 |
 |
|
If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these Think Services sites:
 Game Career Guide (for student game developers.)
 Indie Games (for independent game players/developers.)
 Finger Gaming (news, reviews, and analysis on iPhone and iPod Touch games.)
 GamerBytes (for the latest console digital download news.)
 Worlds In Motion (discussing the business of online worlds.)
 Game Set Watch (the Group's alt.game weblog.) |
|
|
|
| |
PAX 09: Valve's Faliszek: Left 4 Dead 2 Works As 'Cohesive Single Statement'
by Chris Remo
|
|
| |
|
September 4, 2009
|
| |
As the November release of Left 4 Dead 2 approaches, developer Valve has been continually revealing new gameplay elements, and the initial internet outcry about the co-operative zombie action game's close proximity to its predecessor has largely receded.
This week, the company detailed the new Jockey boss infected character, which leaps onto survivor characters and briefly "pilots" them around the map. Following the game's latest showing, at the Penny Arcade Expo in Seattle, Gamasutra sat down with Valve's project lead Chet Faliszek.
Faliszek touched on the game's increasing complexity, Valve's growing familiarity with its systems, and why in a procedurally-driven game like Left 4 Dead 2, a standalone sequel works better as a "single statement" than individual content packs.
"Balance is really important," Faliszek said. "Trying to do piecemeal stuff in DLC, you have a real balance issue there where you're going to have to go back and keep nerfing or expanding elements as you go on. That was one of our original thoughts when we were looking at Left 4 Dead 2, this want to have a cohesive single statement.
"The Jockey's not nearly as cool as he would be when he has the Spitter, because they work together really well" he explained, "and the Spitter's not nearly as cool without the new director AI and the Charger."
"It's all the systems working together that make it work, with all the new ammo and everything else. That's why we wanted to do it as one statement. You need to have all the pieces together to really do it big," he added.
The AI systems benefit from that in particular; Valve has learned more about "making the infected AI act like the players play" -- for example, "the Jockey will walk you into the Spitter's goo, or it'll find the Witch and walk you into the Witch."
Since it began working on the Left 4 Dead series, Valve has had to become much more familiar with that kind of interaction. "The original [game] was this interesting thing in terms of how it was so procedural -- it was strategy on the fly, because you never knew what was going to happen," Faliszek said, and that attitude was different to what the Valve team was accustomed to.
"When we first starting doing Left 4 Dead at Valve, we were just saying, 'Oh, well we normally do it this way,' but we realized people play these maps hundreds of times or thousands of times, and the experience needs to be different every time."
For Left 4 Dead 2, Valve has added scripting capability for the AI director -- functionality that will be available to modders, a community Valve still values highly.
"Talking with them and with our own level designers, it's what they wanted to have for that experience happen. It all ties in together with the AI", Faliszek concluded.
|
| |
|
|
'Well this is how we should have done it... pay us again.'
Even one or two new campaigns for L4D would have gone a long way toward soothing the nerves of people who bought L4D expecting the continued support that Valve promised. But no. We got barely anything. A couple of balance patches. The Last Stand mode which came with just one new level(and a tiny level at that).
So no, I don't think L4D2 will be on my short list of games to buy. I've already got titles on my list for the rest of 2009 and early-mid 2010. Maybe I'll get it when it's on sale. For half off. That's about the price of an expansion, right?
@Andrew Dobbs: So the yearly minor update/iteration that is Madden 2010 is acceptable, but an entirely new game from the ground up is 'bad' because it too has come out in about a year as well?
However, when you buy into an online game with promises of content and support to come, it's not the same thing as simply picking up a single player game. Especially since a lot of people felt that L4D didn't contain enough content out of the box, and many people bought the game with full expectation of more to come.
Yeah, on the one hand people regularly pay full price for stuff like this. On the other hand, there were some blatent lies about the future of L4D, and a lot of customers who bought the game with those lies in mind, came away from this whole thing feeling burned. What they are essentially saying is that L4D was a full price beta, and now you get to buy it all over again now that they've sorted out the things they want to do differently. To me, that's not being honest with their customers, and it's enough to turn me off of buying L4D2.
It's the principle of the thing. And Valve should learn that they can't just tell their customers whatever they want to hear and then pretend they didn't say while holding a hand out for more money.
Come on now, game companies are corporations like the rest of them, complete with an obligation to increase revenue. Let's be real about all this, shall we?
Maybe feature some commentary as well. Except that, since normal journalism just regurgitates the statements of government officials, I guess we can't expect any more from games journalism. Can't bite the hand that feeds and all that.
How difficult is it for you to understand 'false advertising.' Look, Valve promised, again and again, to support L4D over the longterm. They completely and totally went back on that promise. L4D is an online game and its primary draw was cooperative and competitive online play. People were expecting support in the same way Valve supports TF2. You don't see them selling a brand new full-price copy of TF2 every year, do you? No.
They promised support like TF2, and they never gave it to us. For some people that's fine. For others, no thanks. And if you think my choice to not spend 60 dollars on a game is 'screaming and shouting,' then you have bigger issues to work out. I'm not obligated to buy games that you support, and my reasons aren't your business. If you don't agree, don't agree, don't start insulting people's character.
One defense of Valve (at least for the time being), is that they haven't broken any promises. They haven't ceased support for L4D and may very well continue to add to it for years to come. Time will tell if they unceremoniously dump L4D prematurely. Maybe we're used to the new game making the previous one obsolete? I don't think L4D2 is the death rattle for L4D. We'll have to wait and see.
On a similar note, everyone here is gonna complain but STILL buy all 3 versions of Starcraft 2.
L4D just wasn't worth the money they charged. Many people knew it was light on content and expected Valve to deliver more. Instead, they put their focus on the sequel. Will they make more money this way? Probably.
As a consumer, it was frustrating. If people don't speak out about these things, companies won't think twice about doing it again in the future.