technology improves, content improves, the fact of the matter is you're going to buy L4D2 eventually. Would you rather have had them wait to release it for another year? I understand they loved L4D. So why wouldn't you want them to release an improved sequel as soon as possible?

What did they really expect to happen as a result? They wouldn't stop the release of a nearly complete game. They had to know, even if they didn't admit it, that almost everyone in the boycott would buy L4D2, so what precisely was the goal? It helped the game's publicity, and if anything will increase it's sales. So what did they do? Let valve know they weren't happy? IMO This amounts to little more than a collective nerd temper tantrum.

 

[VanityGirl]

snip

I'm too tired to even argue, but I will say that even GameInformer called boycotters "whiny entitled brats". It's from the August Issue that has Crackdown 2 on the cover. I'll quickly quote what GameInformer said in response to a boycotter who wrote in. (I have the mag sitting on my bed).

The "controversy" surrounding the announcment of Left 4 Dead 2 is pathetic. Have you played the full game yet? Do you know exactly how the team is improving the mechanics? Do you know all about the weapons and enemies being added? No, you don't. Furthermore, without that information, you are wholly unqualified to make any judgements relating to the game's scope, quality, and appropriate pricing. Here's a little tip: Complaining about these things with no firsthand experience doesn't make you a gaming activist. It makes you a whiny, entitled brat.

That's what gameinformer said.

 

[NBSRDan]

I got about half-way and then I was like TLDR. The only way the Left 4 Dead 2 "boycott" could be harmful is if it wound up increasing sales overall by promoting the game.

 

[Jumplion]

snip

I'm too tired to even argue, but I will say that even GameInformer called boycotters "whiny entitled brats". It's from the August Issue that has Crackdown 2 on the cover. I'll quickly quote what GameInformer said in response to a boycotter who wrote in. (I have the mag sitting on my bed).

The "controversy" surrounding the announcment of Left 4 Dead 2 is pathetic. Have you played the full game yet? Do you know exactly how the team is improving the mechanics? Do you know all about the weapons and enemies being added? No, you don't. Furthermore, without that information, you are wholly unqualified to make any judgements relating to the game's scope, quality, and appropriate pricing. Here's a little tip: Complaining about these things with no firsthand experience doesn't make you a gaming activist. It makes you a whiny, entitled brat.

That's what gameinformer said.

Yeah, I have that magazine to. Though what exactly is your point? Could you elaborate, I'm not trying to argue, it just seems as if you're trying to contradict me or something.

If 40,000 people are "whiny, entitled brats", then how come over 40,000 of them came together? If the L4D2 boycott was as useless as people said it was, how come over 40,000 people banded together? 40,000 people is a god-damn-lot of people, regardless of the circumstances. If we could transfer that amount of people, and probably quadruple it for a more relevant concern (DRM) then we've got an even greater force to be reckoned with.

 

[VanityGirl]

Yeah, I have that magazine to. Though what exactly is your point? Could you elaborate, I'm not trying to argue, it just seems as if you're trying to contradict me or something.

If 40,000 people are "whiny, entitled brats", then how come over 40,000 of them came together? If the L4D2 boycott was as useless as people said it was, how come over 40,000 people banded together? 40,000 people is a god-damn-lot of people, regardless of the circumstances. If we could transfer that amount of people, and probably quadruple it for a more relevant concern (DRM) then we've got an even greater force to be reckoned with.

Let me answer your question with a question.
Even if I made an undeniable point, would you change your mind? Chances are you would not.
I see no point in arguing, but I was trying to say why maybe the guy you quote thought the people were "whiny entitled brats".

I had a wall of text after this, but then I decided to save the arguement and let you think one way and let me think another.
Neither of us will win, so it would be pointless.

 

[magnuslion]

I read steams page on the boycott, and being that most of their objectives went unfulfilled, I would suggest they sold out.

 

[Jumplion]

Yeah, I have that magazine to. Though what exactly is your point? Could you elaborate, I'm not trying to argue, it just seems as if you're trying to contradict me or something.

If 40,000 people are "whiny, entitled brats", then how come over 40,000 of them came together? If the L4D2 boycott was as useless as people said it was, how come over 40,000 people banded together? 40,000 people is a god-damn-lot of people, regardless of the circumstances. If we could transfer that amount of people, and probably quadruple it for a more relevant concern (DRM) then we've got an even greater force to be reckoned with.

Let me answer your question with a question.
Even if I made an undeniable point, would you change your mind? Chances are you would not.
I see no point in arguing, but I was trying to say why maybe the guy you quote thought the people were "whiny entitled brats".

I had a wall of text after this, but then I decided to save the arguement and let you think one way and let me think another.
Neither of us will win, so it would be pointless.

I'm not trying to argue, I just want a discussion. Nothing wrong with that, I think, I'm open to your opinion and I want to hear it regardless of my opinion. Most likely, no, it wouldn't change my opinion, but I always like to hear the other side of the story.

 

[VanityGirl]

I'm not trying to argue, I just want a discussion. Nothing wrong with that, I think, I'm open to your opinion and I want to hear it regardless of my opinion. Most likely, no, it wouldn't change my opinion, but I always like to hear the other side of the story.

Yes, but the arguement becomes circular. I could mention how 40,000 people really isn't that big of a number for a game that sold as many copies as L4D. I think for the boycott to be successful, it needed have more supporters. You mentioned the 200,000 people that signed a petition. Think of your example, but in a different context. You compared a petition that have 5 times the number of people to a boycott.

Yes, do the multiplication, the petition had 5 times the number of supporters as the boycott. If 2million people are playing a game, and 200,000 people quit then you've lost 10% of your population.
Now, let's for fun say only 2 million copies of L4D were sold, if 40,000 people boycott, then Valve would only lose about 2% of it's fan base... that's not a lot to a developer honestly.
If you start losing over 8-9% of your fan base, then you may have a problem.

Now, considering I know for a fact that L4D sold at least 2.5 million copies, let's do the math on how much fanbase Valve would lose. My math says Valve would lose 1.6% of its fanbase.

These numbers mean that the boycotters did not have enough supports to actively pull a boycott through. For a boycott to work, you need to seriously harm the company finacially by not buying their products.

Valve would lose 2.4 million dollars (assuming the game is sold at 60bucks a pop) if the boycotters did not actually buy L4D2. Now, let's assume the other 2,460,000 people who are not boycotting Do buy the game.
Valve is still looking at a profit of $147,600,000! That's a lot.

I hate to bring math into any equation, but it's actually logical to use math in this instance. In my mind, since the boycotters only made up 1.6% of Valve's gaming populace, then the boycott was already unsuccessful from a monetary standpoint.

I could also go on about how Valve actuall did support the game, but that should be obvious.

 

[Chunko]

innovation in the marketplace

Way to be a sheep. Are you completely ignoring the fact that valve is bringing tons of new innovations to left 4 dead 2 such as new melee weapons as well as flammable weapons. Also your WALL OF TEXT is evidence of incredibly poor writing skills. My english teachers have always told me that the best essay ever should contain 10 pages of Ideas to every one actual page. You have included about a quarter of a page in a WALL OF TEXT.

Of course all of this is merely constructive criticism .

 

[Captain_Caveman]

Big long pile of wrong.

L4D2 boycott worked. Valve was reluctant about making promises about the future of L4D. But after L4D2 boycott got to around 40,000 members they made a promise to support it just as long and just as much as they did TF2. They also promised to make L4D mod servers connectible to via L4D2 so that modders didn't have to stop their projects and port them.

VALVE did this before the game released, so the boycott ended. People will buy L4D2. and L4D players are happy. It WAS a SUCCESS

Oh baloney. They were promising that they'd be trying to do that the day after E3, before the boycott even existed. Nice try at retconning reality though.

false. Gabe didnt promise anything until after they boycott had peaked & the fans even flew him out to Aus to test a mod. He made the announcement IN Aus. Show me PROOF he made it at E3.

 

[zagazsano]

Great job on this post. I love it how those links in "The Titanic Beginnings" all pointed towards Wikipedia. xD
Poor saps fell for Valve's awesomeness and kindness. That kind of showed how they weren't very dedicated to their "boycott," or maybe Left4Dead2 will be super awesome...well we'll find out soon

 

[salbarragan]

I'm sorry but this sounds like someone on the LFTD2 PR machine. Only 19 posts? Really? Forget about it!

 

[salbarragan]

And to top it off, joined 2 days ago.

 

[salbarragan]

It just sounds to convenient and too well written to just be someone asking a simple question or comment. I'm not buying it.

 

[Jumplion]

I'm not trying to argue, I just want a discussion. Nothing wrong with that, I think, I'm open to your opinion and I want to hear it regardless of my opinion. Most likely, no, it wouldn't change my opinion, but I always like to hear the other side of the story.

Yes, but the arguement becomes circular. I could mention how 40,000 people really isn't that big of a number for a game that sold as many copies as L4D. I think for the boycott to be successful, it needed have more supporters. You mentioned the 200,000 people that signed a petition. Think of your example, but in a different context. You compared a petition that have 5 times the number of people to a boycott.

Yes, do the multiplication, the petition had 5 times the number of supporters as the boycott. If 2million people are playing a game, and 200,000 people quit then you've lost 10% of your population.
Now, let's for fun say only 2 million copies of L4D were sold, if 40,000 people boycott, then Valve would only lose about 2% of it's fan base... that's not a lot to a developer honestly.
If you start losing over 8-9% of your fan base, then you may have a problem.

Actually, that is exactly my point, and I fully agree with you.

In context of how much L4D2 will probably sell overall, 40,000 people isn't a lot. But for a solitary cause to get answers out of a company, that was literally bombarded with negative tones from the rest of the community, it's a miracle that they made it past 1000 "entitled brats", let alone 40,000!

And like I said, quintuple that, and you get 200,000 people all for the single cause of including an option for LAN play in Starcraft 2. Just quintuple that again, and you get a fraction of the people who hate DRM (and I know there are a lot of people who hate it).

We, as customers, should not take shit from anyone no matter how ridiculous it may sound. Sure, the L4D2 boycott may have been premature and a "waste of time", but it did bring up some interesting points. How much should a developer support their game before moving on to the next game, especially a developer as prodigious as VALVe (whom have supported their games decades after release)? How do they handle PR? Why exactly are they doing this? Etc... If 40k people will stand up against VALVe, a highly respected company, just imagine how many would stand up to Activision.

That's my thought process anyway, I tend to be an optimist at times.

 

[Deleted]

I think it will make L4D2 online even better because we won't play with the whiners. And guys, really, think about it. The Sour Sallies that lead the group could easily increase the numbers in the group. 40000 isn't a true representation, looks like the kind of thing they'll do.

 

[Angelic-Dragon]

To me it seems that Valve are frightened to release any downloadable content that will cost the user, if it is on steam (Sorry for those that have L4D on 360). Maybe they should consider making larger downloadable content that is worth a price, rather than a few small things that can be made within a modding community.

well its not just that. with tf2 valve uses the updates to experiment with new things and see how they work and if need be, fix them with a patch not long after. the other thing is that valve believes in supporting their communities (which theyve done since cs and dod), so its not so much out of fear as it is out of their history and their high regard for the communities for their games, one of the reasons why i think valve is one of the best developers ever.

OK agree with you there, valve are good when it comes to community.