Has Left4Dead been left for dead?

A game that proved that Valve still had their magic touch after Team Fortress 2, Left4Dead proved a storm in the gaming community. Brilliant graphics combined with unique co-operative gameplay established this newcomer immediately as a classic of its genre, and shifted almost 3 million copies so far world wide.

With Valve releasing free content almost monthly for TF2, gamers were expecting amazing things from Left4Dead DLC wise. However, Valve were not so quick on the ball with DLCs, releasing the map creating tools over half a year on from its release. On top of that, due to the success of Left4Dead, Valve announced a sequel of which, of course, left a lot of loyal fans of the franchise fuming.

This was not a wise move by Valve at all, with the delayed DLC – which was even announced to be released with the game at first – and the announcement of a sequel coming out in no less than a year later to its prequel, fans became furious and talk of boycotting the new game was afoot on the forums.

L4D2 has made Bill angry too

In essence, Valve did create a fantastic game which revolutionised co-operative gaming and kept them as a leading creator of fantastic games. Even looking at the current usage of players playing games using their Steam software, Left4Dead is still ranked in the  top 5 most played games (http://store.steampowered.com/stats/), so evidently the game is still a popular title. However with the emergence of Left4Dead 2 in November – and whether this will be a good game or not time will tell – it is difficult to say if Left4Dead will still be a leading title in Valve’s already elegant ensemble of creations.

Marchant

Is this some sort of joke?

Recently installed vista, waited half an hour for it download and install 68 updates. Restart to find this screen, another 30 minutes!

This screen sticks for an eye watering 30 minutes

New Staff Member

Adius.live welcomes new staff member Marchant!

DRM: Does it damage value?

I’m sure you can all guess that my answer is going to be yes. What I intend to do in this piece is illustrate how excessive DRM damages the value of a product (in this instance PC games) and that in turn makes piracy more attractive.

The problem with intrusive gaming DRM is that unlike films or music for example, copies of games are generally release quality with the benefit of having the DRM stripped. That makes them essentially better than the retail version, rather than merely cheaper (free). This in turn makes the pirated game an altogether better value proposition than the retail game.

I’ll give you an example: Anno 1404, a strategy game developed by Related Designs and published by Ubisoft. Now let’s say you decide you want this game; you go to the store and see it for £35, only to realise that it has TAGES DRM with a 3 activation limit (tough-luck if you have no internet connection or 4 computers).

On the other hand you could go to Isohunt and download it at no cost; along with no intrusive DRM. This means that to most consumers the pirate version of the game is better value for money, a big problem for developers and publishers who want to discourage piracy.

A further factor affecting the usefulness of DRM is the fact that almost all DRM methods have been cracked. However the DRM servers are still being maintained by the publishers that insist on their use. Who pays for this? Us, the consumer, whenever we buy a game. Less DRM should mean marginally lower prices on games.

What publishers and developers need to do is make the genuine games a better value proposition – very little DRM, art-books, steel cases etc – they need to make the payment for the game make sense. As it is now, I am paying for product that is inferior to a free product and that is just messed up!

New Staff Member

Adius.live welcomes new staff member Mattman!

Adius.live goes live

This site launches with no specific subject area. Simply a group of tech enthusiasts giving there opinion on a whole variety of gadgets, games and much more.

Watch this space.