Valve Admitting L4D Single Player Mediocrity Through Multiplayer Piracy Moderation?

From GamesGazette.net: "As many of the people who have Left 4 Dead will know, Valve did not include Digital Rights Management (DRM) onto the disc(s). While this is rather good given the way the DRM controversy has exploded in the wake of the Spore debacle, it doesn't mean Valve is just letting piracy happen. In fact, there is something they are doing about it that is kind of making it seem like they are conceding something to the public. That is, if you know it's going on. It's a way that really doesn't make much sense to us, though it could make sense when you think about it, because it's only happening to those that want to play multiplayer through the cracked L4D copies floating around the torrent sites. This could mean one of two things: Either they think the multiplayer is the key seller of the game (it's what's getting the game these high scores on the reviews so far), or....

....maybe even they think that the single player campaign in L4D sucks total ass."

[Timesplitter14]

For the last time, L4D is a multiplayer game and the single-player mode is only for people who don't have internet. You're not even SUPPOSED to play the story mode.

It's like Counter-Strike. CS had a single-player mode. How many people knew about that? I bet there aren't too many. I knew a hardcore CS player who didn't even know it. And there's a good reason for that : multiplayer games like this don't need a single-player mode.

[JD_Shadow]

Then why not just make it (and CS, for that matter) a MP-only game like Warhawk or WOW? If we're not supposed to play the story mode, then why the hell include the mode to begin with?

@1.2: If that's how it worked, then WoW and Final Fantasy XI would've had a single player mode included within it. If it's just going to be an afterthought, then don't waste your time and don't include it. I don't think they are as different, as well, because they are in the same boat as L4D. Warhawk and Socom: Confrontation are two more games we can use as examples of those that don't have a SP campaign yet do rather well (Socom is beginning to pick up a little bit of steam and it IS MP-only).

Plus, to me, anyway (not saying you're to blame of it), that is just an excuse as to why the single-player mode sucks.

@2.1: MGO is another game entirely. It is treated as a game that was in MGS4, and wasn't MGS4's MP component. That and you're in the minority with that opinion (though you have every right in the world to think and express it just as someone in the majority would). Alot of people enjoyed MGO once they got through some of the hoops to actually get to the game itself.

So I think you're comparing two different things here.

@ZEEBO4LIFESTFU: And...you're in the Gamer Zone with that half-assed reply...WHY?

Judging by your comments on 4 and 6, your bubbles (as well as your Gamer Zone residence) isn't going to last too long on this site.

[Timesplitter14]

Because that's how PC games work. I dunno. It's just a convention.

Hardcore PC games are never as ''ready for the masses'' as console games. They always have this kind of ''home made'' feel and I like that.

The problem with WoW and FF11 is that they are MMOs and they are casual games. That makes a big difference.

[BRACHATTACK]

Good game, single player sucked.

[ps3king]

Left For Dead's single player campaign mode is the Multiplayers's Internet-Less luxury. Valve does a good job of making your friend-bots work well though. They do funny things that try to replicate mistakes like what a human players might do. Then again, buying Left for Dead to only play the single player campaign is like buying a PS3 just to watch movies on.

[cmrbe]

but you are not suppose to play it?.

[Aclay]

@Timesplitter14,

MGS4 didn't have the best multiplayer, but the core gameplay in MGS games have always been the single player. Metal Gear Online was a separate component from MGS4 and I don't think that reviewers even included MGO in their review of MGS4.

But honestly, if L4D is so focused on multiplayer, I think that it should have been a multi-player only game.

[Andras84]

What do you mean we are not suppoesed to play the single player??? If we are not supposed to than it should be blocked or not even made. It takes a very long time to create that single player. Valve just f-ed up with it. Don't try to protect that lazy @ss Gabe.

[Timesplitter14]

ok, just take another example, then.

Like singleplayer only games.

I guess I know what you'll say and why you'll say that. (that singleplayer games stay focused on what they're good at) And you're right. But when you look at it in a very rationnal way, getting this bonus multiplayer or singleplayer just can't be a bad thing. It's a bonus. It doesn't really matter if it's good or bad.

[TheIneffableBob]

Left 4 Dead was designed as a multiplayer game. Single-player was included because, well, why not? They already created the bots to use in multiplayer to fill up empty slots, so why not just have them play with you offline? Single-player is good for laptops where you might not always have an Internet connection. It was an addition that took little effort but made it much more accessible in more situations.

[Tony P]

Prime reason why I did not purchase the game.

I'm probably one of the few left who prefers a good single-player campaign over cooperative play. Many games have managed both adequately, but L4D doesn't seem to be one of them.

[Time_Is_On_My_Side]

With XBOX 360 games they have to incorporate single player campaigns because you pay for online. The PlayStation 3, PC, and Mac have free online this is their advantage. With persistent online games the network topology it's expensive to maintain so people pay to keep the online going. This is very similar to XBOX Live it's expensive to keep going so they have people to keep it going.

Shadowrun is the only XBOX 360 game that I know of that forces you to play for XBOX Live. As Timesplitter14 that's just stupid they have a campaign but it isn't suppose to be played. It's like saying Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots has online but you're not suppose to use it. This game is like Unreal Tournament 3 the campaign is just second thought. You're suppose to play it but not spend most of your time on it the downfall of a paying service.

In the end it's because PlayStation 3, PC, and Mac players play for free we can have online only games without forcing anyone to paying a fee. It's that simple and will be the ideal platforms for persistent online games since we don't pay a fee on top of a fee.

[pixelsword]

...I say that because if L4D, a console exclusive for the 360, specifically made single player because some 360 owners don't have access to the internet, then they should've assured a great single-player experience.

That's just plain sloppy to do otherwise... tack on a single-player mode touted for the consle then make excuses when the single-player sucks.

[poopface1]

of course playing with bots isnt as fun, but there are still people who might want to use it. Out of every multiplayer focused game Iv played with bots, Im glad they were still there as an option. You can probaly play with one friend and 2 bots if you wanted a full team, or play the game in the event your internet goes out, or you dont have internet.

Do you think annyone ever said the UT was better with bots that online, NO!!!!! Woo wooo to you fanboys.

Do you realy think not including bots is better than including them for the heck of it. you people are really blind.

[kwyjibo]

We have arguments claiming that if the single player is not as accomplished as the multiplayer, then Valve shouldn't have included it at all.

Well, you're totally wrong - you do not have any sound backing for that argument. Left 4 Dead includes bots, AI controlled teammates which means players can seamlessly drop in and out of the match. These bots are an integral part of the game, if you would like to play with these bots alone, then you can. Valve have rightly included that option for those who choose to play with bots.

The argument that because playing alongside bots is not as satisfying as playing alongside friends is true, it's also blindingly obvious, and does not mean that single player botmatch should be dropped. Do you think that including a botmatch mode in Unreal Tournament or Quake 3 was a bad thing? Bot support in Counter-Strike should be dropped, so you can't, even if you choose to, to play offline?

No, of course not. Those arguing that it should have absolutely nothing to back up their stance, other than QQ, QQ.

[Legion]

Your statement "Shadowrun is the only XBOX 360 game that I know of that forces you to play for XBOX Live" is incorrect. Do you even have an XBox 360? You can play the game solo with bots. Or you can use system link over a network even. Which may of us do so in the desert when deployed.

[GWAVE]

I love how so many games that have excellent multiplayer but hum-ho single player are massacred by video game reviewers. Yet, there will always be a select few games (like Halo 3 and now L4D) that for some odd reason are allowed to dodge this bullet.

[Timesplitter14]

I agree

But I think they should give this free pass to every game, and in both scenarios : ''singleplayer only'' games like MGS4, and ''multiplayer only'' games like L4D.

If the game's awesome, just give it a good score. Sure MGS4 had an online mode, but it was really bad. Just like L4D's story mode. That didn't prevent it (and SHOULDN'T prevent it) from being awesome and deserving AAA scores.

[likedamaster]

Piracy is that exactly, piracy. Why would they not protect their product? Another misleading title FTL. Xbox fans don't defend Valve, they make great games...period.

[JD_Shadow]

This is worthy for discussion, though. You're talking about it, though. See, I didn't say that Valve said this, but they might be implying it.

I am happy that I'm getting people to talk about something that would've never even been brought up if I hadn't said it and submitted it. I'm thinking it's a thing that if I don't bring up these topics, not many people will.

[Spike47]

that's why I say anything higher than a 9.0 or a perfect 5/5 is not correct.

[Timesplitter14]

How would you rate MGS4, then?

MGS4 had a really crappy multiplayer. Does that mean it should've been rated 7 or 8/10?

I think not. If a game's awesome, it's awesome.

[BRACHATTACK]

MGS4 had great online, too complex for your small brain

MGS4 - amazing single player AND multiplayer

L4D - crappy single player, amazing multiplayer

[Timesplitter14]

Brachattack....

MGS4 is my favorite game ever. You don't need to pump out fanboyish arguments to convince me. But I just don't think MGS4's multiplayer is ''too complex for my brain''. That's just... no.

It was made by a completely different team and Konami ruined it. Subsistance was better.

[ps3king]

The game is great. So much fun. I will be playing this game for a long time I hope, as long as the dedicated server continue to run.

After Playing this game, some parts of me really want a full fleshed out FPS Single player story involving Nothing but fast Zombies. But then again that would undermine what great the Multi-player is.

I hope they make more episodes though. One in a Mall...

[callahan09]

No, it's not that there is such a thing as too high of a score for this game because it's multiplayer is the focus of it. The real issue if you want to talk like that is the double standard in reviews today. They talk about Resistance 2's single-player sucking (and, by the way, that's a load of crap, because it doesn't suck) and then dock points because of that, then they praise the multiplayer aspects but barely delve into discussing them, as though they're not important. But with L4D, they don't judge it on its single-player, they judge it on its multiplayer (as well they should, it is intended to be a multiplayer experience). My point is, why don't reviewers rate all games on the same sort of basis?

[Time_Is_On_My_Side]

All components of a game must be counted in the final review it doesn't make sense to just look at one aspect of the game and call it a day. You call that bias the only downfall of Metal Gear Solid 4 was the signing out for a Konami account other wise an amazing multiplayer experience. You do everything that you can do in single player.

Example: Lets say Halo 3's campaign is amazing but the online was so laggy that you couldn't play. This should be counted in the review otherwise it's bias because you only looking at what's good in the game. They call it confirmation bias because they're only looking at the aspects the confirms their choices.

[callahan09]

I think they should just start reviewing the single-player & multiplayer portions of games separately. I mean, do it all in one review write-up, but give the two components separate scores. They already break it down like:

Presentation
Graphics
Sound
Gameplay
Longevity

Or whatever. They shouldn't have Gameplay... they should have Single-Player and Multi-Player scores in place of that. If a game is single-player only, then obviously they shouldn't give it a multi-player score, and vice-versa.

Because if I'm about to buy the new Halo game, I don't really give a damn if they give the Single-Player a 5 out of 10, as long as they give the multiplayer a 10 out of 10. In other words, I'm looking at the review to find out if what I want out of the game is good. If I'm looking for a multiplayer game, I don't want to see a 7 for gameplay because they thought multiplayer was perfect but singleplayer sucked. That doesn't represent the fact that WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR should be scored a 10 for gameplay, because I'm only interested in the multiplayer. So, separate the scores, and you'll make everyone happy. Seriously.

[TrevorPhillips]

guys not every game is perfect

[ZEEBO4LIFESTFU]

just wondering why a ps3 fanboy took the time to post a story about a 360 game?

garbage site

[Timesplitter14]

Since when is this a ''360 game''?

That's just laughable

[ps3king]

He is stating a fact isn't he. Left for Dead is on the XBOX 360. Therefore by process of association: IT IS A 360 GAME!!!

Man so dumb.

[TheIneffableBob]

Well, yeah, but it was designed as a PC game first and foremost.

Saying Left 4 Dead is a 360 game is like saying Gears of War and Metal Gear Solid are PC games when referring to them because they're on the PC.

[Spike47]

the quality of MGS4's singleplayer cannot be compared with the quality of L4D's multiplayer. Remember that singleplayer is the base of a game, everybody usually plays that part of the game first.

I rented this game on my PC, I like what they did with multiplayer but the core base of the game, the singleplayer, is just "been there done that".

[Timesplitter14]

Altough I agree that singleplayer is better, I really do believe that L4D 's multiplayer is worth 9/10+

[ps3king]

There is a stigma with gamers. Bioshock had a great single player with great reviews, but criticized at for having no Multiplayer. L4D is the exact opposite... I applaud both games for having a vision in mind of delivering the best experience in either arena the game-play is aimed at. Valve can clearly do both MP and SP games amazingly well. But Valve puts more polish in their games then a lot of companies do. Why play Half-life 2 MP when I could be playing CS or TF2.

When was the last game that delivered flawless SP and MP in one package?

Please don't say Resistance2, Halo3, Mario Kart, Gears, Goldeneye, etc..

Last game I can think of that did this well was... duke nukem 3d.

[JD_Shadow]

Where did you rent this? I didn't know Gamefly did PC games.

Note that I'm assuming it IS Gamefly because I can't remember any other rental chain that does this, unless I've been out of the rental loop for that long.

[callahan09]

"Please don't say Resistance2, Halo3, Mario Kart, Gears, Goldeneye, etc.."

Pick a number between 1 and 10, but please don't say 1, 2, 4, 6, or 9.

Also... nothing is flawless.

[Xbox Street Gang]

So much for AAA...

[ZEEBO4LIFESTFU]

that?

what a dumb thing to say

[Timesplitter14]

Why is this conversation so.... unclear?

[ZEEBO4LIFESTFU]

you know exactly what i mean.

of course valve is best on PC but its exclusive to 360 and pc and hes certinyl not a pc fanboy

[Timesplitter14]

''you and your anti-religious arguments are a joke''

If I broke your dreams yesterday, talk about it via PMs. Not here

EDIT : You don't need to be a PC fanboy to like PC games, do you?

You're just one of those rare individuals who really believe in ''console exclusives'' and you don't understand that this expression doesn't make sense.

[Spike47]

I can fully understand that. I sure did enjoy the multiplayer at first and I wasn't too far from geting addicted to the mayhem.

[Erdrick]

its simple: using drm to stop a single player game from being pirated is virtually impossible, so why bother? multi-player, on the other hand, is easy to protect. valve looked at their options and made the best decision.

[Rooted_Dust]

Co-op or Single-player, it's the same damn thing, just with bot-players. If you feel like playing the same game or hunting achievements, but without the human stupidity factor, you have the option to play offline.

[kwyjibo]

This is why we N4G's "hot" system is flawed. It allows uniformed idiotic stories such as these to bubble up to the top, by using flame baiting falsities to attract emotive response from imbeciles. Like Digg, N4G needs a bury system so these stories can be killed off.

The whole point of this story, was not to present a reasoned argument, but to provide a platform for an uninformed argument to generate idiot hits at all costs.

Not only is the article filled with poor attempts at FUD such as pretty much everything they write within brackets. For example, Steam makes distributing patches trivially easy for Valve, so of course they update often, and have done for all their games. Yet the article pushes the FUD that this is in fact some sort of "draconian" method to enforce anti-piracy.

It's not draconian, if you have a hacked version of the game, then Valve have every right to stop you playing the game.

And then it brings up the Hamachi method of creating a virtual LAN, as if the fact that this method exists negates any methods of detection used by Steam. Everyone knows that compared to a single crack, that the virtual LAN method is going to be a hoop too far for most.

Game Gazette uses the fact that Valve has not disabled cracked Left4Dead games though Steam as some kind of concession that the single player campaign is worthless. Yet it fails to mention that Valve have never sought to disable any of their games through Steam, even their single player games. You could, and Game Gazette probably would, use this argument to suggest that Valve thought Half-Life 2 was a rubbish single player experience.

Do you know why Valve don't bother disabling offline games? Because it'd be absolutely futile, people can hack the game, and then set their Steam emulator to offline mode, and then you'd have access to single player forever. Game Gazette don't know this though, because, they're idiots gasping for lowest common denominator hits, rather than trying to provide any meaningful commentary.

[kwyjibo]

I thought the site had some appearance of legitimacy when I first clicked on the article. It turns out it's nothing more than an inflated platform for darkpower's skewed and broken views because the domain name gives him the mirage of respectability that mere comments on N4G don't.

The people who approved this story have approved nothing more than an ill informed forum post, or some niche "my very first" blog post, something that falls way outside N4G's guidelines for contributions.

Taken from darkpower's blog - "Everyone should know how to weed out the crap from the thought out blogs", we obviously don't at N4G, because this crap has made the front page.

Those who approved this story, you have done N4G a disservice.

[JD_Shadow]

"This is why we N4G's "hot" system is flawed. It allows uniformed idiotic stories such as these to bubble up to the top, by using flame baiting falsities to attract emotive response from imbeciles. Like Digg, N4G needs a bury system so these stories can be killed off."

So this sort of thing should never be discussed? You just want criticism of Valve to be killed so no one will be able to discuss it?

"The whole point of this story, was not to present a reasoned argument, but to provide a platform for an uninformed argument to generate idiot hits at all costs."

It's a reasoned argument. You don't think DRM-related articles should be made, and you don't think this phenomenon is worth talking about with L4D?

"Not only is the article filled with poor attempts at FUD such as pretty much everything they write within brackets. For example, Steam makes distributing patches trivially easy for Valve, so of course they update often, and have done for all their games. Yet the article pushes the FUD that this is in fact some sort of "draconian" method to enforce anti-piracy."

Read what else was said. What is stopping an error in judgment from happening, or from them insisting that someone is hacking when they are not? That and it still doesn't make any damn bit of sense. Why not just PUT the DRM on the disc if they want people to pay for the multiplayer? There are other ways they can make this possible, like making the game subscription based. That and Steam is still not the easiest thing to use. You're forgetting to mention all that what was said here.

"It's not draconian, if you have a hacked version of the game, then Valve have every right to stop you playing the game."

As you will bring up later, they don't stop anyone from hacking the single player. More on that later.

"And then it brings up the Hamachi method of creating a virtual LAN, as if the fact that this method exists negates any methods of detection used by Steam. Everyone knows that compared to a single crack, that the virtual LAN method is going to be a hoop too far for most."

Yet it's something a LOT of them have used. There is still ANOTHER way that I found out last night that they are trying, and so far, it's working. I'm not going to mention this here, but here's the thing: These people ARE willing to jump through hoops, no matter what they are, just as everyone is to find out how far they CAN go. The harder someone tries to keep things legit, the harder they are challenged by those that are willing to push them further.

"Game Gazette uses the fact that Valve has not disabled cracked Left4Dead games though Steam as some kind of concession that the single player campaign is worthless. Yet it fails to mention that Valve have never sought to disable any of their games through Steam, even their single player games. You could, and Game Gazette probably would, use this argument to suggest that Valve thought Half-Life 2 was a rubbish single player experience."

Actually, I had thought of that, as well. However, there are a few things you're forgetting to consider here. For one, when HL2 came out, the whole DRM piracy issue didn't have as much fire as it has now. Plus, Valve wasn't getting as much criticism about how they make games and how they act about the gaming industry as they are right now. That and there ARE criticisms about L4D that are listed in the article, which actually makes this possibility that they are conceding even more possible. Please consider all the facts before going on the rant.

"Do you know why Valve don't bother disabling offline games? Because it'd be absolutely futile, people can hack the game, and then set their Steam emulator to offline mode, and then you'd have access to single player forever. Game Gazette don't know this though, because, they're idiots gasping for lowest common denominator hits, rather than trying to provide any meaningful commentary."

Nope, that's not the point you're trying to make here. I know all about the offline mode of Steam, but that's not the point of the article. Like I said, you have other ways and you can just as easily brick the hacked game if you want through the service. Since all of these people want to go into the multiplayer service, they obviously have that opportunity to do something about them playing ANY part of the game, and with piracy getting so much mainstream exposure right now, you have to believe that Valve might be concerned about any part of their game being hacked or compromised.

This was a nice try, but you actually missed and didn't explain key points that actually says exactly what this article is talking about. You're trying to say whatever you can to discredit this article, but you're actually sounding as if you didn't like that this was VALVE that was being criticized for something. Why are they always immune to ANY criticism? I don't get that.

EDIT: And about your reply to your own comment, does that make the point any less valid. You're trying as hard as you can to do this character assassination bit and distracting people because you didn't like the opinions that were told (not to mention that people might want to be aware of these things and it deserves to be talked about, something you're not understanding). Thing is, so many people have right now caught on to this distracting and assassination that they usually don't pay attention to someone who does that. And you're telling me that every single person that has commented on this article and have actually discussed the real issue here shouldn't be and instead talking about someone's supposed lack of cred? You're saying that this isn't worthy of discussion? WHY? If you thought that, then why the hell DID you comment to begin with?

And even that, you made all those points that someone might've took a bit seriously, and then you ruin it all by replying with something like that. Why do that when, even when you were doing the same on your other post, you were doing so well?

[Strelnikov]

I agree with kwyjibo, mostly in that this article is complete bullshit.

I'd like to point out a couple things. It's been stated already that Steam allows for easy updating of games, and that is what Valve is doing with L4D. How is it wrong or a concession of defeat when a company patches an exploit in their game? I simply do not understand this assertion, it's ridiculous. Secondly, Steam is not the least bit un-friendly. It's lightweight for what it is, has a myriad of useful features, allows for effortless updates, and has a great digital distribution system with an excellent library of games backing it up.

Stop blaming publishers for your failings and throwing around words like "draconian". I'm sick of hearing it and in a case where it does not describe the actual situation, it's unacceptable.

[kwyjibo]

First things, Steam is easy to use. It sorts itself out pretty easily, games such as NBA 2K use Steam in their retail copies. That game not even available from Valve directly, and shows the confidence other publishers have in the Steam solution. The guy picking up a sports game, or the Popcap games aren't exactly going to be part of the computing literati.

It's very difficult present a false negative on someone else's legitimate copy to make it seem hacked. And even if it were the case, Steam has copies of all the recorded licenses that you own, so if you own the game but somehow have a corrupted version, it'll just get updated with the correct files. But these two issues were tangential anyway, and don't really relate to how broken your argument is.

There's the law of diminishing returns, you can only close up the obvious ones, the hardcore pirates will continue. Closing up a simple crack will put a lot of the more casual pirates off, Valve are OK with that.

You try and dismiss the counter-argument that Valve has never bricked up any other single player game, by claiming that when Half-Life 2 was released, "DRM piracy" wasn't as big an issue. It was, but even had I bought into your pathetic argument, you'll find that The Orange Box, and it's constituents had the same deal too.

Are you telling me that in one year, the goal posts have moved on so much, that Valve would abandon their stance and try to brick single player games? That's your argument, and it's false. Did you pen an article last year entitled "Valve admitting Portal mediocrity through lack of piracy moderation"? Because issues regarding DRM, be it Starforce or Sony's XCP have been going around for a lot longer than just Spore. Did Infinity Ward admit to the inferiority of Call of Duty 4 because they didn't offer Bioshock's limited installations? I could continue down this route ad infinitum, given that your logic is so flawed.

Asking me to reconsider the facts, when you've not even considered them at all is a bit hypocritical. This is just Valve carrying on as normal, the story would be more accurate had it just stated "Valve still confident in Steam solution", but that wouldn't get you all those degrees on N4G would it?

You know nothing about Valve's take on piracy. Listen to Gabe speak, read about their approach to piracy through Steam. It's not really an issue for them, they have flatly stated that multiple times. The reason Left4Dead ships with no DRM but Steam itself, is because all the data on the disk is encrypted and you have to unlock it online. Steam is the only DRM needed. You don't even need the disk in to play, which is what most DRM tries to ensure anyway.

There's nothing wrong with criticising Valve. There are some very legitimate complaints, some of the unfair pricing on Steam or lack of updates to the console versions of their games. I have criticised them many times on their own forums, including today, when I complained about Valve allowing other companies to put SecuROM products on Steam, even though it's absolutely needless.

No, my problem has absolutely nothing to do with criticism of Valve. It's to do with ill informed FUDdy rubbish, self promoted by someone who knows nothing, using a domain name to create a facade of respectability whereas in reality the website is nothing more than an overinflated platform for darkpower's N4G comments.

The bury button, we need you now more than ever.

----

EDIT: Of course my second post doesn't make your argument less valid. But given that my original post quite bluntly stated that your argument was invalid in the first place, I didn't think there was anywhere left for it to go. Negative validity? It's like dividing by zero isn't it?

It was a very simple comment, that your off-N4G has about as much legitimacy as your on-N4G blog, which includes a criticism of Valve for not "reiventing the wheel", the first time I've ever heard that as a negative.

I'll save the youtube videos for the next "Game Gazette" post that I'll pick apart. They make for an exceptional ad hominem.

[eagle21]

All 360 exclusives are overhyped and underdelivered trash! Wake up and smell the bias! :)

[Timesplitter14]

ok but I don't see any X360 exclusive around here in this article

[NiteWarrior]

Very nice comment..

[Swarm]

So... this guy is whining about the fact that you can valve stops you from cracking the game (Well DUH, idiots), and if you do crack it you can play only the singleplayer so therefore Valve purposely didn't bother to create a wonderful story? This guy really is an idiot IMO.

Valve (and Turtle Rock before they were bought by Valve) never said this game was going to have any sort of epic singleplayer. The focus since they even thought of it was Co-op between friends. Singleplayer is just for learning the maps and training within the game. It also doubles as a good offline mode for bursts of L4D-ness.

Also didn't Battlefield (all of em) do the exact same thing? The focus was on massive battlezones in multiplayer only, but as soon as you hit singleplayer the bots really sucked and it was terrible. Oh and don't even ask about the "story" singleplayer had but guess what, it won a lot of GOTY's.

[MelaDarkwood]

I definitely agree. When I first got L4D, I played through one campaign, just to learn how to play, before I joined any multiplayer games. Because, really, who wants to play with someone who doesn't know what they're doing? It works well for getting achievements, as well. Say by some bad luck you keep dying before you reach the chopper on No Mercy, but you really want the Mercy Killer achievement. Just load up single player, put it on normal (or easy, if you really want), and survive. The bots are really good at coming to your rescue, and they won't shoot you in the face by accident. Having humans to talk to and think with is better by far, of course, but the bots have their good points. I vastly prefer multiplayer over single player, but I wouldn't say that Valve "ruined" the single player. It works as well as it's supposed to.

[solar]

from the very beginning this game has been all about "co-op". even in the TV commercials states "bring friends". i had no expectations of a SP experience at all with this title. as many others did. i wouldn't even think about playing this game without a mate or 3 around.

[zalifer]

They didn't include DRM because DRM is a load of crap that doesn't work, so why pay securerom a salary for software that will be cracked in a few days? its wasting valves money.

[JD_Shadow]

Yeah, I know it's a load of crap, but if Valve seriously wanted to strike back against piracy, then they should've chosen a less conceding way to do so than this.

Though I'm not surprised that the Valve Defense Force has come into this thread trying to do whatever they can to discredit a viewpoint (in which brings up actual facts, too). It's kind of disheartening when you see that someone thinks that a developer is SO much immune to criticism that they insult anyone who does so like this. It's really pathetic, if you ask me.

EDIT: I do think that there this misconception that people who criticize Valve are only doing it because of Gabe's comments about the PS3 (which we don't know if he still feels as strongly about that opinion as he did before anymore). There's also this misconception that if you like Valve's games, you have to absolutely HATE the PS3, and vice versa, to the point that it feels like if you like one thing and then decide that you want to even play the other, much less like it, that you would have to go take a shower afterwards. This shouldn't and doesn't have to be the case. A friend of mine likes both the PS3 and Valve games and, when I told her about the comments Gabe made on the PS3, she responded in a way which makes me think that she could be one of THE people that could convince Valve about the value of having a Valve game on the PS3 (not that I would buy L4D on the PS3 anyway since the game so far hasn't impressed me as there are some errors in judgment in game design that are killing it for me so far). I'm hoping people like her speak up more, and that the misconception can be killed soon. This is why I think this console war is so much nastier and bloodier than any other generation's console war I have seen...EVER! It has to stop!

@kwyjibo: "I'll save the youtube videos for the next "Game Gazette" post that I'll pick apart. They make for an exceptional ad hominem."

THANK YOU for exposing yourself right there by bringing up the YouTube crap. It really shows yourself for what this really is all about with you, because there's only one small group of people that tends to always bring it up. Why dig the hole when you HAD some good points? You did that to yourself, man. No one got you to bring them up, you did that yourself, and you need to realize when it's best to just shut up. Make the point and be done with it.

[kwyjibo]

For those who haven't been following this comment trail, darkpower is referring to my comments forwarded at:
http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-...

I recommend you read that critique first to get a clearer understanding of what the issues actually are with this "article".

----

It's unsurprising that instead of addressing those "good points" I made, that you've tried to pin me down to some illuminati conspiratorial Valve Defence Force, stalking you with the threat of Youtube.

Yet again, you've made a line from points which don't exist. I've already pointed to your utter failure to both understand how Steam, and Valve work. Maybe you'd have a better understanding, if you actually went and bought the game, instead of complaining about how Valve keep on trying to shut you out of your hacked version.

You're right, I have dug that hole. You're lying face down in it, in a pool of blood, your failed arguments scattered like ashes.

I'm going to repeat that point that I made earlier, those who approved this story have done N4G a disservice.

[Timesplitter14]

I just think a game should be rated by the amount of fun it brings. Period. If you disagree, tell me why it should not.

It's as if people have forgotten we play games for fun. I could care less about a ''well polished'' game if it's not fun.

Here's how you should rate a game :

- Is it fun : Yes or No?

- Yes : Rate the fun you had on 10

- There you go. You have your score.

That's exactly the reason why games like MGS, Okami, SotC, etc... get high reviews (and deserve them). We're not going to give low scores to every game that doesn't have a mp or sp. We just look if they're good at what they do.

[zonetrooper5]

Look at Counter Strike Zero Condition which is the one counter strike with "single player" mode, instead it was just bots on a mutiplayer map and a loose storyline thrown in just to keep it together. Honestly, they made a SP part of L4D because some people may not have the internet, have a poor internet/dial up, might not want to play online etc. From the start both Valve and Turtle Head have said that this is a 4 player co-op zombie game where its best played with friends although if you want you can play with bots.

[evrfighter]

Think back to pre online console days where games like turok had a really good storyline but the versus mode sucked. L4D is the opposite. Valve had pc gamers in mind while making this game as was mentioned before, Left 4 Dead is a pc title.

The 360 version isn't even published by valve but EA. and unless they changed it along the way the 360 version wasn't even ported by turtle rock studios but another studio whose name I forgot.

These past few weeks have been interesting in that the 360 crowd has quickly jumped on the "left 4 dead is a 360 exclusive" wagon. I'm new to n4g and I'm amazed at the brand loyalty between ps3 and 360 users. I'm strictly a pc gamer and the only loyalty I carry is to whoever offers hardware at the lowest price. I just want to make sure it's clear that left 4 dead is NOT a 360 exclusive as it was never made with 360 users in mind.

Let's get one thing straight in the pc gaming community, valve/steam=fps online gaming. If they want to make a single player game they'll release another episode of Half Life. They've already shown they can do single player and do it really well. L4d is an alternative title to their cs audience.

[Swarm]

As I understand it Valve did do the port to 360, but the game was developed first for the PC. From what I remember from a interview Valve said the 360 version was always a few weeks behind the PC version since things were ported to it after it worked and was polished on the PC version.

L4D to me is the major PC game of the year, with some a handy port to 360.

Agreed on the last paragraph of your statement.

[likedamaster]

"This could mean one of two things: Either they think the multiplayer is the key seller of the game... or....

....maybe even they think that the single player campaign in L4D sucks total ass."

How bout, they want you to buy a good game and not pirate what they created. Simple. This article is full of flame and bias towards Valve, not only that but it mostly talks about how to "crack" L4D...almost as if saying, "this game sucked for me and you should just pirate it, here's how to do it(but no specifics)." Sounds like a mad PC gamer that can't afford to buy anymore PC games, if you ask me. Save the drama for your Mama and go buy yourself a 360/PS3 and be happy.

They never admitted to any of what the title on this article claims. Another misleading title FTL.

[sleepbox]

Left 4 Dead will go down as a milestone in the FPS genre.

It is the first FPS ever that you simply CANNOT memorize and it is the best co-op FPS experience ever.

I hate that most of you are too ignorant to see this but sadly, you are.

[JHUX]

When I bought l4D I didn't put enough time researching it before I bought it, I just new it was a coop zombie horror from the AD's in counter-strike, and then from word of mouth. I was expecting more of a story based campaign than what it is. If you have people to play with I would definitely recommend this game, verses mode is extremely fun. If you can't play online or with some people you know, I personally would not recommend it. I personally wish there was more story to it, etc. Even though I don't believe that will be a direction valve will take it. I am kind of expecting "episodes" to pop up and make you pay for, and if they do that I will be extremely angry, as it should be free.

I must say thought it is very enjoyable if you have 3 people to play with and you can all be on the same team. Especially on Expert verses where teamwork is needed a lot more. (Own l4D on PC and it looks and runs great, so I personally can't say anything about the 360 version, but I'm sure it will do fine).

[PJ]

I love the fanboy spin on this when Valve did not reward the pirates with multiplayer. So they didn't protect the disc with DRM which is refreshing but they did include a code for multiplayer. This has nothing to do with the single player campaign which is great.

[MiloGarret]

That is an absolutely retarded assumption... So from now on we should consider DRM an indication of quality? Seriously, this person fell of the stupid tree and hit every branch on his way down.

[tee_bag242]

This game is awesome. Its everything I had hoped it would be. Its obviously not that much fun playing with bots that don't scream 'Help me guys!' or 'F#ck their coming!".
I personally don't care to play single player campaign and as people have said, its only to accommodate users without internet who will inherently miss out on the fundamental concept of the game - that being team work, group strategy (through talking and negotiation) and survival.
It's not fair for people who haven't even played to game to criticize it for its 'lack of single player' - you guys are really missing the point ... oh how you are missing out.
The replay value of this game is out of sight! Its almost like an Arcade FPS that you can keep coming back to and be challenged each time.
This game easily gets conservative 9/10. EASILY!