My Games of '09 PC Games

First lets clear some, there will be no games of the decade, the decade hasnt finished until 10 ends. Bloody people and their inability to read years properly, thereby perpetuating errors to ad infinitum.

So my favorite games? In no particular order whatsoever.

Torchlight:
Makes the wait for Diablo 3 just a touch bit better and substantial worse at the same time.

CoD: MW2:

Because sometimes you need to play a game that is just point and shoot kill the other team and who cares if the game has no value for any form of skill whatsoever, it is fun, carnal fun that has you swearing at 1811 using pieces of shit. Oh, but the single player is utter shit; stupid story that has more plot holes than the local hooker's nylons. 

Champions Online:
Because beating up people hasn't been this awesome in quite some time. Sure it doesnt change the MMO at all, but I don't think change is a constant requirement for games, sometimes you just want to jump into a horde of robo-dinosaurs, beat them all up then fly off to beat up frog aliens who are threatening your city. 

Batman AA:
Because Batman is awesome, and this game gets that right. Even if most of the riddles were too easy, the combat was a touch simple, and the boss fights were so console games 3 generations ago; this game exemplifies how a good, nay superb presentation can go a long way to making you overlook otherwise deafening defects. Also the solid story helped a great deal, errr, minus that Joker boss battle bit.

Empire Total War:
Because writing your own history of the world from your chosen nation is just as awesome with musket warfare. Also conquering Canada and making it part of America was somewhat strange for me. Winning a battle with my last dozen Swedish troops to wipe out a faction, only to have his 6 allies declare war on me the next turn. Just what I didn't want, but also precisely what makes me enjoy the game. 

League of Legends:
Okay so you like Defense of the Ancients. But you are getting sick of the Warcraft III interface, and could go for some better graphics. Also you're wondering where else the DotA gameplay can go. Well LoL has some answers. They aren't all the best, but it is there. The game has lots of balancing to work out, needs more modes, maps better stat tracking, but it is a wonderful start. Oh yea and it is free. So like try it.Dragon Age: OriginsUh because it is a Bioware RPG. Go play it now. Just go. You get to kill huge dragons.

Borderlands:
Okay it is like Diablo with guns, with more attitude. I throw a bird out that acts like chain lightning. That explodes people. 

Harvest Massive Encounter:
Free-form tower defense that utterly rapes me. But it is utterly simple, brutally tough, and a perfect game to burn through podcasts with. You can make death stars with it.

Defense Grid:

Because Harvest Massive Encounter doesnt have levels or a story or lots of interesting tactics with lots of towers, there is a more traditional tower defense game that was made with lots of care and effort and made me go through the game grabbing every single Steam Achievement, well accept 'Nail Biter' Because I'm just that good.

King's Bounty The Legend:
It came out it 2008? Screw that! I played it this year and it is awesome it gets in my 2009 list. Great art style, great gameplay, challenging and charming. I saved a zombie woman, made her human and married her. Now my kids give me stat bonuses. Also the sheer diversity in how you can form your army is pretty broad. Undead? Archers? Knights? Gryphons? Dragons? Insects? Any mixture of the above, go for it, you can pretty much make it work.  

Plants vs Zombies:
Presentation over everything else. The gameplay isn't better than anything in Defense Grid or Harvest Massive Encounter, but it does prove that being unique and different does count. Oh and the actual strategy is quite solid, if the game is a little too click laden for my taste.

Warhammer Dawn of War 2:
Anything that puts more thinking into strategy games is good with me. Sure the multiplayer just turned into a micro-fest, but Singleplayer let you think over your moves far more than most supposed RTS games let you.

Personal Spite of the Year Award: Demigod
The game that somehow I should have enjoyed, but ended up loathing with a hatred beyond reason, Demigod just did not mesh with me. I can't tell if it was the maps that felt like Quake 3 maps (a previous game of spite for me), the lack of choices in the heroes available, the interface, or the difficultly in getting anything close to a decently matched game going. All I can say now is that it didn't work out, and it might be my fault. I'm sorry Demigod, can we still be friends?

So there you have it. If I get around to I'd like to do a post about console games. We shall see. 

Big Business Impacts On Gaming

The recent news that Dante's Inferno the upcoming beat-em up hack 'n slasher has again pulled a PR stunt is shocking to me. PR Stunts are not new to the gaming industry but they usually are limited to one choice stunt at an event and then the game is usually out. But with Dante's Inferno over the past year I can count up several PR stunts that have brought this game to my attention over and over again. Maybe thats precisely what they want, I mean I honestly would not care at all about the game otherwise. But now I'm thinking about the game too much. Such that I'm thinking, if this game needs this much coverage just to attract people to it, what is the real story about this game's development? 

The question I'd like to address is the notion that EA is attempting to beat their competition through pure publicity? At the end of the day Dante's Inferno could be good, or mediocre but will it come close to matching the craze that is God of War III, its key competition. And do not forget there is only a month between the two titles, with Dante this February and Kratos in March, you can bet your dog/cat that EA knows they are taking on the champ in the ring in 2010. But is this how you do it?

There was a point in the gaming industry when you became a best seller by making the best possible game, but is that point long gone now. When Ubisoft brags about how great the Imagine series of DS games sells in spite of the dreadful quality capitalizing upon a  market that can't tell a Mad Dog McCree from a Half-Life? It feels like EA have capitulated to the line that their marketing department fed them: "You can't make a better game than Santa Monica, but we can sell a game better than they can." I mean I cannot understand any other reason why they would waste so much time and effort on cheap (that snag a photo of your act of lust was nothing else) ploys that accomplish nothing beyond proving that there is no such thing as bad advertisement. 

This is a troubling concept to me. Does this mean that in the future more publishers will adopt the attitude of marketing the game harder than the other guy? We know it works in other mediums, otherwise how would trash like Transformers, Robert Langdon novels, Twilight, and the current Disney music act of the week; rise above content that is genuinely moving their mediums forward (or at very least asking questions or their readers/listeners/viewers and making them think about the content before them). Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe the crap I just listed is popular because I am out of sync with quality entertainment today. But then again, I'm pretty sure anyone who has to used marketing ploys to push their game/movie/book is not concerned about pushing a medium forward (hell probably dont even care about keeping it lateral) and just want to make some money. Actually not even make some money, they want to make assloads of money, more than anyone else, they want good reviews also, but not because they want their game to be enjoyable for those who play it, but rather because good reviews are a means to an end. Good reviews = easier to sell the product with a shiny sticker that says "Indigenous Gaming Newts calls it spittle inducing good times!".

Course I could be wrong, and Dante's Inferno was alloted a shit load of cash the developers didn't need, so they authorized crap loads of tacky and blatant PR stunts to burn through that wad of cash. It could happen. 

And in comic book stuff: Rage of the Red Lanterns is pretty awesome, can't wait for Blackest Night when the collections start to come out next year. 
That will be all. See you in a few months.

Play Batman: The Animated Series Theme Music Here

Well, I played Batman: Arkham Asylum. Not to be confused with Batman's AA class, which consists of him punching you in the face until the drinking stops. I jest. Anyways as you've probably heard it is the greatest comic book based game ever made, and I have no desire to disagree. It is an excellent title and fans of good games should try it out. I just wanted to talk about it because it deserves to get more said about it. 

Fans of Batman should also check it out, as it bears little resemblance, beyond Joker taking over Arkham, to the Graphic Novel written by the ever so esoteric Grant Morrison. And fans of good games and Batman have no reason what so ever to not pick it up. Those who might also be interested: Fans of beat-em ups; Fans of stealth games; And fans of games that are just plain old pretty to look at. 

The game is interesting because it exists in a sort of limbo, being moderately placed within the world of the Animated series, but clearly not (the art style and time period of the game are at odds with the show); And yet not existing in the world of the comics either. Perhaps we can expect this to indicate that there will be a separate canon established for Batman's new gaming franchise (which clearly there will be given the amount of praise lavished on it).

And that's all I have to say about it. If you want a full review go check the big boys (or small boys) they've got very nice ones. Hell Yahtzee at The Escapist even enjoyed the bloody game, and he doesnt like anything. The combat is fun and works, the stealth is fun and diverse enough to keep you entertained, the gadgets are gadget-esque and you punch giant muscled giants in the face then ride them around like cattle. What else do you want.

Oh I'll add that the final fight was so out of character and so "gamey" that it almost ruined the entire game for me. The whole event seemed out of character for Joker (GASP HE'S THE END BOSS? what did you think it would be?) but then I suppose you can just argue that the Joker exists as a character who lives to be different. So I'll let it slide. Still "gamey" end boss fights are so friggin' kitschy that I can't bring myself to play the game again. I'll just remember it. 

Oh yea Harley = Pure Hotness.

If I Was Only This Much More Super!

Alright well I've had Champions Online for quite some time now, pushed a character pretty far into the game, level 30, and while I do not feel that I have seen everything the game has to offer, I feel I've seen enough to get a nice impressions/review piece out. Which is interesting because I've put easily 70 hours into the game over the past month and that does not feel like a significant portion of time to offer anything truly concrete about the game beyond impressions.

So lets just dive into it, I enjoy Champions Online. As far as MMOs go it is not trying to change anything, I wouldn't even say that it is trying to perfect what has come before. It is simply trying to exist as an awesome experience for those of us who adore Superheroes and wish we could do that. So put bluntly, if you do not enjoy comic books then you most likely will not enjoy this game. Plain and simple, there is too much service paid to comic book cliches to make it anything else beyond a comic book nerd's fantasy made real. You will venture through cities beating up gangs, you will stop super villains in fantastical bases, you will feign defeat to surprise a villain in their lair. You will find an amazing travel power and most probably beat/slash/incinerate/freeze/mentally assault thousands upon thousands of thugs into what I can only assume is death.

You will have fun. For a time. There is a  problem in that the game tends to keep you in an area just 1-2 hours longer than you would prefer to be. Upon entering a new section there is a euphoric realization of the new sights and sounds before you and how refreshing they are; for me the biggest was the Robot Cowboy section with an amusement park, that just took my breathe away. But then 4-6 hours later the feeling of this grand unique setting was worn off almost entirely as I struggled to make my way through the canyon. Had the game only put me there for 2-3 hours I believe looking back I would only have my Euphoric memories, but now in hindsight I have the two conflicting opinions. One of sheer amazement and the other tedious boredom at wanting to be blown away again. And I was when I did move on, but the cycle continued.

It isn't a horrid scenario but it meshes terribly with the feeling that the amount of content just barely scrapes you along. You need to grab every quest available to push follow the leveling path. Miss one (difficult because you can access a list with all quest givers shown on it which will then highlight them on your map) or worse come across a broken mission and you'll find yourself struggling to keep up with the missions. If they would increase the exp reward (or alternatively lower the leveling requirements) then it would let you leave missions alone giving you different stuff to play through later with alternate characters. 

Luckily the core gameplay is an absolute blast. Combat is a joy, with plenty of options available for you to approach your foes. Do you focus on one at a time and drop them like dominoes one after another. Or do you max your AOE and kill them off in one huge explosion. I honestly cannot tell you which is better, but it keeps things different, sometimes i use my cone attack, other times my single target high damage attack, or my close range flurry of melee attacks, or my sphere aoe to annihilate everything (which also pulls everything in sight to attack me which is dangerous but simultaneously awesome). Combat keeps you paying attention, you have to watch for indicators to block, (which have saved me numerous times from fights I could have lost)  and in general stay on your toes. 
It is true the game requires someone to go over the power set descriptions and delineate everything about them, because often times they have simply left code up that really fails to explain what they do. Thankfully the Powerhouse exists for you go and sample your prospective powers before you are locked in with them (although respecs are possible). So really if you grab a power that doesn't work as you would like it to or expect it to you can only blame yourself for not trying it fully out. 

But how does the game function as an MMO? Well that's interesting because it is true that you will constantly see people, hear their chat logs, and on occasion fight for mission goals. But for the most part, you will be soloing unless you and a friend are constantly grouping (this will also make the game easy as pie for you, as there are very few missions that require more than one person let alone two). The game does not care at all about who last hits or deals the most damage to a target; you hit it once you'll get credit, although actually resources and experience are allotted based on damage dealt. You get credit for your mission just by tagging the target once.
Another unique facet of Champions is how the servers are split into shards, or up to 100 people, this means there is never a need for server transfers, nor will you and your friends ever have to recreate a character because you did not know what servers you were each on.

Of course I really should not end this before discussing the largest perceived problem with the title, the end game drought. I honestly cannot comment on this issue at the present time. I have been busy with plenty of content so far and promises of more content several time a year seems sufficient in my opinion. I will be sure to address this in the future should an issue present itself towards the pro or the con. I will say that playing through with my alts is very tedious. You just do missions you have already done (albeit you do them better the second time around) and aside from playing a radically different powerset (the various powers really do differentiate themselves from each other) there truly is little reason to replay the content beyond utilizing unique powers each go around the proverbial merry-go-round.

Crafting is another issue present within the game. It exists and you can do it, but the main reason is to build very useful healing items and damage shields that can prove their worth in battles that are not going your way. The gear you can craft usually is on par with loot found or earned from missions. The requirement for learning special recipes needs to be explained however, as there appears to be random drops earned from breaking down components. It all adds up to craft system that has some perks but seems more like a bullet point rather than a fully developed feature.  

And I'll end on the positive note. The character creator. It is without a doubt in my mind brilliant. If you can envisage a character concept you can make it pretty damn close to what you want. You will want to make alternate Champs simply because it is a joy flexing the creative potential of the creator and making a robot dragon who uses rocket boots because your nemesis tore your wings off.

I should also comment on the nemesis system. It is very cool. But shows up 10 levels too late. It is very fun building your rival and explaining your feud that led to the nemesis status between them, but the fact that it arrives at level 25 instead of 15 or sooner seems strange. The concept is perhaps the lone unique idea that Champions has and they decide to make you work towards it. I suppose in a game you'll be playing for months to come it will not be a huge impact but I would like to be able to at least form the Nemesis at the same time I make the hero so I can build them around a single, perhaps contrasting, concept. Once you get it though, awesome, nothing like seeing your traitorous brother trying to kill you over and over again.

So in closing. Champion Online. Bring almost nothing new to MMOs. Yet surprisingly still a compelling and unique experience thanks to its central theme of being about superheroes. If you like combat and comics, and are not turned off by the prospect of spending the next year or so playing the same game, then I think you'll find a charming game in Champions. It is clearly not built for everyone, but for those who can find something to relate to. Well they will really enjoy it. 

Words Go Here? Seriously!? Go Figure.

So its been quite some time. Lets talk about games. Good games of course. I'd love to be able to dissect horrid games, but I'm just not going to pay money for games that are bad.

So lets talk about games I have played. Street Fighter IV & League of Legends (finally NDA was lifted!).

First lets get Street Fighter IV out of the way. I'm playing it on the PC with a keyboard. Which is interesting, because it falls somewhere between the gamepad, and the arcade stick, certain moves are very easy to pull off once you get the finger motions down, while some are very hard, (I'm looking at you 720-ish degree spins). However my limited time (according to Steam roughly 10 hours) with game has revealed several things to me.

1. Damn I suck at Street Fighter IV. 

2. Damn this game is very beautiful. So much love and care went into making the visual fidelity of this game stunning. The filters are a nice touch also.

3. Damn this game is basically a simpler version of DotA or rather AoS (Aeon of Strife) styled games are basically team oriented real-time strategy versions of the fighting game genre. Much of your success in both genres is based upon the amount of knowledge you have going into the match, and from there quickly analyzing your opponents' play style to figure out an effective counter style. In Street Fighter it consists of learning every character in the game's moves and combos and how to effectively avoid/block or otherwise negate such moves. In DotA exact same thing; you need to understand what skills each hero has, what items complement and counter those skills and further you need to understand map layout, how the fog of war breaks lock-ons during chases and so on. It seems to me the AoS is a logical extension fighting game principles applied to a RTS game where the only function is a competitive multiplayer environment. The core difference being the team environment contrasted against a fighting game's simply One versus One. The sheer strategy and fine skill that is involved in both is surprising. But then any competitive really ultimately falls into requiring effective strategies and sufficient skills to obtain victories so I suppose this is more of a general statement of human competitions in general rather than merely an observation between fighting games and DotA clones.

So, if you enjoy Fighting games, you will probably find Street Fighter IV a worthwhile purchase. Too bad the sale on Steam already ended. Oh and Sagat needs a nerf. What do you mean fighting games don't get patched?

Next up, since I've gone on and on about DotA clones it seems appropriate to move onto League of Legends. So the game functions like DotA, two sides smash grunts at each other forever. Each side gets 5 champions and they vie for their side's victory. They level up gaining more skills and gain gold for grunts, champions and buildings destroyed. The player functions as the summoner. A benevolent god-entity who exists to order his Champion around. You as the summoner are granted two skills that usually have cooldown timers of 2-6 minutes. You also possess runes and masteries. For masteries think WoW talent trees. Slightly buffing your champions stats and abilities. Runes are basically swappable meta-game items that further buff the stats and abilities. You can have 3 pages of rune setups.  For quick swaps of various builds based on what character you use for that match.

The game feels like a logical extension DotA. Which makes sense because the brains behind League created most of DotA as we know it, Mr. Guinsoo, if you will. The game plays out largely similiar to to DotA, with a very similar map to DotA's. Albeit with some subtle changes, shrubs can be used to hide in, which are great for ambushes. Perhaps the most notable change is the shift away from hero kills = team win which very much dominates DotA. Very rare is it possible for the carry to rise up and lead your team to victory as is the case in DotA. Rather effective use of pushes and team defends of your own base are essential to your victory. It is possible to dominate a team through kills, but often unless there is a follow through with a strong base push, champion killing serves little purpose beyond fattening the wallet, although not especially well. 
Further the art of last hitting has been greatly reduced. Denying is out. Although last hitting enemies grunts is still viable to slow passively slow your attack. Towers are absolutely devastating in the League, making assaults very risking without extensive grunt support or having exceptional items are the purpose of tanking.
And the item system. It is probably the best method to use DotA's item recipe system and have it make sense to newcomers to the game. It gives you nice flow charts of what items to buy, lets you skip buying smaller parts if you already have the raw cash, and most items allow you to build your champion in a diverse way. They have stats that boost everything about your Champion: cooldowns, spell power, attack, attack speed, dodge, movespeed, hp, armor, magic armor, dodge, if you want to boost it, odds are there is an item that will grant it.

The style of the game falls directly into comedic hilarity. Which is an interesting choice. Because the game has no desire to make you feel connected to some realistic scenario that might play out in some mythical realm. Simply put the game is aware it is a game and doesnt try to convince you otherwise. Sure they do right up Champion descriptions detailing who these figures are, but really, they don't matter. 

At the end of the day I like it. There are some changes I would like to see with match making; mainly just that the only mode of play available for legitimate matches is the Blind Pick option, whereby you can not see what champion the opposition has chosen until the match has already begun. I want to see all random, drafts, and no duplicates modes made available. This is a very minor gripe that I have though, and largely just works to keep things interesting long after the game has been out.The gameplay is very solid, the controls are tight, lag is non-existent in my experience for well over 90% of games played. All this adds up to game that when it actually launches will keep me coming back for more. Now I just wish I had some friends to play it with.
 

Quickies

Some quick impressions of some of the games I've played recently:

Shadow Complex:
Very fun, although very easy. It is clear that a lot of effort went into the game, and it shows. Very pretty. The 3D aiming is really trippy, and confusing at times, but it largely works. Taking cover from enemy fire on the other hand... not so much. It is not a huge deal, you simply have to shoot the enemies first. A solid title to pick up if you enjoyed the old 2D metroid games. Best of all is that game gives you a plethora of tools at your disposal and lets you decide how to get past the various obstacles. I somehow skipped the hookshot and got it second last, but my skill with the foam gun meant it didnt really matter. And yes, everything you've heard about the foam gun is pretty well true; it is a fairly unique weapon that helps the game stand out just a tinsy bit more... Not that there is much competition in the Metroid-esque game genre. 

Zenoclash:

Initially I had my doubts, by the second level I was concerned. It was moderately fun, but failed to pull me in. The art style seems like it is trying too hard. But the game's story is fairly interesting, certainly different. The best thing about it is its diversity. It mixes things up quite regularily, such that you do not get stuck in the motions. And this game lets you fight your way through fights however you decide. Maybe you want to use the guns (if you can call them that) or maybe you want to beat people up using a regular combo. Maybe you want to just through people around. It lets you decide how to win, well except against the big guys, you just gotta smack them around with large blunt implements. And first person melee combat. Sure it works, I already saw it work back in 2006 with Dark Messiah of Might Magick, a game that holds a special place in my heart, despite its numerous flaws.

The Path:
This game clearly is not for me. It is more art than game. The gameplay seems to be get lost, get scared shitless that a wolf is gonna eat you, then quit the game because you just wandered around for 4 hours and nothings happened, and you like games that at least tell you what the point is; and I swear if someone tells me that there is no point IS THE POINT, it will not be pretty. I'll admit the presentation is there, indie quality, but it definitely has it style. I just cannot fathom what the purpose is. The game seems like a blend of art and games, with emphasis placed on the art rather than the gamplay. Meh, I'll just step back and say that the game totally was not for me.

Droplitz:
Interesting puzzle game. Has quite the learning curve, although only on the larger boards. You really need to practice to get good at it. Once you do though, it plays as well as any puzzler I've played. 

Trine:
Alright now this game is simply awesome. I talked about games giving you options earlier in the post, and this game really gives you freedom to get from point A to point B, and you can usually get there through at least 4 routes. Build towers, throw rocks, Swing off platforms, build bridges. Basically get through it however you want. Very fun. Although that last level. Well lets just forget its there. After all things are about the journey, not the destination.

Champions Online:
It's City of Heroes, with a new coat of paint, and loot drops. Simply put, my dream game. I really liked it. Such that I purchased the lifetime subscription, which I tend to do. Hopefully I dont get burned like with Hellgate; oh god the memories, I should never think back to that. Anyways, I'm pretty pumped about the launch on the first of September.

Cogs:
Puzzle Box game. Literally. You get boxes with puzzles on them and you solve them. They are pretty tough later on. But the game is more about speed runs, which is something I really couldnt care less about. Its not bad, its just there is not a whole lot to it. The puzzles dont have multiple solutions, and after I've revealed how much I adore multiple solutions this game does not mesh well. 

On a side note I'm pretty sure thats why I hate adventure games. The requirement to collect arbitrary items to move on always has burned me, I want to adventure, not solve problems that question patience above logical analysis.  

Democracy 2:
Okay I have not put much time in the game yet, but my short time managing a country that values liberalism above all else was brilliant. I failed miserably but adored every moment of it; apparently going 300 trillion in debt is a bad thing. I had this brilliant planto cut the military completely, but forgot that all my political capital comes from ministers agreeing with my policies (which they didnt, the stinking alcoholic, war mongering, capitalists) and so the budget spiralled out of control. But when it was working, hoo boy... what a rush. The game is probably very niche in appeal, but I like.

And thats it. I'm torn over my next purchase. Should it be Batman, Borderlands, or Alpha Protocol. I'm getting Uncharted 2 already, and Dragon's Age in November, with the slate left empty for December. I fully intend to get Alpha Protocol at some point in the future, but I dont mind waiting for it to drop in price or have a sale on Steam or some place. I think I'll wait on Borderlands, maybe try a demo. And I think I'll probably just wait for a sale on Batman as well. I pretty sure I figured out the ending anyways. *wink wink*

Ciao for now.

The Storm That Supposedly Rages.

Apparently there is a "huge" hub bub going on about Shadow Complex. It is being covered on every gaming blog everywhere so what the hell why not throw in my 3 cents. 

Not the game itself of course, because that would quite frankly make sense and render the entire argument much simpler. Rather the cause for concern is that the game exists within a universe that was created by one Orson Scott Card, a well known writer, which means that his own beliefs are well publicized. He is apparently quite against the notion of non-traditional marriage (or men marrying men/women marrying women if you need it put bluntly) such that he advocates for and funds groups to actively prevent the notion gay marriages in America. 

The issue is that should we, as gamers, boycott this game (shadow complex) because of the involvement of Mr. Card in its creation. Put simply and in my own personal opinion. No. For a couple reasons, some related to game, some less so.

It feels like the entire boycott is fruitless. Mr. Card's payment likely does not relate to the game's success, I suspect he is already paid for his services/use of his IP. I could understand a boycott if the game was about getting into some power armor then proceeding to hunt down a secret "terrorist group" that is promoting gay rights. But the content within the game shares no connection to Mr. Card's own personal beliefs. I do not think it is fair to the dozens of others involved in the game to right-off their game simply because they actually hired a real writer to give their game something substantial.

Let me finish this by saying that boycotts get thrown around so much nowadays that they have completely lost any relevance to anything gaming related. Why? Because you can say one thing on the internet then turn around and do the opposite. Starcraft 2 boycotts, Diablo 3 boycotts, Arma 2 boycotts, L4D2 boycott, boycott boycott boycott. Seriously its like the only way gamers think they can affect anything is by linking arms and trying to stop the bulldozer.

What should gamers do? Simply voice your opinion, talk to developers, send them emails, twitter them, stop by their office if they happen to live near you. Just be cordial, polite, and able to effectively compose your argument such that it does not come out like some pedantic forum troll's bile speech. 

People say money talks. And I suppose it does. But talk talks much louder, and usually more concisely. If you do feel that this is an issue to you, then not only should you withhold your money (that includes NOT playing the demo, why should you get enjoyment at all?) but you should actively tell Mr. Card and the developers at Chair why you did not purchase their game.

Thats my 3 cents on the non-issue as I see it.