Support NeoGAF

[Buckethead]

People's sense of entitlement is kinda annoying.

I remember paying $50 for Yoshi's Story and beating it in 2 hours.
We have the internet now, that helps. If you feel it's not worth it, then don't buy it.

It's a good business decision and there's nowhere that says they "owe" you anything.
Debate about it until the cows come home, but they don't owe you nothin'.

Don't blame them for your addiction to their game. You got there by yourself.

 

[lupin23rd]

I was surprised at first too, but I figured that L4D was not really finished in the first place, so I guess they wanted to cash in on the "rest" of the game they forgot to make.

 

[StoOgE]

I love L4D, but I'm pretty pissed about this.

No wonder they don't allow custom maps on L4D. They want to fucking bilk us for more map packs as full games.

 

[morningbus]

Here's the thing, besides the new characters and whatever work is going into creating new levels, I don't see what else is so radically different from the first game that it couldn't have come out as incremental updates. Really, the only thing I can see as a huge, sequel worthy step forward is the improvements to the AI director.

Besides that, what else couldn't have been added? Fire resistant infected, Charger class special infected (as well as probably any other additional infected), updated witch behavior, incendiary weapons, and melee weapons could all have been added to the original game and have broken nothing.

Also, I do understand that they're trying to make the game's story and character development matter more and that advancement in those areas would be hard to shoehorn in as patches, but those improvements are ultimately irrelevant. This is a multiplayer focused game. Once I've experienced the story of the campaign once, I will stop caring and focus on having fun with the gameplay.

Look, I love Left 4 Dead and it is one of my most played games of all time (140+ hours and counting), but they really have to do more than re-skin the characters and locations to warrant me buying another full priced game. I hope they can achieve that before the game is released because, unlike before or with other Valve games, I will not be buying based on promises and potential.

 

[Ikuu]

People's sense of entitlement is kinda annoying.

He said: "One of the things that we're doing is we seem to be in a transition between games as a package product and games more of a service. So if you look at Team Fortress 2, one of things that's really helped grow the community is the continuous updates, where we release new maps, new character classes, new unlockables, new weapons. And we tell the stories about the characters, like the meet the sniper, or meet the sandwich. And that ongoing delivery of content really seems to grow the community.

"So each time we've released one of those for Team Fortress 2 we've seen about a 20% increase in the number of people who are playing online. And that number is really important because it determines how many community created maps there are, how many servers are running, and so on. So we'll do the same thing with Left 4 Dead where we'll have the initial release and then we'll release more movies, more characters, more weapons, unlockables, achievements, because that's the way you continue to grow a community over time."
http://www.videogamer.com/news/valve_details_post_left_4_dead_launch_plans.html

 

[Akia]

*cough*

Damn, I'm guess from that rumor that Turtle Rock won and Valve let them aim for a 2009 sequel? I think that sounds about right.

 

[Odyssey]

L4D's skeletal framework isn't just about value that you stick a dollar sign on. L4D has a great formula, but it potentially could of been much better if it didn't putter out so quick. I also thought there were two original L4D campaigns that were cut and were suppose to be added on later. I want more content this time around, but New Orleans is a pretty great location choice.

 

[ghst]

the valve i knew would rather much make a great game in two years than a good game in one. and for a full blown sequel, iteration is not nearly enough.

even their iterative episodes spent alteast 18 months in development, and are priced and labeled accordingly.

 

[Buckethead]

He said: "One of the things that we're doing is we seem to be in a transition between games as a package product and games more of a service. So if you look at Team Fortress 2, one of things that's really helped grow the community is the continuous updates, where we release new maps, new character classes, new unlockables, new weapons.

True, but I don't care how many people play "again" and re-boot up the old game.
They don't care about who's playing and who's not necessarily, they care about getting your money. That's the point of DLC. Unless they want to give it to you for free (like they already did) because they feel it's owed to you.

However, they don't owe everyone a completely new campaign as long/longer than the original.

Fact is, DLC, whether you think it's cool or whatever, doesn't usually constitute it's price point nor is it usually percieved as "legitimate". Look at Lost and Damned. DLC to one of the biggest games on a next-generation console.
It had a different feel from IV, was promoted pretty heavily, and had a lot of content and was one of the few games that actually justified the $20 price-point. However, there was no disc/in-store SKU to push on the consumer and sales suffered greatly because of it.

DLC hasn't matured yet. It's not a smart move, imo. Many Valve fans are used to DLC and episodic content because they trust them because they've grown up doing it. However Joe Schmoe isn't down with it quite yet. I don't blame him with MS' shady ass credit card/XBL subscription shit either.

So, price-point, maybe a little high, $40 seems more fair in all honesty. However if it came in DLC it would be just as much, only broken up over time, right? They may have disappointed some with their announcement, however it's not like they blatantly lied and betrayed their consumers like many are painting to have happened.

 

[mattso]

I'm an admitted Valve fanboy/game addict and I will be avoiding this sequel like the plague. I can't believe this company of all company's is trying to pull this crap.

I honestly cannot understand posts like this

 

[bdouble]

I am not going to listen to a however-long-that-is podcast in order to be convinced to buy something, it shouldn't take that. Valve needs to communicate whatever they say in that podcast or someone needs to make some bullet points on their behalf or something

I'm not trying to convince you to buy it. I'm just saying you are making accusations and assumptions that aren't true. So wait for your bullet points until you say its just a "content patch"

 

[BlazeHedgehog]

He said: "One of the things that we're doing is we seem to be in a transition between games as a package product and games more of a service. So if you look at Team Fortress 2, one of things that's really helped grow the community is the continuous updates, where we release new maps, new character classes, new unlockables, new weapons. And we tell the stories about the characters, like the meet the sniper, or meet the sandwich. And that ongoing delivery of content really seems to grow the community.

"So each time we've released one of those for Team Fortress 2 we've seen about a 20% increase in the number of people who are playing online. And that number is really important because it determines how many community created maps there are, how many servers are running, and so on. So we'll do the same thing with Left 4 Dead where we'll have the initial release and then we'll release more movies, more characters, more weapons, unlockables, achievements, because that's the way you continue to grow a community over time."
http://www.videogamer.com/news/valve_details_post_left_4_dead_launch_plans.html

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3169669

Keeping on the online bonanza, writer Chet Faliszek said that Valve plans to get the DLC rolling much more quickly with Left 4 Dead than it has been able to for Team Fortress 2. Plans already in the works call for new campaigns, weapons, and boss infected (the game's zombie enemies). In addition, there were strong hints at a flamethrower coming not long after launch.

 

[sykoex]

Sad to see Valve entering the cash-in sequel business. Sign of the times I guess. Although I guess they can still afford to snub the PS3.

 

[Docpan]

My only question is.........

Why Left 4 Dead 2, but no Half Life 2: Episode 3???

My only assumption is that Episode 3 is going to be a full-length game, possibly even on a new game engine.

 

[RiskyChris]

I mean, I didn't even buy GTA4:TLAD until the other week, and I liked GTA4 more than 99% of GAF.

 

[Red]

Why are they making L4D 2?

Because they want my money.

 

[C4Lukins]

Well it's a pretty stupid move for my part at least.

L4D DLC means I woulda paid up to $30 for that shit.

L4D2 in 6 months means Valve gets $0 from, because I sure as hell ain't paying $60 for an expansion pack (or the game that should have been released in the first place).

I will counter your non purchase with my full $60 purchase, because I want a new game and not iterative DLC.

 

[Xamdou]

Well EA is the publisher afterall so perhaps they pressured Valve to release part 2 this Fall since the 1st sold over 1mil ;O

 

[bdouble]

My only assumption is that Episode 3 is going to be a full-length game, possibly even on a new game engine.

Why do people keep saying this? The whole point of Source is to not have to make a new engine. UE3 maybe be called Ue3 but its still just improved tech from UE2 most likely. They designed it specifically to be modular so they could take and rework everything as it goes. The thing is they don't want to pull a Crysis and black out half their consumer base so these are very small changes over a long period of time. HL2:Ep3 will be the best looking Source game when its released simple as that.

Well EA is the publisher afterall so perhaps they pressured Valve to release part 2 this Fall since the 1st sold over 1mil ;O

No distribution partner.

 

[Slavik81]

if they let l4d2 out a year later, i would be fine

Even just releasing it later wouldn't solve the underlying problem. Left4Dead was a great game, but they spent so long on building the technology and mechanics that there was a fairly limited amount of content. The multiplayer was hit-or-miss, and quite limited in scope.

We needed more support like the survivor pack and SDK, and we needed more frequent patches. I loved Left4Dead, but had a few reservations and was been waiting for a big update to go back to playing it again with people on my friendslist. Now that's not going to happen.

The problem with Left4Dead 2 isn't how soon it's coming out, it's how they've treated Left4Dead 1. My nagging issues with it will never be resolved, and my friends list will never again be lit up with people playing Left4Dead like it was last month with people playing Team Fortress 2.

 

[Ecchi-Time7]

Even just releasing it later wouldn't solve the underlying problem. Left4Dead was a great game, but they spent so long on building the technology and mechanics that there was a fairly limited amount of content. The multiplayer was hit-or-miss, and quite limited in scope.

We needed more support like the survivor pack and SDK, and we needed more frequent patches. I loved Left4Dead, but had a few reservations and was been waiting for a big update to go back to playing it again with people on my friendslist. Now that's not going to happen.

The problem with Left4Dead 2 isn't how soon it's coming out, it's how they've treated Left4Dead 1. My nagging issues with it will never be resolved, and my friends list will never again be lit up with people playing Left4Dead like it was last month with people playing Team Fortress 2.

Why do you say they spent so long building the original game? Valve said it was largely just a CS:S mod.

 

[BlazeHedgehog]

I will counter your non purchase with my full $60 purchase, because I want a new game and not iterative DLC.

But... why? You'd rather actually spend money than get something for free?

I see a lot of people on GAF that love to spend money. Even when they don't have to, they would rather spend money on something than get it for free.

And it doesn't make sense to me. I get that you're supporting your favorite company, but... it's like spoiling a child in some ways. There are people who are willing to support their favorite company even when they don't deserve it.

That's not a practice anyone should be championing. I'm not saying this about you specifically, mind, this is just an observation I've made in general.

 

[Grayman]

Well EA is the publisher afterall so perhaps they pressured Valve to release part 2 this Fall since the 1st sold over 1mil ;O

valve doesn't exactly need EAs money...

 

[Boonoo]

This plus Valve in hindsight didn't like the standalone structure of the campaign and starting over on a new one with new characters verges on sequel territory.

I wonder if there were disagreements about this decision at Valve pre-L4D2 announcement?

This seems strange since in the commentary mode explicitly state that they originally had the different campaigns connected and that they changed it to standalone to better suit repeated play.

This whole thing seems strange.

I wonder where along the way they decided that the free dlc they were working on (as talked about in Sega1991's quotes) was going to be a retail product.

I haven't listened to the podcast yet, but do they say it was always going to be a retail game or do they make mention of the transition--that things just became to big to be added as patches?

 

[firex]

I don't know and don't really care why, I just want them to price it fairly. It's a bad comparison because the games I am comparing L4D to are much more awesome, but it's like Doom 1 -> Doom 2, in that Doom 2 is more of the same with a new weapon and 32 totally new levels. The difference being, back then those kinds of sequels were fine and gaming budgets weren't out of control. This reeks of a quick cash grab, so if they're going to do that, they should at least have the decency to not charge full MSRP.

I'd buy it at $20, maybe $30, but anything beyond that is robbery.

 

[poppabk]

People need to accept that DLC brings in less money than full retail releases. You would think that the endless rock band and guitar hero announcements would have clued them in.

 

[Grayman]

this thread seems to have some xbox centric points of view that don't offer insight to the meat of the discussion.

 

[Woo-Fu]

Why do you say they spent so long building the original game? Valve said it was largely just a CS:S mod.

It was announced november of 2006, released november 2008, there are two years right there not counting any of the development that occurred before the original announcement.

 

[C4Lukins]

But... why? You'd rather actually spend money than get something for free?

I see a lot of people on GAF that love to spend money. Even when they don't have to, they would rather spend money on something than get it for free.

And it doesn't make sense to me. I get that you're supporting your favorite company, but... it's like spoiling a child in some ways. There are people who are willing to support their favorite company even when they don't deserve it.

That's not a practice anyone should be championing. I'm not saying this about you specifically, mind, this is just an observation I've made in general.

Yes I would rather all games are free. But when a company makes a new game, I do not feel that they owe me something and it should be free. I also would prefer a full new game to a new episode every 6 months or so free or not, because rarely do I follow a game for more then a couple of months after release.

 

[dLMN8R]

Listen to the Rock Paper Shotgun podcast.
He actually goes into some detail on why they are making a new game.. and it got me FUCKING HYPED FOR IT.

This, 1000 times this.


People always jump on the hyperbole train prematurely at every single announcement and instantly assume the worst:

-New TF2 unlocks were announced, and it was "OMG TEAM FORTRESS 2 IS RUINED FUCK VALVE" (months later, they're pretty awesome)

-Valve cancels The Black Box, only Orange Box is available "HOLY FUCKING SHIT VALVE IS FUCKING DEAD VALVE IS OFF MY AAA DEVELOPER LIST VALVE FUCKING SUCKS WHAT THE FUCK VALVE I NEED TO REBUY GAMES I ALREADY HAVE TO GET THE NEW ONES WHAT THE HELL???????" (two years later, Orange Box is held up as one of the greatest packages ever released, Valve deeply discounts Orange Box on/before release, and they give you the extra copies of the games to give to friends if you wish. Orange Box is no longer a "rip-off" that forces you to re-buy old games you already have, it's suddenly held up as *THE* benchmark for incredible value)

-Portal 360 XBLA announcement last year "OMG VALVE IS DOOMED FORGETTING ABOUT PC WHAT THE FUCK" (turned out it was just Portal + free mod on 360 that PC gamers can get for free)

-Left 4 Dead simultaneous launch? "OMG CONSOLIZED GAME VALVE IS FUCKING DEAD WHAT THE FUCK" (whoops, it's actually a pretty awesome game)

-Left 4 Dead 2 announced? "WHAT THE FUCK VALVE DON'T CHARGE ME FULL PRICE FOR AN EXPANSION" (*insert inevitable clarafication in two months time when Valve announces doubtless discount for existing owners and more content for the original Left 4 Dead*)


Same crap, different day. Don't pretend like I'm exaggerating things either. Every single controversial Valve announcement and they suddenly "lose credibility" or some crap, instantly redeeming themselves mere months later.

Ridiculous.

 

[Slavik81]

Why do you say they spent so long building the original game? Valve said it was largely just a CS:S mod.

Admittedly, not a ridiculously long time, but it was being worked on for about 3 years before it released.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/696/696664p1.html

 

[RiskyChris]

But... why? You'd rather actually spend money than get something for free?

Well considering paying for L4D2 will give me an unimaginably better experience than even a free DLC that would marginally improve L4D1 and marginally affect its playerbase...

 

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

valve's "reasoning" didn't make a lick of fucking sense. basically they said:

"it takes time to work on the director and takes time to work on other stuff we want to fix, so we are making a new game, right?"

they ended it with those words. "we're making a new game, right?" or something very close. wtf? it's like they took lessons from bush on how to throw random words at the interviewer to confuse them like those MGS camera-busting grenades.

 

[Houston3000]

I don't care if this cost $50 or whatever. While I think this is more than mere free DLC content, I don't think it's far beyond what a traditional expansion pack would of added to a game save for the sheer number of scenarios. I guess in the age of console games though expansion packs are dead.

I just wish (hope?) we could play the current four Campaigns with the new additions (with the original characters), instead of Valve making them practically obsolete with this game.

 

[Phobophile]

Because the sheer amount of changes, albeit seemingly small, they're introducing warrants a new sequel as they're so significant.

• Improved AI Director 2.0
• New weapons
• All-new maps

I'd rather see these ironed out in a fresh stand-alone release as they'll have more dedicated man hours for optimization.

And there's no saying how much dev time and money went into developing this shit. I can't believe the indignation perceived by many people shocked that a company may want to recoup lost money spent on development.

 

[dLMN8R]

And price and/or discounts for existing Left 4 Dead owners hasn't been announced either.

 

[Icarus]

I get a kick out of people's sense of entitlement. You got your money out of L4D. No one owes you more than that.

 

[Omikron]

I get a kick out of people's sense of entitlement. You got your money out of L4D. No one owes you more than that.

100% correct.

 

[Azure Dream]

People need to accept that DLC brings in less money than full retail releases. You would think that the endless rock band and guitar hero announcements would have clued them in.

It's not just the "waaaah we want things for free" side of it. Valve has constantly talked up the TF2 model like that was the plan for success in the future, and that it had worked out for them really well. So if consumers are continually made happy with new content, and sales jump every time a major content release happens... why change strategies? Especially after the statements made?

I keep coming back to them feeling the limitations of the original engine, like they don't want to mess with it anymore. They can do so much more with this new engine and AI director, and the old levels won't work with it, so why patch around it and try to jury-rig everything sloppily when you can just start fresh?

 

[ezekial45]

Reading the L4D2 steam forums was pretty funny at first, but now it's a little infuriating. Especially this gem of a post:

To those marginalizing

You purchase an expensive condo in a prestigious building still under development. Sure, the walls still need painting and the floor re-doing, but you're not concerned: the building owner assures you maintenance is done regularly and it will be no time until your suite is fully furnished!

So you're happy with your prime piece of real estate and cut him a check, ignoring the little flaws here and there until the renovator arrives.

And he does! Oh you're so happy... but apparently he couldn't get an electrician today, so he can only get half the floor done and the kitchen. "No prob" you say, "come back soon!".

Except he never comes back, to your place that is. No, instead as you open the door the next day you are shocked to see the whole renovation team in the same condo right across from yours!

You call out to them "Hey guys, I thought you were supposed to be renovating my place!?"

"Nah," they say, "change of plan - we're doing up this new place real pretty. Gonna put it up for about the same as yours too."

As you and some other condo owners in the same predicament began to voice your concern, some of the more naive tenets snipe at you:
"Stop complaining", re-assuring that "you should be happy that at least you can buy that other condo".

 

[BlazeHedgehog]

Well considering paying for L4D2 will give me an unimaginably better experience than even a free DLC that would marginally improve L4D1 and marginally affect its playerbase...

But, again, look at TF2 DLC. As I said in another thread, with all the new gametypes, maps, and weapons that were added to TF2, that could have been Team Fortress 3.

But they didn't do that. All TF2 DLC has been free and the state of the game today is very, very different compared to what it was in 2007.

And Valve specifically said they were going to do the same with Left4Dead. There is nothing stopping Valve from doing daylight maps or revamping the AI director or adding new weapons to the current Left4Dead. It's their game, their software distribution platform, and they can do whatever the hell they want with it. They aren't playing by any rules but the ones they themselves created.

Sure, you can cite all the people who claim TF2 DLC is "ruining the game" (even I wish I could go back and play the original TF2 sometimes), but the same people who are saying that are likely the same type of people who would still play Counter-Strike 1.6 instead of adapting to the (very slight) changes made to Counter-Strike Source.

Announcing L4D2 this soon is a complete 180 for basically everything Valve's ever said about any of their games to-date.

 

[morningbus]

Look, can we drop the "lol entitlement" talk for just a little bit and recognize that people were explicitly made to expect something that they're no longer getting and that Valve deserves to be called out on that?

I totally understand the "pro-L4D2" arguments, they make sense, and you have every right to think that way. Your logic isn't flawed. But it's only been a day since the game was announced and the announcement was kind of a shock. People deserve to hash out their feelings on this.

 

[aeolist]

The best parts of L4D2 sound like fixes for all the problems in L4D1.

I have no problem paying for new content. When it seems like I paid $50 for a year of a beta-level game and then being asked to pay another $50 for the fixed version I feel like I got screwed.

 

[Mar]

I never thought I'd see the day when gamers would complain about getting a new game.

Surely this is a sign of the

Spoiler

zombie

apocalypse.

 

[PillowKnight]

This, 1000 times this.


People always jump on the hyperbole train prematurely at every single announcement and instantly assume the worst:

-New TF2 unlocks were announced, and it was "OMG TEAM FORTRESS 2 IS RUINED FUCK VALVE" (months later, they're pretty awesome)

-Valve cancels The Black Box, only Orange Box is available "HOLY FUCKING SHIT VALVE IS FUCKING DEAD VALVE IS OFF MY AAA DEVELOPER LIST VALVE FUCKING SUCKS WHAT THE FUCK VALVE I NEED TO REBUY GAMES I ALREADY HAVE TO GET THE NEW ONES WHAT THE HELL???????" (two years later, Orange Box is held up as one of the greatest packages ever released, Valve deeply discounts Orange Box on/before release, and they give you the extra copies of the games to give to friends if you wish. Orange Box is no longer a "rip-off" that forces you to re-buy old games you already have, it's suddenly held up as *THE* benchmark for incredible value)

-Portal 360 XBLA announcement last year "OMG VALVE IS DOOMED FORGETTING ABOUT PC WHAT THE FUCK" (turned out it was just Portal + free mod on 360 that PC gamers can get for free)

-Left 4 Dead simultaneous launch? "OMG CONSOLIZED GAME VALVE IS FUCKING DEAD WHAT THE FUCK" (whoops, it's actually a pretty awesome game)

-Left 4 Dead 2 announced? "WHAT THE FUCK VALVE DON'T CHARGE ME FULL PRICE FOR AN EXPANSION" (*insert inevitable clarafication in two months time when Valve announces doubtless discount for existing owners and more content for the original Left 4 Dead*)


Same crap, different day. Don't pretend like I'm exaggerating things either. Every single controversial Valve announcement and they suddenly "lose credibility" or some crap, instantly redeeming themselves mere months later.

Ridiculous.

That's quite a bit of revisionist history concerning the TF2 updates. Aside from that, do you really think all of those conclusions would've been arrived at had people not bitched?

It's almost as if you assume that the company can do no wrong.

 

[RiskyChris]

But, again, look at TF2 DLC. As I said in another thread, with all the new gametypes, maps, and weapons that were added to TF2, that could have been Team Fortress 3.

But they didn't do that. All TF2 DLC has been free and the state of the game today is very, very different compared to what it was in 2007.

And Valve specifically said they were going to do the same with Left4Dead. There is nothing stopping Valve from doing daylight maps or revamping the AI director or adding new weapons to the current Left4Dead. It's their game, their software distribution platform, and they can do whatever the hell they want with it. They aren't playing by any rules but the ones they themselves created.

Sure, you can cite all the people who claim TF2 DLC is "ruining the game" (even I wish I could go back and play the original TF2 sometimes), but the same people who are saying that are likely the same type of people who would still play Counter-Strike 1.6 instead of adapting to the (very slight) changes made to Counter-Strike Source.

Announcing L4D2 this soon is a complete 180 for basically everything Valve's ever said about any of their games to-date.

Yeah, there's the betrayal shit, but L4D is a totally different game from TF2. It makes more sense to support a team-based FPS with something that keeps the playerbase thriving than it does to make an add-on for a small tactical game.

 

[BlazeHedgehog]

Yeah, there's the betrayal shit, but L4D is a totally different game from TF2. It makes more sense to support a team-based FPS with something that keeps the playerbase thriving than it does to make an add-on for a small tactical game.

But I don't see how that matters. How is doing L4D2 any more beneficial than just making it L4D1 DLC?

Splintering the user base? How? If you own L4D, you have the DLC. You can't not own L4D and avoid the DLC, unless you're a weirdo who plays the game offline exclusively. There comes the issue of getting that DLC on to the Xbox 360 (something Valve is currently trying to work through with TF2), but, again, that's never stopped Valve before.

That was Valve's entire point with how they were doing TF2 DLC: there's more to be gained by supporting a game for months or even years with free bonus content than there is from just pumping out quick sequels annually.

Does Valve really have so much money that they are using L4D2 as a test for this strategy (e.g. seeing which method results in more profit)?

 

[Slavik81]

Well considering paying for L4D2 will give me an unimaginably better experience than even a free DLC that would marginally improve L4D1 and marginally affect its playerbase...

The free DLC and Steam deals for TF2 have definitely had a significant impact on it's regular playerbase. I wish I'd kept exact numbers from months ago, but I swear it wasn't more than about 12 to 15 thousand peak. Now... well, you can see for yourself.

 

[dLMN8R]

That's quite a bit of revisionist history concerning the TF2 updates. Aside from that, do you really think all of those conclusions would've been arrived at had people not bitched?

It's almost as if you assume that the company can do no wrong.

There is no revisionist history to be had here. When Valve first announced that new weapons were coming for Team Fortress 2, people were absolutely APESHIT about how they were completely out of place for the game, how they will positively RUIN TF2 because of class unbalancing, how it'll be UNFAIR for people who don't have the weapons, and on and on and on.

While of course some things came true, such as people temporarily stacking classes, the game was nowhere near "ruined", and it's still the most popular game on Steam behind Counter-Strike

The conclusions also had nothing to do with the bitching:

The TF2 unlocks didn't get any fundamentally different because of people bitching, only minor balance tweaks
The Orange Box's value is praised because of the games it includes, not because of the free gifts previous owners got.
Left 4 Dead still today isn't "consolized".
Portal XBLA was never something that PC gamers missed out on

 

[RiskyChris]

Does Valve really have so much money that they are using L4D2 as a test for this strategy (e.g. seeing which method results in more profit)?

Yes, in fact they do!

I whole-heartedly think having a new game is better for the community, at least for console players. If L4D was exclusively propped up by the PC community, patches and DLC would be a much more viable option. The console crowd will be more receptive to a new game, which will make everyone's experience better.

The free DLC and Steam deals for TF2 have definitely had a significant impact on it's regular playerbase. I wish I'd kept exact numbers from months ago, but I swear it wasn't more than about 12 to 15 thousand peak. Now... well, you can see for yourself.

Ok, that's Steam. Can you give me some examples of XBL or PSN?