**Official Portal 2 thread**

People do it for MMO's all the time, jump through hoops to get open beta and headstart, including buying other games just so they can get an item. No reason Portal 2 fans would be any different.

I bought my pack on the 2nd well before any of the ARG stuff was even well known. £27 for Super Meat Boy, Killing floor, Bit Trip, the ball + the others is great value :)

I think Sunday would have been cool, I'm a bit disappointed we're only looking at ~12 hours earlier. But realisticly anyone who bought their pack on Saturday evening or Sunday should have realised that it was not going to be a weekend release.
 
Last edited:
Vtec9k said:
People do it for MMO's all the time, jump through hoops to get open beta and headstart, including buying other games just so they can get an item. No reason Portal 2 fans would be any different.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Early access to an MMO can give you a good headstart if you are deperate get get one.

Portal 2 is a single player game. There is no headstart to be obtained.
 
Is it just me or if you have a ps3 its worth getting that version. you get it for the ps3 and you get it for the pc, you get tripple points and cash back at some places. And its only 5 quid more. Then sell on the ps3 version for cash back without the code

hmm
 
Last edited:
Evilsod said:
So whats the problem?
Click to expand...

No problem.

Simply highlighting the fact that plenty of people will have bought games they otherwise wouldn't have - which I have no problem with but some deny it has happened (and say that if it has, there aren't many and that these people are <insert derogative>).

Also highlighting that it was a marketing move by valve to generate profit on the release of portal 2 and that the system they created was intended to draw people in to buying games they wouldnt have otherwise.


People on this forum seem to have taken great offense at these points though for reasons unbeknown to myself. I was merely pointing them out.
 
Just realised how many cheap copies of Portal 2 there will be flying about for steam to due to the PS3 bundle. Looks like it can be used separately as long as the original PS3 user doesn't like their steam account to PSN (might mean no multiplayer?). But that's means they will have a free DRM free copy of Portal 2 to give away to a friend on steam, even if the account is linked to PSN I think they can still use the other copy under a different username on steam but only 1 can be played at a time.
 
Deific said:
No problem.

Simply highlighting the fact that plenty of people will have bought games they otherwise wouldn't have - which I have no problem with but some deny it has happened (and say that if it has, there aren't many and that these people are <insert derogative>).

Also highlighting that it was a marketing move by valve to generate profit on the release of portal 2 and that the system they created was intended to draw people in to buying games they wouldnt have otherwise.


People on this forum seem to have taken great offense at these points though for reasons unbeknown to myself. I was merely pointing them out.
Click to expand...

It's because you're speaking out against Valve you heretic :mad: :p

Besides, of course it was to make profit. I doubt very much a proposal that went like:

So we have this great idea to implement Portal themed updates across a range of other companies games as part of an ARG in order to hype up the release of Portal 2. The drawback is it'll cost us X and have zero return.

Would have gone very far.

Likewise I can't see the other companies agreeing to all the work and effort they had to put in without some return either.

As for drawing people in to buy games they normally wouldn't have, that happens me nearly every time there's a sale on steam and the games are cheap enough so I can only assume there are others :o

Finally, I said they were foolish if they believed the act of simply buying the pack would expedite the release of Portal 2 especially considering the volumes of data available on the arg which had been helpfully categorised in a wiki. I stand by that, they were foolish.
 
Last edited:
Deific said:
No problem.

Simply highlighting the fact that plenty of people will have bought games they otherwise wouldn't have - which I have no problem with but some deny it has happened (and say that if it has, there aren't many and that these people are <insert derogative>).

Also highlighting that it was a marketing move by valve to generate profit on the release of portal 2 and that the system they created was intended to draw people in to buying games they wouldnt have otherwise.
Click to expand...

Could it be because you were making it sound like you were condeming Valve because some people were buying it under the assumption that they were getting Portal 2 much earlier and nothing more? Yes, it was blatantly to encourage sales and get people interested not only in Portal 2 but in the games that participated. Would you have preferred that nothing happened? Everything you've said has sounded negative towards the whole event.

Talk about making a mountain of a mole hill.
 
shock horror call the press - company tries to make money


cant believe some people still see these big million dollar companies as some sort of charity.

if people purchased that sack pack in an attempt to get portal 2 out quicker and only because of that, then well they need to get more because they certainly dont live in the real world.
fair enough if you purchased it bc a) it was a good deal and b) you wanted some of the games.
 
Last edited:
Evilsod said:
Could it be because you were making it sound like you were condeming Valve because some people were buying it under the assumption that they were getting Portal 2 much earlier and nothing more? Yes, it was blatantly to encourage sales and get people interested not only in Portal 2 but in the games that participated. Would you have preferred that nothing happened? Everything you've said has sounded negative towards the whole event.

Talk about making a mountain of a mole hill.
Click to expand...

I did no such thing. People were saying that nobody was influenced by the prospect of an early release of Portal 2, when they bought the potato sack. I simply explained how naieve a thought that was, and how infact, many people will have been influenced. Nothing more - but even this is too much for some to accept. Pointing out that valve used clever marketing to let people interperate early release for themselves and buy into the hype (which I haven't criticised), then gets people changing their sentiment from, "valve can do no bad, stop insulting valve!", into "but valve have to make money too!" - as if me pointing out how getting people to buy into their marketing strategy and the bundle of games attached to it, is a direct attack at valve as a company, rather than a simple counter-argument to several peoples previous flawed one.

Infact every discussion on the forums about steams marketing strategies ends up in, "Valves a company, they have to make moneys too!" as a be-all-end-all argumentative point, regardless of its relevance. Steam/valve brown-nosing has no end.
 
Last edited:
Deific said:
I did no such thing. People were saying that nobody was influenced by the prospect of an early release of Portal 2, when they bought the potato sack. I simply explained how naieve a thought that was, and how infact, many people will have been influenced. Nothing more - but even this is too much for some to accept. Pointing out that valve used clever marketing to let people interperate early release for themselves and buy into the hype (which I haven't criticised), then gets people changing their sentiment from, "valve can do no bad, stop insulting valve!", into "but valve have to make money too!" - as if me pointing out how getting people to buy into their marketing strategy and the bundle of games attached to it, is a direct attack at valve as a company, rather than a simple counter-argument to several peoples previous flawed one.

Infact every discussion on the forums about steams marketing strategies ends up in, "Valves a company, they have to make moneys too!" as a be-all-end-all argumentative point, regardless of its relevance. Steam/valve brown-nosing has no end.
Click to expand...

You see, the keyword you missed in there was "only". Nobody was disputing that people may, even a tiny bit, of bought the pack because of the early release prospect. People who bought it ONLY because they wanted Portal 2 to be released earlier are fools. If getting the games was anything but the major overriding decision as to why you got the Potato Sack, you are doing it wrong.

Besides that this has nothing to do with anything. They've made an elaborate potato/clue hunt in multiple games as a build up to the release. Yes it was to draw attention to it in valves own viral way, how this somehow reflects badly on Valve is a mystery.
 
The thing is a few of us really aren't criticising Valve at all, the entire event can only have been a positive thing it would be stupid to say otherwise. I would label it more as constructive criticism that the event ended up being less awesome then it could have been which takes away from the hype surrounding it.

Imagine for a second that the numbers had been worked so that the entire community had unlocked the game early Sunday after hard work and enjoyment of the new content that the games provided. There would have been page after page of praise for Valve on the forums... everybody would have truly won in that scenario.

My point then is that the event was good fun for those that enjoyed it... however it could have been really memorable had the community managed to come together and release the game a couple of days early. In retrospect of how it turned out I think it would have been better for everyone if they had ran the event without the promise of an early release.
 
I think Valve's marketing campaigns are genius. Hidden clues, spin off sites and community involvement is a thousand times better than "game is out 19/04/11!lolololol"

Yes, people are naive to think they could buy their way to an early release, but it hasn't stopped them trying and the benefit is x number of thousand people bought the Indy games and supported the smaller developers, which is surely a good thing?
 
A good thing until next time where those people that were "tricked" say to themselves, "Well actually this 'early release' won't be early at all".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom