Halo: Reach Multiplayer Expands With New DLC
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
Well I did fall down the stairs this morning tripping over the cat. Sorry, 3 - 4 per pack, some of them were free.ohgodalex said:
I may cough up the points. I still have a lot left over in my account after the small mass effect dlc spending spree I had. While having only three maps in it seems kinda cheap I'm honestly more interested in the new forge possiblities. I love messing with forge world and every new map to mess with is a good one to me.
After Halo 3 required you to download the map packs to play ranked games, I decided to drop the series...
And lo and behold, more downloadable map packs.
I just don't want to keep spending money after I've bought the game.
I mean, I shell out money for the Xbox console.
Then I have to pay for live.
I have to buy the game.
And now I have to upgrade the game to be able to use more of its features.
True, some game DLCs aren't required and you could do without them, but I have a feeling that Bungie enjoys withholding features to those who don't consantly give them money.
That is why I don't own Reach.
And lo and behold, more downloadable map packs.
I just don't want to keep spending money after I've bought the game.
I mean, I shell out money for the Xbox console.
Then I have to pay for live.
I have to buy the game.
And now I have to upgrade the game to be able to use more of its features.
True, some game DLCs aren't required and you could do without them, but I have a feeling that Bungie enjoys withholding features to those who don't consantly give them money.
That is why I don't own Reach.
I hope this new invasion map is good because to two so far are starting to get boring. It would be nice if new unlockable Armour comes with the dlc.
9-12 months? That seems a little long...The Long Road said:
Also I have never gottten why people complain aboout DLC. If you dont like it when they do it DONT BY IT. That more than anything will get the companys to change it if enough people particepate. Complaing on the net will get nothing changed.
'tis a shame.imnotparanoid said:I dont have live so rarley use multiplayer.Chrono212 said:But I like single player DLCimnotparanoid said:
OT: Anchor 9 kinda looks like one of the MAC Cannon stations from Halo 2 that you start out on, or is that just me?
I used to avoid multiplayer but I think that if I didn't on Reach then I would have felt riped off :/
...and when you've milked them all...C95J said:
KEEP ON MILKIN'
I just have a predisposition towards DLC; paid full price, now im paying more...
*sigh* i won't be buying it, but it means ill be left out of all this fun, that really should have been included.
On a general-Escapist note, I think they recently made a video about a idea to change game sales so that they include DLC (which then doesnt make it DLC, really...)
It was 3 per map pack. ALL of them, were 800 microsft points. The only map that wasen't part of a pack was cold storage and that was free.SalamanderJoe said:
Lol, the map packs Bungie put out for Halo3 were all 3 maps for 800 points as well. If you want to complain about something, complain about getting milked roughly the sum total of $15 dollars for 3 maps in CoD:MW2...oh wait, thats right, there were 5 maps in those packs, but two were fucking copy pasted from CoD4 with a slight graphical update. I realize this was a bit off topic, but the point is don't complain about Bungie charging 800 points for 3 maps(and maps that are original mind you, not ripped almost straight from the single player like CoD's) when there are other companies out there that are charging more for less.TelHybrid said:
aaaand that's why I didn't buy the Halo 3 map packs. It's a shame the community are dumb enough to pay stupid amounts for so little which encourages companies to pull this shit.VegetaPrinceofSaiyans said:
In regards to MW2, I complain about that shit all the time. 1200 points for 3 new maps is fucking bollocks, but that doesn't make what Bungie/M$ are doing any better to be honest. You can compare a small turd to a big turd, but at the end of the day, it's still a DLC turd.
That is pretty soon, which is even more reasoning as to why I'm glad that I simply rented Reach. It would be literally the only game that I would play on Live, so I haven't subscribed for years now, making it more of an overpriced teases of uselessness to me. However, ~800 MS points has been the going rate for many map packs from what I can recall of my past Live experience. The punch to the groin is how few of maps there are in general for these DLC packs when the full game is $60, has a campaign mode, co-op, firefight, unlockables, and 8 multiplayer maps that can be fiddled with in Forge. To its credit, at least Reach offers quite a bit for Live subscribers[footnote]As a Perma-Silver, the single player warrants little more than a rental in my view[/footnote], in contrast to generic shooter C that has just the campaign and multiplayer maps.
I look at the cost relationship between full games and the DLC and I find that there is often a disparity in what you feel like you're getting for ten or so dollars. Then again, some people pay out an extra $10 for a video documentary and a fancy booklet, so at least maps add actual game content.
I look at the cost relationship between full games and the DLC and I find that there is often a disparity in what you feel like you're getting for ten or so dollars. Then again, some people pay out an extra $10 for a video documentary and a fancy booklet, so at least maps add actual game content.