True, but, I can always turn my head and look at TF2.tghm1801 said:They're charging $15 for it on PC too, I'm afraid.
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.Ephraim J. Witchwood said: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.archvile93 said: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.Ephraim J. Witchwood said: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.archvile93 said: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?Ephraim J. Witchwood said: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.archvile93 said: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.Ephraim J. Witchwood said: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 $15, they suddenly become a soulless company that is trying to make more money off of a game that people already bought. Is that what you're saying?archvile93 said:I'd agree with you there if it was something more substantial than a few maps. Maybe some new game modes and some campaign extras.Ephraim J. Witchwood said:Alon Shechter said:Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.daywalker1776 said:$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.archvile93 said:$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.JemothSkarii said:What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food
On Topic. If I didn't like Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.
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.
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?Ephraim J. Witchwood said:You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.
On Topic. If I liked Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.
Ephraim J. Witchwood said:Alon Shechter said:Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.daywalker1776 said:$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.archvile93 said:$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.JemothSkarii said:What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food
On Topic. If I liked Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.
Most likely it will sell better than that.Caligulove said:I think Bad Company Vietnam has raised my expectations for $15 DLC... and this does not fit them
you should get it, its $15 worth of awesomeness, 1943 was only multiplayer and i paid 20 bux 4 it and never looked backJoseph375 said:For $15 I could download the ALL OF Battlefield Bad Company: Vietnam. (I know its only mutliplayer, but still though) I might get it, but I'm probably going to stop playing Black Ops soon...
I'd like to remind you that this DLC adds 5 maps and one zombie map, nothing story-based.Ephraim J. Witchwood said:Alon Shechter said:Oh look, 15$.
Well, that's another DLC from Activision that I will ignore and deny its existence.daywalker1776 said:$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.archvile93 said:$15 huh? I may be a fan of CoD, but that's not going to happen.You people annoy me. Not you 4 specifically, but people making that complaint. It's only $5 over the basic $10 DLC, quit whining.JemothSkarii said:What? Black Ops DLC!? ZO-...Oh, $15...my mistake, I'll go get something better with that $15...like booze or food
On Topic. If I liked Black Ops, I might buy it. Some of my friends probably will, though.