Black op First Strike DLC announced

[archvile93]

Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.

$15. Not this shit again. Hasn't Activision learned their lesson. Let's all hope Treyarch changes that, or at least tries to protest it.

$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.

What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food

You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.

On Topic. If I didn't like Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.

I'd agree with you there if it was something more substantial than a few maps. Maybe some new game modes and some campaign extras.

Alright, so Bungie can release about 4 maps for $10 and they get praise for it, but when Activision releases 6 (including the zombie map) for $15, they suddenly become a soulless company that is trying to make more money off of a game that people already bought. Is that what you're saying?

Who said I bought the maps for Halo? I don't even have a 360. I also never heard they even released maps for that game, though it doesn't surprise me that they did.

I never said you did. I am simply stating that nobody bitched when Bungie released map packs for Halo 3, nobody's bitching about the Noble Map Pack for Reach, yet everyone bitches about Activision releasing map packs with a slightly higher number of maps, at a slightly higher price.

What really doesn't make sense is that people are still complaining about MW2's map packs "costing $15 and having only 2 (or something like that) new maps." The so called "old" maps in those were really good to start with, and they were bringing them into MW2 so people could play them there.

If you like the maps in MW, why not just keep playing MW instead paying $15 to play the same maps in an inferior game?

 

[RUINER ACTUAL]

Those maps look totally uninspired. I bought both MW2 DLCs and they are some of.my favorite maps, and im getting back into playing it too. But Im not getting BO or the DLC. For $15 I could get the Reach DLC and enough Monster to play it all night.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.

$15. Not this shit again. Hasn't Activision learned their lesson. Let's all hope Treyarch changes that, or at least tries to protest it.

$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.

What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food

You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.

On Topic. If I didn't like Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.

I'd agree with you there if it was something more substantial than a few maps. Maybe some new game modes and some campaign extras.

Alright, so Bungie can release about 4 maps for $10 and they get praise for it, but when Activision releases 6 (including the zombie map) for $15, they suddenly become a soulless company that is trying to make more money off of a game that people already bought. Is that what you're saying?

Yeah people are insane.

This is more of a personal opinion but I reckon all the Halo 3 map packs other than the latest one were pretty garbage, save for a couple of levels here and there. That and these maps are completely integrated into the playlists. You wanna play snipers? Buy the map pack. You wanna play SWAT? Buy ALL the map packs. Compared to that CoD's map packs are just a neat little extra.
And Halo's map packs were often crappy remakes of maps from the earlier games or copy-pasted campaign levels.
(However in that respect CoD is similar, but to me not as much.)

If you've already got the damn game surely you can afford $15 bucks for a nice addition.
I understand if people simply don't like CoD, don't feel like paying, or have an unconnected console, but not getting them isn't some triumphant Braveheart style stand against evil as many morons believe, its just a game for christ sake.

 

[The Lunatic]

Man, glad I'm not a console gamer.

$15 for 6 maps?

Next they'll start charging you for dialogue.

 

[archvile93]

Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.

$15. Not this shit again. Hasn't Activision learned their lesson. Let's all hope Treyarch changes that, or at least tries to protest it.

$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.

What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food

You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.

On Topic. If I didn't like Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.

I'd agree with you there if it was something more substantial than a few maps. Maybe some new game modes and some campaign extras.

Alright, so Bungie can release about 4 maps for $10 and they get praise for it, but when Activision releases 6 (including the zombie map) for $15, they suddenly become a soulless company that is trying to make more money off of a game that people already bought. Is that what you're saying?

Who said I bought the maps for Halo? I don't even have a 360. I also never heard they even released maps for that game, though it doesn't surprise me that they did.

I never said you did. I am simply stating that nobody bitched when Bungie released map packs for Halo 3, nobody's bitching about the Noble Map Pack for Reach, yet everyone bitches about Activision releasing map packs with a slightly higher number of maps, at a slightly higher price.

What really doesn't make sense is that people are still complaining about MW2's map packs "costing $15 and having only 2 (or something like that) new maps." The so called "old" maps in those were really good to start with, and they were bringing them into MW2 so people could play them there.

If you like the maps in MW, why not just keep playing MW instead paying $15 to play the same maps in an inferior game?

I actually prefer MW2 over MW1, if only because the weapon and level selection is, in my opinion, better. Only problem I had with that game is that the MP5 was replaced with the MP5K.

Wow Deja vu. I would agree with you there if MW2 wasn't incredibly poorly balanced (most of which they never fixed). It had more weapons and such, but it seems like a situation of quality over quantity. Also, how hard is it to port maps from one game to the next with extremely similar engines? There's a reason I wouldn't pay someone nearly as much to microwave my breakfast as say rewire my entire house. Considering the maps in Black Ops are all new, it's definately a better deal than MW2s DLC was, but it still doesn't seem worth theprice to me.

 

[Korolev]

Oh. So quickly with the map packs? That's what killed MW2 for me, and it looks like I'll never play Black Ops again.

15 dollars is too expensive for me. Maybe not for some. But it is for me.

 

[The Lunatic]

They're charging $15 for it on PC too, I'm afraid.

True, but, I can always turn my head and look at TF2.

 

[SovietSecrets]

Did not buy any of the DLC for MW 2. Will be doing the same here.

 

[linkblade91]

My question is: when are they going to let those of us who didn't buy the limited editions get access to all the old zombie maps? I really liked the original, but because I didn't shell out an additional $20-30 for the one map I wanted, I get to twiddle my thumbs and wait until they release it as DLC, which I'll most likely have to pay for anyway. I have a copy of WaW; why should I have to wait + pay to re-acquire maps I already own!? Jerks...

 

[Trippy Turtle]

the maps look kinda bad in that... bungie's map are better at the start with forge you can do anything.

 

[archvile93]

Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.

$15. Not this shit again. Hasn't Activision learned their lesson. Let's all hope Treyarch changes that, or at least tries to protest it.

$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.

What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food

You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.

On Topic. If I didn't like Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.

I'd agree with you there if it was something more substantial than a few maps. Maybe some new game modes and some campaign extras.

Alright, so Bungie can release about 4 maps for $10 and they get praise for it, but when Activision releases 6 (including the zombie map) for $15, they suddenly become a soulless company that is trying to make more money off of a game that people already bought. Is that what you're saying?

Who said I bought the maps for Halo? I don't even have a 360. I also never heard they even released maps for that game, though it doesn't surprise me that they did.

I never said you did. I am simply stating that nobody bitched when Bungie released map packs for Halo 3, nobody's bitching about the Noble Map Pack for Reach, yet everyone bitches about Activision releasing map packs with a slightly higher number of maps, at a slightly higher price.

What really doesn't make sense is that people are still complaining about MW2's map packs "costing $15 and having only 2 (or something like that) new maps." The so called "old" maps in those were really good to start with, and they were bringing them into MW2 so people could play them there.

If you like the maps in MW, why not just keep playing MW instead paying $15 to play the same maps in an inferior game?

I actually prefer MW2 over MW1, if only because the weapon and level selection is, in my opinion, better. Only problem I had with that game is that the MP5 was replaced with the MP5K.

Wow Deja vu. I would agree with you there if MW2 wasn't incredibly poorly balanced (most of which they never fixed). It had more weapons and such, but it seems like a situation of quality over quantity. Also, how hard is it to port maps from one game to the next with extremely similar engines? There's a reason I wouldn't pay someone nearly as much to microwave my breakfast as say rewire my entire house. Considering the maps in Black Ops are all new, it's definately a better deal than MW2s DLC was, but it still doesn't seem worth theprice to me.

Well, not all. I know for a fact that Jungle is a re-skin of Creek from the Variety Map Pack for MW1. Pretty sure everything else is new, though.

I was referring to the new DLC maps. And while jungle is similar to Creek I don't think they're identical. For one thing, I don't think Jungle has a tunnel through the map center, but that's a different argument altogether.

 

[Smooth Operator]

You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.

On Topic. If I liked Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.

You find it fair that 6 maps (which couldn't take Treyarch more then a week to make) cost a quarter of the whole damn game?
Well I blame people like you for this sh*t going down in the first place.