Will the Left 4 Dead 2 Boycott Survive?

With Valve’s announcement of Left 4 Dead 2 came the announcement from a group of fans that they would be boycotting the zombie survival game sequel. But are their demands reasonable, or are they the mindless groans of an army of soulless meat puppets?

Sorry, that came off a bit rude. I was just trying to segue.

Left 4 Dead was one of last year’s most popular multiplayer games, pitting four survivors against the zombie horde in a post-apocalyptic world. With its wide popularity one would think that the announcement of a new and improved sequel would have fans excited, and without a doubt many are. But many fans are also downright rabid at the proposal of a new L4D. Rabid like the lifeless zombie hordes that yearn for brain matter.

I’m sorry, I did it again. Very unbecoming of me. I didn’t mean for things to get out of hand like that.

So what’s the deal? Why are the fans upset by the release of more of one of their favourite games?

Well, the fans are only angry because they love. They love L4D, and they want more of it. For free. The situation is not simple, but the problem seems to have its roots in a promise Valve made around the release of the first L4D. Valve claimed that they would consistently release free downloadable content for L4D, expanding the world with new levels and so on, in much the same way they’ve been doing for Team Fortress 2. Valve have made one free content update so far, adding a survival mode and some versus campaigns, but other than that the only new content fans have received news of is the not-so-free sequel. Cue boycott. Also cue shrill tenor note as decomposed hands burst through wall.

So what are the terms of this gaming resistance-movement? Lucky for us, the ravenous horde of almost 30,000 boycotters currently have something of a manifesto on the Steam forums, which explains their position.

So what do the disgruntled fans have to say? First, they make two acknowledgments: they recognize that Valve must make money, and that Judgment cannot be passed on the quality of Left 4 Dead 2 until its release, which is to say that the fans don’t really know if L4D2 will be worth what it costs until they actually get a chance to play it. Fair enough, you army of hungry zombie-gamers.

Now on to the good stuff: the accusations! The L4D2 boycott also plans to hold Valve to its promise of free downloadable content. The question of whether or not Valve has a duty to release free DLC depends on what the game was explicitly advertised to include and what the reasonable buyer would expect to get from it, and it’s hard to say whether Valve’s announcement of free DLC, which came after the release of the game, is part of those considerations. But it is safe to say that, whether or not Valve is required to release free DLC, it would be admirable of them to follow up on their plans and would leave a good impression on the mobs of bloodthirsty, groaning fans, whose arms are outstretched, reaching for more gaaaaaaames.

Is this whole fans as zombies metaphor getting old? I don’t care.

So far so good. But the L4D boycott makes another claim: that the release of L4D2 will split the online communities of L4D, making the online experience less enjoyable, and as such, Valve should not release L4D2 as a new game.

This is where things start to get messy, like the aftermath of a zombie ah forget it. You get the point.

First of all, if this is in fact a genuine concern, then the release of any sequel will result in community splitting. Stating that Valve should not release a sequel to a game, because doing so will reduce the quality of the online experience of its predecessor, is unreasonable, because it implies that game developers should not ever release sequels to online games. If reducing the quality of online play is something developers should not do, and releasing a sequel does as much, then developers shouldn’t be allowed to release sequels. This contradicts the boycott’s first acknowledgment that Valve is a company with financial needs and cannot be expected to survive without the release of new games. It’s also just clearly a bizarre claim.

This also doesn’t take into account the fact that the release of games from other companies can very well reduce the quality of online play by splitting communities. World of Warcraft split the communities of countless MMORPGs that came before it, lowering the quality of play for people who paid for an online experience with other games, but no developers were expected to somehow uphold the integrity of a gaming community, outside of making a place where a community can develop.

The fact is that the existence of an online community is not the responsibility of the developer of a game. Valve had a responsibility to make a playable multiplayer game with an interface that enabled players to connect –that is, they had a responsibility to facilitate a place for a community to develop– but no responsibility to somehow hold together a group of people. This is simply out of the control of a game developer, since things like the release of competing games, player interest, and many other outside factors will affect a community. A community is made up of people with the ability to make their own choices of what they will play, so it would be unreasonable to claim that Valve has a responsibility to hold such a thing together.

The boycott also claims that The announced content of Left 4 Dead 2 does not warrant a stand-alone, full-priced sequel and should instead become updates (free or otherwise) for Left 4 Dead. This is in direct contradiction with their acknowledgment that judgment cannot be passed on L4D2 until it is released. The simple fact of the matter is that no one knows yet whether L4D2 is a warranted sequel. We have seen a few screenshots and a trailer, but until people play it and reviews are released, the boycott cannot reasonably claim that L4D2 does not warrant a stand-alone release, especially when they themselves say that the value of L4D2 is as of yet unknown. The demand that L4D2 should be released as DLC is undermined by the fact that they simply don’t know what L4D2 will be like.

Finally, the boycott claims that L4D2 will make its predecessor obsolete. Again, this claim contradicts the earlier claims that judgment should not be passed on L4D2 and that L4D2 does not warrant a stand-alone sequel.

Again, the supporters of the boycott simply don’t know the quality of L4D2, and so can’t make claims about whether it will make the precursor obsolete. Further, if L4D2 is not warranted as a sequel to the first game –that is to say, if it is so similar to the first game that it should be included in the first game– it cannot make it obsolete; the sequel would have to be better than the first game to make it obsolete. Essentially, the boycott claims that L4D2 will be of such close quality to the first game that it shouldn’t even be a sequel, but also that it will be such a good quality sequel that it will make the first game obsolete. The boycott can’t have it both ways, but that is what they demand.

Just like a brainless zombie horde would.

Dammit, I did it again. Really, this is embarrassing.

Anyway, the supporters of the boycott are angry, but they’re also being unreasonable. They demand free DLC from Valve, which is fair enough, but go too far in demanding that Valve essentially never release a sequel to L4D. The only promise Valve made was to release free DLC for the first game, and as long as they do that they are free to make sequels as well. There is room for both, and the claim that Valve has a duty to not release a sequel to their game because they claimed free DLC would be available for it is quite a leap. It simply doesn’t follow that because Valve promised free DLC that a sequel is unfair or unwarranted.

In the end, the boycotters are free to boycott, and Valve is free to make a sequel and release free DLC for L4D. The result will be either that L4D2 is great and is worth buying, or it will not be worth buying and all the L4D1 players who boycotted it will be able to continue playing their favourite game with free updates. Everybody wins!

Except for those who have been consumed by the throngs of ruthless zombies.