Why I am boycotting L4D2

[Cuniculus]

Actually, I see you guys as the bitter and pissed off ones. It's sad to me that you resign yourselves to the idea that we should allow companies to intentionally release shoddy products because somehow "they have to make money" is an acceptable excuse. You know, that money comes from somewhere, and, at least when I buy things, I expect them (call me nuts) to be good, rather than pay people to bend me over without complaint. As an alternative to this rather fatalistic way of thinking, I would propose as a synonym to "capitalist society" the term "consumer culture," where the emphasis is on the obligation to the end-user who actually uses what someone sells, rather than the fuck-em-all high score mentality of the already-haves. In this light, I say boycotts, even symbolic ones like this, are at least a way of voicing dissatisfaction with a company's policies. It's no Rosa Parks, sure (it is just a video game), but Jesus, aren't we owed something?

Bitter? Maybe. Though, I will admit that I am a realist. However, no one said anything about buying a shitty product. L4D is an absolutely awesome product. Pay for it. I expect L4D2 to be just as good. Pay for it. I'm not saying they can make a shitty game, and that you should pay for it no matter what, I am saying that they are coming out with GOOD products.

And yes, "they have to make money" is quite right. That's all any company cares about. However, it's the product they are selling. If a farming company started charging $10 for a gallon of milk, and the milk was spoiled, then yes. Boycott.

 

[Taerdin]

You people make me laugh.

I hope the next time you decide to not buy a game people make countless threads on forums saying how big of a whiner you are. Oh was the price too much for you? Did you have other things in mind? Well too bad because apparently companies need to make money so stop complaining and just give it to em!

Hilarity.

I for one think the boycotters have every right to decide to not buy L4D2 for whatever reason, and find you forum punks to be the real whiners and complainers in this case. At least they have a motivation, whats yours? To feel better than them? Do you think Gabe Newell is curled up in a ball and crying in the corner and you need to defend him? I'm pretty sure he's fine, get over yourselves.

 

[UncleOvid]

What brings my piss to a boil is reading game news and forums and whatnot littered with these boycott crusades (not just the OP here but in a few other forums too, albeit with quite a bit more profanity) in an attempt to stop people from buying a game WHICH HASN'T BEEN FUCKING RELEASED YET.

Seriously, these people do need to grow up and stop being such presumptuous dickheads by carrying the rumour that the new Left 4 Dead game will just be a bunch of bug fixes. NO ONE HAS PLAYED IT YET, MORONS. Valve, the company that brought us the Half Lifes, Counter-Strike and the king of value for money, The Orange Box, has pretty good quality control (if tradition has us to believe) and they probably wouldn't just skimp out on L4D2. If Valve do as they have done before, there should be enough to justify the price.

Nevertheless, no one here has played it, so no one can ***** about the price. Valve has GIVEN YOU THE TOOLS TO MAKE EXTRA STUFF FOR THE FIRST GAME. They aren't pulling support. And above all, no one is forcing you to buy it. Therefore, no need for any boycotting or complaints.

That is a good point: the boycott does seem to rely mainly on the assumption that L4D2 (no, I'm not doing it anymore) is going to be a large update rather than a new game. But I don't think that suspicion is entirely unfounded, considering the release date is only a year later than L4D and a mere 5 months after its announcement. True, Valve has a good track record developing high quality games, but considering the complaints about L4D being incomplete (supported by the large amount of debugging DLC released), I can understand if some loyal fans see this as the beginning of Valve's slide into soulless corporate asshole-dom.

HOOLLDD UP ONE SECOND DOOOD. When did anybody label L4D as a "bad" or "shoddy" product? I, for one, find it to be a rather good game, as did most critics, the general public and (presumably) the boycotters themselves. Certainly I (and many others) got our money's worth from the hours playing online and replaying the campaign.

Who's calling L4D shoddy? Nobody, and neither did I. But I would (and did) call it incomplete and even sub-par. Like I said, I've never played it, I'm just judging from the conversation where most of you -- on both sides -- would too. That said though, the "shoddy product" comment wasn't aimed at L4D specifically. If I may refer you to my earlier, conveniently overlooked example (Cuniculus, you should be paying attention too):

My own view is this: fuck DLC. In particular, fuck DLC that you have to pay for. Seriously, I don't want to shell out a Grant for a game I have to buy more stuff for later. That, in my opinion, is the definition of incomplete -- and underhanded. It's like if Shakespeare came out at the end of Hamlet and said, "Hey, you guys want to come back in a couple months for a few bucks more? I'm totally gonna give Ophelia a brother and kill off her dad halfway through!" Some of the best money I ever spent on a game was GOTY Morrowind. I wish I could chalk it up to patience and foresight rather than dumb luck that I picked up a game that was nearly twice the size of the original for $40 less than the suckers who paid for each extra installment, but hey, the warm glow of superiority makes up for it.

What steams my own widdle is the notion, once again, that companies feel justified on skimping on quality for the purpose of maximizing profits -- and we let them. Why the hell do we let Microsoft get away with spewing out Windows year after year, when each iteration mostly works to find new ways to annoy us? The 360's Rings of Death? How many people payed $400 bucks for something that didn't work? But it's okay because Microsoft's a company and companies have to make money? Fuck. That.

But look, I'm not for the boycott either. If L4D2 comes out and it's awesome and all new and has everything you ever dreamed of and boobies and chips and you still don't buy it because L4D's going to be abandoned for it, then you're dumb. Valve made a mistake and miscalculated how popular a minor game was going to be. They didn't invest a lot in it initially and had to pick up the slack when they saw there was a demand. Now they're trying to fix it up properly. That's not something to be punished for.

If it's the same game with a new coat of paint and you have to pay for it all over again, only this time it works ... well, that's another story.

 

[UncleOvid]

UncleOvid:

Your side argument neatly summed up in far better terms what I was just typing. I'm quite glad I pressed 'refresh' now. It seems odd that when people challenge the status quo for any reason regardless of how menial, they are automatically subject to ridicule by their peers. This is made doubly confusing by the fact that, in the slim chance the challenge is successful, those very same people who ridiculed and abused their peers will be the ones that benefit from it.

Awww, thanks! I don't think I've ever neatly summed up anything in my life. And I agree, those who pursue change invariably get attacked by those who don't, regardless of whatever benefit may come of it. It's not confusing, it's just people. They're a fickle and short-sighted crew.