I'm a consumer -- if I feel like something isn't worth my money, I'm not going to buy it. L4D was a full-priced game with about as much content as your average downloadable game, and now they're rushing out a sequel and I'm supposed to be excited about it?

Your average downloadable game doesn't have the director, though.

_________________

Who doesn't want more content for a game they like?

Nobody doesn't want the content. Some people just aren't willing to pay for it. That's perfectly reasonable.

Galaxy Man would be singing a different tune if he had to pay full price for each new world in Mario&Luigi.

"This comes out only year after the first, I shouldn't have to pay for it, it should all just be free," seems to be the mentality of Valve fans. They obviously have a reason to do this, but even after all the years of pandering to their fans for so long, 18,000 people don't think it's enough.

_________________
"My job? Toilets 'n boilers, boilers 'n toilets. Plus that one boilin' toilet. Fire me if'n you dare. "

I haven't actually played the game, nor do I care to. But what I'm hearing (comments about lack of content) seems to make the full game sound more like an incomplete demo than a fully polished game, so it would make sense that fans would assume that the addition of new content would be more like an add-on than a full priced "sequel"

But I don't really know =/

Lulwut?

I wouldn't complain if they made a new addition to a game I liked.

And a new world is one thing... A new GAME. AS IN 'NEW CHARACTERS, WEAPONS AND MODES OR WHATEVER, is a different matter.

It's when they start raping the franchise which is when you should complain.

_________________
IT'S TEA TIME!

The whole point of L4D is that you don't have very many levels, but what few levels there are are infinitely replayable due to the A.I. director that changes where the zombies/health/ammo is going to be every time based on how your team is playing, making the levels different every time you play them even if the maps are the same. Most of the people who are complaining are complaining about the lack of levels, which is kind of a valid point. It seems like as long as they make the same number of levels as (if not more than) the first game, and each of them are of equal quality of the first game, then that would qualify as a sequel.

_________________

I never understood why people complained about it. They're getting 5 new campaigns, and new weapons. Even if it would be a DLC, that's a shitload for it to be free.

Because they were spolied by TF2 and The orange box.

But those were the exceptions, NOT THE RULES.

_________________
IT'S TEA TIME!

I'm not buying it because there's no such thing as an FPS that is worth my money

I don't really care for Valve games at all.

_________________
IT'S TEA TIME!

"This comes out only year after the first, I shouldn't have to pay for it, it should all just be free," seems to be the mentality of Valve fans. They obviously have a reason to do this, but even after all the years of pandering to their fans for so long, 18,000 people don't think it's enough.

More like, the first game was incredibly short and already cost me more than it's worth. I play it everyone once in a while at a LAN but otherwise I don't bother with it.

I'm not asking for new, free content, but I'm definitely not paying full-price again for basically the same game. I don't see why that's so hard to understand or how that makes me a whiny fanboy. If anything, this thread seems to be full of whiny Valve apologists.

Considering I'd have to buy a Gamecube to play that, in addition to the game itself, it probably still isn't worth it.

Although by now, I'm sure the prices have gone down substantially, so maybe...

I'm not sure I'd even call it an FPS in the traditional sense.