Ahh yes...the icky console version. Curse the 360 and their incompatabilities with PC version games haha lawlz.
ParaDOX: It's not "marketing" because I am not profiting from it in anyway. This falls into the friendly recommendation category.
It's not "marketing" because I am not profiting from it in anyway. This falls into the friendly recommendation category.
Marketing is: the commercial processes involved in promoting and selling and distributing a product or service. What you're doing could be referred to as part of viral marketing (while you weren't actively selling the product, you were promoting it through word of mouth). Of course, there was no initial compaign by Funcom to start any conversational buzz on purpose (unless you consider the announcement of the new engine as a publicity technique), so I suppose that's stretching it a bit. Either way, the definition was fit for its purpose and you understood what I was saying.
ParaDOX: I have a feeling that they will release HL2 Episode 3 as HL3 instead and charge more money for a new game that way. I hope I'm wrong.
I have a feeling that they will release HL2 Episode 3 as HL3 instead and charge more money for a new game that way. I hope I'm wrong.
That just doesn't make sense. They told us there will be three episodes and I believe they mentioned a Half-Life 3 after the third episode. The only difference would be the name and cost. I don't think they want such a small continuation counted as the third full game, as the other games have recieved astonishing reviews, this would weaken how people view the Half-Life series, and ultimately how people view the company. It's just a bad business decision. They again, they are the same people making L4D2 a year after release of the first.
We're not the only ones disliking the idea of L4D2. There's a steam group dedicated to people boycotting L4D2, and it has over 20,000 members. Of course, they're probably just a bunch of kids who will buy the game anyways.
http://www.paradisesgarage.com/mcweb2/photos/troop/images/2372/original.aspx[/IMG]
Here is some more information on why L4D is turning into a sequel.
Valve's announcement that Left 4 Dead 2 would be released only a year after the first game has generated a great deal of controversy among fans of the game. There are concerns that Left 4 Dead will not get any additional content, the community will be divided, and that the quick development cycle won't do justice to the sequel. Now, Valve devs and execs are going out of their way to address those concerns. Left 4 Dead project lead Chet Faliszek said, "It just became very clear that this was a cohesive, singular statement we wanted to make, not a more slow update thing... too much stuff was tied together with too many other things." Developer Tom Leonard was quick to point out that work wouldn't cease for the first game: "We are doing updates across the summer, adding new matchmaking features, and new features to facilitate user maps after the SDK is out. ... Additionally, those maps can be transported into Left 4 Dead 2." Doug Lombardi said simply, "Trust us a little bit," explaining that Gabe Newell is "always talking about providing entertainment as a service — it's not about making a game any more."
(Link 1) (Link 2)
In short we should give them more time to explain why this is turning into a sequel instead of jumping to conclusions *cough cough* Joe. Twenty new weapons, three new specials, and five new campaigns is kind of a big stretch which would work wonders with the new AI director. In terms of continuing the story and enhancing the gameplay.
Doug Lombardi (Valve's Marketing VP) has said that they are working on ways to keep the communities together so that gives people some hope that L4D 1 won't be left in the dust. They also said that there is a possibility that more content will still be added to L4D 1.
So all there is to do is wait and see what happens. Not like you guys care though as you will be probably be pwaying MW2. O well as long as my minions and i have a co-op game to pirates and wreck in i'm fine. There will probably be another update soon for L4D 1 as well.
Doug Lombardi:Again, I would say, let us tell more of the story before people make their final judgement. And then if they say we’re f’d, then that’s fair. [laughs]
DarkAstraea: In short we should give them more time to explain why this is turning into a sequel instead of jumping to conclusions *cough cough* Joe.
In short we should give them more time to explain why this is turning into a sequel instead of jumping to conclusions *cough cough* Joe.
It isn't intended to be an argument, it gives more information saying that they aren't letting go of L4D 1 and will be adding more DLC to it, plus their reasons for making it into a sequel, hence the links. If you even bothered to read properly. Then again you aren't the person who likes to sit down patiently and wait.
DarkAstraea: If you even bothered to read properly. Then again you aren't the person who likes to sit down patiently and wait.
If you even bothered to read properly. Then again you aren't the person who likes to sit down patiently and wait.
Now it's an Argument... LOL
Remember... Where ever you go, there you are...
In other news, ghost busting loving fans of the 80s can a whack at this game.
(Click Me!! Wooo)
To be released on June 16th NA, June 19th EU.
Note: This may actually beat L4D 2 in best coop, then again game reviews say it was too short so who knows. O well, just another game for my minions and i to wreck in bwahahahaha.
DarkAstraea: It isn't intended to be an argument, it gives more information saying that they aren't letting go of L4D 1 and will be adding more DLC to it, plus their reasons for making it into a sequel, hence the links.
It isn't intended to be an argument, it gives more information saying that they aren't letting go of L4D 1 and will be adding more DLC to it, plus their reasons for making it into a sequel, hence the links.
An argument: a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal. Yeah, that sounds about right. This is definitely an argument. Plus, that cat picture was hilarious. I needed an excuse to use it.
DarkAstraea: If you even bothered to read properly.
If you even bothered to read properly.
I've read your links and I understand both sides of the argument. I still don't like the way they decided to release both games and I'm still not going to purchase L4D2. L4D is fun enough for the same repetitive zombie killing action. New weapons? Great. I don't really care that much (I mean, one of them is a frying pan. Yeah, that's funny, but that should be cooking Bacon, not killing zombies). While some of the other features are quite nifty, they're just not worth another $50 for the same game with new features. That's why it should be an expansion pack at most. Couldn't fit all that nifty content into a DLC reasonably? Then don't. Just give us our updates over time like a good company would.
In all fairness, the game doesn't look so bad. It's Valve, and I trust that they'll release a fine game, it's just such an easy thing to argue against.
DarkAstraea: Then again you aren't the person who likes to sit down patiently and wait.
Then again you aren't the person who likes to sit down patiently and wait.
While this may or may not be true, it is irrelevant to the argument and a possible argumentum ad hominem.
An invalid argument does not make any sense then because if it is backing a proposition or proposal then the argument would be valid.
Now that I think about it, there is only one major phailure that they had with L4D that they could work on, Steam Cloud. That system had and still does have a lot of problems in terms of joining servers, connecting to private servers, locking servers, and such.
DarkAstraea: An invalid argument does not make any sense then because if it is backing a proposition or proposal then the argument would be valid.
While I understand what you're saying, this is false. Just being an argument does not make it a valid argument if the basis of the argument is not grounded in logic or truth. If it is not grounded in logic or truth, it becomes invalid. (Validity is defined as: well grounded in logic or truth).
DarkAstraea: Now that I think about it, there is only one major phailure that they had with L4D that they could work on, Steam Cloud. That system had and still does have a lot of problems in terms of joining servers, connecting to private servers, locking servers, and such.
I agree that the largest failure was Steam Cloud. You can't honestly bash them for it though, it's not like L4D was meant to be played online with other players, right?
I also agree that it's the one of the only major failures. I can't help but shudder at the knowledge that they sit by for so long not fixing some of the games initial bugs, glitches, and exploits.
Don't get me wrong though, L4D was (and still is) a very enjoyable game.
But the post is grounded in truth and or logic as it is backed by references from the group of people in question.
It would be arguing against the people that are making complaints about how there is not going to be any more content being added, and other questions or complains that have been flying around the net, and also why valve sees that it should be turned into a sequel.
From my first point of view they are just giving explanations and not arguing against anything. Unless this is still invalid please tell me how it is or would be invalid, from the way i see it, it would be a valid argument. Otherwise it would just be opinionated.
DarkAstraea: But the post is grounded in truth and or logic as it is backed by references from the group of people in question. It would be arguing against the people that are making complaints about how there is not going to be any more content being added, and other questions or complains that have been flying around the net, and also why valve sees that it should be turned into a sequel. From my first point of view they are just giving explanations and not arguing against anything. Unless this is still invalid please tell me how it is or would be invalid, from the way i see it, it would be a valid argument. Otherwise it would just be opinionated.
Nope, your argument is perfectly valid, I just needed an excuse to post the funny cat picture.