The Left 4 Dead 2 Ultimatum (our requests for the new game)

[Windows 2000]

I think this announcement of an Sequel within a year of the original's release is a extremely controversial one. I know that many people are annoyed by this new development, and that some, like myself, are worried that work on Left 4 Dead 2 may push back work on other Valve projects such as the Team Fortress 2 Class packs, and Half Life 2 Episode 3. While initially I objected to the idea of a sequel so soon, I realised that Valve might have been forced into it. There is only so much you can do through patching a existing game, from what little information I have gleaned, I believe that Valve has made some large changes to the Left 4 Dead engine, enough so that they must release a new game instead of releasing as paid DLC, or a free expansion.

I think that this new game could be a success, but while I may be willing to see Valve's point of view on this... I believe we, as the patrons of Valve deserve a chance to speak our minds about this new game being pushed onto us. I also think it is not out of line for us to make a few requests.

If L4D 2 delivers on most of our demands, and I say MOST, and not necessarily ALL of them, I will buy it on PREORDER.

2. <=$45, possibly discounts for those who already own L4D
3. Allows usage of previous survivors (for survival and versus at least)
4. allows importing of L4D 1 maps (CONFIRMED)
5. actually has 20 weapons as promised (Looking like it might happen)
6. allows 8 player Survival, or at least more than 4 players
7. Allows for versus mode with more than 4v4 players. Optimistically, 8v8 with all the survivors
8. extra survivors for versus and/or survival.
9. AI director that throws more at you than just hordes and special infected. I want to see other events such as seeing a random survivor get overwhelmed right before you can save them. Maybe a achievement for acually saving a survivor, but just have them become infected, die, or become a survivor if your team has a dead person (partially confirmed)
10. have moments where your group has to collaborate to do certain things. Maybe have a mounted gun that one player has to use to cover people, or have one person hold a door open, or work some electronics so someone else can do something, let's see a bit more TEAMWORK.
11. add a in game, On the Fly voting mechanic for some things, like using a mounted gun. Give scripted votes for certain decisions (perhaps like which path to take if players are given a choice between several routes), and just a general vote button that people can use.
12. better server layout and matchmaking. People who want to play custom maps should be able to find them easily, and matchmaking should have a integrated server browser this time so people can play on their clan's or group's server without any hassle. (said to be in the works)
13. better options for server owners. Give us some variables to put in our server configs, and document them properly so we can customize things a bit.
14. GIVE US THE FULL F-ING SDK
15. new normal infected types, or have something between special and normal ones, zombies who are stronger or something (possibly happening already with biohazard suit infected) (CONFIRMED) AND/OR
16. CLASSIC ZOMBIES. I know you like the whole speed hting, but I'd like to see slow, creepy zombies that take several shots to down. I want me some classic zombies.
17. give us something to do in safe rooms. Let everyone heal up a tiny bit for free for once by doing something in game(like running to a fridge and grabbing some food before you leave).
    have scripted, but skippable 1 or so minute scenes where the survivors are waking up or preparing to leave the safe room.
18. There is room for a bit more storytelling and character interaction.
19. Customizable Game HUD and Silhouettes, give the option to elements of the HUD disabled, as well as the colored silhouettes, it could add more tension to the game, and make things harder for those who want it that way.
    
    and most of all
    
20. DO NOT MAKE ANOTHER SEQUEL SO SOON AFTER THIS. DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT.
    

So this is our list of requests/demands. We do not expect all of them to be delivered on, and I believe most of us do not mind the game being delayed a bit to compensate for changes Valve might have to make to fit some of these.

For you others here on the Steam Forums, DO NOT POST A SIMPLE "I agree" or "/signed" YOU... YOU... DOUBLE POSTERS! I want to hear some real discussion on what we want in a sequel to Left 4 Dead.

Feel free to add more suggestions for things to add to the Ultimatum, and suggest edits to the list, I will be checking in on here to see if any changes need to be made, and reading up on what other ideas people may have.

Although I support Valve, I think the decision to make a sequel so soon smacks of a certain game publisher we all know of that is known for it's many (paid) expansion packs and annual sports titles. If Valve hopes to adopt this marketing scheme (which they profess they are not trying to as stated in a interview:

Originally Posted by Shacknews

Shack: Are you leaving any hooks in the engine to allow for expansion in patches rather than releasing a new sequel?

Chet Faliszek: I think all this, oh, Valve's going to make Maddens every year--that's not true. There's this whole group of us at Valve who had all these ideas. When we get done with this, we're going to sit back and we have no future plans or anything like that. This could be the platform for zombie apocalypse games for a while.

Full Article

I really hope that Valve will not go the easy route and rest on it's laurels by making cheap, under-developed titles on a regular basis. I sincerely do not, as I hope and believe that they are better than that.

I do not wish Valve to see this thread, and my views as a threat. I just wish it to be viewed as a statement of intent, I want us all to have a nice little chat, and figure out what is going to happen.

TL;DR, Valve should not push a sequel to a game out unless its actually a improvement on the existing one. My opinion is we give some examples of what we the customers think would make it worth our while to buy a new game.

[SFtheWolf]

This wasn't very well thought out.

Slow zombies would be fairly worthless with the game's mechanics. Splitting up would necessitate that smokers and hunters be changed significantly. Extra survivors would increase the voice acting work exponentially. Server customisation is already horrible and game breaking as it is and should be kept to a minimum. 8v8 versus just plain doesn't make sense to me. They've already said you can import L4D1 maps.

Survivors have to be immune or one boom would mean you go down, that's why they're survivors. Also: "I want to see other events such as seeing a random survivor get overwhelmed right before you can save them." How does that not happen already?

[Robert Neville]

Originally Posted by Windows 2000

2. >$30

How much are you looking to pay $40, $50, $100?

[Killuminati91]

OKay here is my opinion about your points:

1. valid
2. yup, id definatly like to see that
3. seems to be already integrated if you believe valve
4. 20 seems a bit too much... I want about double the amount
of weapons from l4d1... so you have a choice between 2 snipers, 2 autoshots and so on.
5. not "balanced" from developers view, its already possible in l4d though
6. not possible cause every survivor would need audio lines that fit to the happenings,
and that would raise into GB of data + much cash for voice actors
7. no opinion bout that
8. split ups wouldnt work well with SI, but id like to see some creepy moments too.
9. yes
10. yes
11. YES
12. yup, id like to see 2 or 3 stronger zombies per horde, they go down in like 4 shots instead of 1
13. wouldnt fit into the game
14. story yes, your offer no
15. YES

[Eshros]

How about we summarize it as "lower the cost of L4D2 if we have L4D", which could be authenticated via steam. I'll sign that.

[Windows 2000]

Originally Posted by SFtheWolf

This wasn't very well thought out.

Slow zombies would be fairly worthless with the game's mechanics. Splitting up would necessitate that smokers and hunters be changed significantly. Extra survivors would increase the voice acting work exponentially. Server customisation is already horrible and game breaking as it is and should be kept to a minimum. 8v8 versus just plain doesn't make sense to me. They've already said you can import L4D1 maps.

Survivors have to be immune or one boom would mean you go down, that's why they're survivors. Also: "I want to see other events such as seeing a random survivor get overwhelmed right before you can save them." How does that not happen already?

These are ideas, and I do not expect all of them to be acted on.

but other survivors would not be that hard to implement. Just give them maybe 10 lines, which amount to HELP! and a death scream. I think it would make things more interesting than just having a survivor suddenly appear in a closet.

8v8 would be fine for maybe one large map, or possibly just 6v6 or something. But I think survival with more than 4 players should definitely happen.

[Fuzileer]

TL. DR.


Jk, I made a post like this earlier today. =\ Oh well.

Id like it if OP would add these to his list:

1. Improved server layout: It made searching and loading custom maps a b**ch and took ages.
2. Improved story: We loved L4D1s characters, such a shame valve didnt develop them further.
3. Silhouettes: Id like the option to have them disabled, when all players are on mic and you cant see where your mates are when they turn a corner, I feel that it would add more tension to the game. Especially when you hear someone get pounced and you start franctically searching for them.

[rumsey]

no
10charity

[Trandom Kaggus]

I'd like to see more campaigns using more teams of survivors made as post-release DLC. I'm hoping that as soon as I see these new four survivors in an animated cutscene like the opening to L1D, I'll fall in love again; and Valve is brilliant at this, and I'd like to think they could pull it off multiple times.

I'd even pay for those expansions/characters.

[spikeyroxas]

hmmmm the only thing i wanted was new SI. but we got that now so i dont know what else i want.
I would like more info on the game :P but i guess i have to meet up with that thing called patience again :P

[Alex122790]

Originally Posted by Windows 2000

>$30

Think you mean <$30?

Originally Posted by Windows 2000

Allows for versus mode with more than 4v4 players. Optimistically, 8v8 with all the survivors

Yeah... 8v8... not like 4 is in the game name or anything... oh wait...

[Windows 2000]

Originally Posted by Fuzileer

TL. DR.


Jk, I made a post like this earlier today. =\ Oh well.

Id like it if OP would add these to his list:

1. Improved server layout: It made searching and loading custom maps a b**ch and took ages.
2. Improved story: We loved L4D1s characters, such a shame valve didnt develop them further.
3. Silhouettes: Id like the option to have them disabled, when all players are on mic and you cant see where your mates are when they turn a corner, I feel that it would add more tension to the game. Especially when you hear someone get pounced and you start franctically searching for them.

Reworded a couple things, and added the whole thing with silhouettes. I also think a lot of the HUD should be optional too. Maybe have pretty much no HUD in Expert Mode, or something like that, or a option for minimal HUD.

Originally Posted by Alex122790

Yeah... 8v8... not like 4 is in the game name or anything... oh wait...

The meat of the game, and the canon story is still 4 people, but Versus is more like a bonus mode.

[Nutty]

Furthermore, more than 4 players per team is not a good idea, because with good weapons survivors will just dominate infected. The game should be a little creepy, but when you have a squad with you...
Btw, you should listen to the podcast. Most of the points you addressed are covered and commented in the podcast of rockpapershotgun.
Splitting up idea is also bad, because coordinated infected will certainly win and this game is focused on team play.
The idea of a story part in the safe room is rubbish. I really don't want no videos to be viewed millions of times...

I'd just want more detailed maps. So you could be in more of the rooms in the city(as infected), because as you have played the game for some time, you really don't have that many places to have an attack from. What i am trying to say is that it gets to easy to understand the places the attacks come from.
Than i do agree that you would get a bigger variety of weapons as survivors and infected get reinforcements(new infected).

[Armored_Tussock]

So you're past anger and now you're trying to negotiate? Lightweight.

I'm still angry and they still won't get full price from me for an expansion.

actually has 20 weapons as promised

Because Valve sure knows how to keep their promises.

[Windows 2000]

Originally Posted by Nutty

Furthermore, more than 4 players per team is not a good idea, because with good weapons survivors will just dominate infected. The game should be a little creepy, but when you have a squad with you...
Btw, you should listen to the podcast. Most of the points you addressed are covered and commented in the podcast of rockpapershotgun.
Splitting up idea is also bad, because coordinated infected will certainly win and this game is focused on team play.
The idea of a story part in the safe room is rubbish. I really don't want no videos to be viewed millions of times...

I'd just want more detailed maps. So you could be in more of the rooms in the city(as infected), because as you have played the game for some time, you really don't have that many places to have an attack from. What i am trying to say is that it gets to easy to understand the places the attacks come from.
Than i do agree that you would get a bigger variety of weapons as survivors and infected get reinforcements(new infected).

Survival isn't creepy, its frenetic action and split second decisions until your team eventually dies. Even with a group of 8 survivors, your team will die once special infected start spawning every couple seconds. You will run out of ammo, or something. Bigger teams means longer survival scores possibly, but if there are stronger versions of normal infected, those can ramp up too, until even a well coordinated group can't continue.

Splitting up doesn't necessarily mean you have to be completely separated. Make it so two people have to perform some action while two of them cover the busy ones. Have a panic event with two mounted guns spaced apart so that the survivors have to cover both the entrance and exit to a chokepoint while something happens.

As with the story bits in the safe room, I said they should be skippable, and no more than a minute or two long. It doesn't have to be that deep, it could just be chatter between the survivors. Some of Francis complaining how he hates ______, or Zoey wondering when they will be safe. Bill saying something about hurrying up and moving out, Louis saying something about his PILLS, whatever. Although this will probably just be with the new characters, not with the current 4.

Originally Posted by Armored_Tussock

So you're past anger and now you're trying to negotiate? Lightweight.

If we make demands, Valve can easily ignore them. Suggestions can and have been used in updates on Team Fortress 2. Most of the upgrades are similar to those introduced and/or discussed in the forums. Anger doesn't accomplish anything on it's own. There are already threads around that show people are angry, I think negotiation and discussion will be more effective.