Map Packs

[Last Bullet]

After browsing through the Brink forums, I found a thread about the amount of maps that would be available upon release. (No one was sure) But a few replies in, people began mentioning looking forward to map packs. Not just more maps, or an addition campaign arc, like the Left 4 Dead series. But solely maps, which they pay for, like Modern Warfare 2. It felt like something hit me over the head.

Maybe it's because Valve has spoiled me. Maybe it's because I'm a tightfisted bastard when it comes to purchasing... anything. Maybe it's because I'm used to the availability of mods and user-created content on the PC. Maybe it's because I think of Brink as a co-op campaign game -- I hadn't even considered deathmatch and such -- so a map pack defeated the purpose of the game. But this just sort of blew my mind.

So, folks, the discussion. What are your thoughts on paying for map packs? Is there a certain price/map-amount ratio that makes it acceptable? Do you buy them the moment they pop up? Wait for them to get a massive sale, or they all are released together (via GOTY or something)? Or do you just avoid purchasing DLC altogether?

 

[Ironic Pirate]

Less than a dollar per map.

Problem is, it fucks up the map cycling process.

And I haven't ever bought one, but not due to any inherent objection.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

The only DLC i've ever bought or had a part in purchasing is the DLC for Dragon Age: Origins. All of which are very exciting to play.

 

[Dr. HeatSync]

As someone who did actually both both map packs for MW2 for the PC, (although I would say over-priced) I like the idea of each map being professionally reviewed and play-tested to fit with the game. If this means I have to pay a bit for a well designed map, I don't see much of a problem.

 

[XT inc]

I loathe it as it feels like a cop out. They always seem to have these bundles out uber fast and for allot of cash. I honestly paid for reach with the money I saved mostly with the money I saved not buying MW2 map packs, 2400 ms points canadian is like 40$ with tax.

Me personally maps aren't the content I go for. Guns, mods, modes, vehicles, character add ons are all awesome. You bundle me the black ops map pack that has 5 maps to be bundled with like 6 new guns or new character mods then I might buy it for 4-800 ms. you step into that 20$ aka new used game for me range. You would have to blow my fucking mind to get me to hit yes.

 

[Outright Villainy]

I don't really like map packs either. Like you, I guess you can say I've been spoiled. And with something like the MW2 map packs making you pay for maps they had in the last game, it felt like a kick in the teeth. I don't want to get kicked in the teeth, thanks.

 

[Tharwen]

I see no reason to buy more maps for a game I already own when I could get a good game on Steam for the same price. Simples!

 

[DazZ.]

I like the idea of each map being professionally reviewed and play-tested to fit with the game. If this means I have to pay a bit for a well designed map, I don't see much of a problem.

But that has been free for over 10 years, why would we start paying now?

It's fucking stupid, and I'll never buy an FPS that will lock you out of doing what you want with it let alone buy a map pack.

 

[Iwata]

If I buy a DLC, it'd damn better offer something more interesting than some shitty map...

 

[Dr. HeatSync]

I like the idea of each map being professionally reviewed and play-tested to fit with the game. If this means I have to pay a bit for a well designed map, I don't see much of a problem.

But that has been free for over 10 years, why would we start paying now?

It's fucking stupid, and I'll never buy an FPS that will lock you out of doing what you want with it let alone buy a map pack.

In other words, you expect it to be free because some bloke way back in 1996 did it for free. Now with a large team of artists and designers working at a developing studio that have to craft the map to a level of professional quality, I don't see why I shouldn't pay. If the map has been crafted professionally to ensure that it is not broken and fun to play, then I feel they should be paid for that effort.

This ignorance of the game industry is not exactly enlightening, and I think we're past an age where you can do whatever you want with a FPS just because Quake and Unreal may have depended a lot on user content. Developers have every right to say what you can and can't do with their game and if they want for people to play as they intend, they will do that, and if it means they feel that creating new maps means a price tag, I see no reason to make them work for free.

 

[DazZ.]

I like the idea of each map being professionally reviewed and play-tested to fit with the game. If this means I have to pay a bit for a well designed map, I don't see much of a problem.

But that has been free for over 10 years, why would we start paying now?

It's fucking stupid, and I'll never buy an FPS that will lock you out of doing what you want with it let alone buy a map pack.

In other words, you expect it to be free because some bloke way back in 1996 did it for free.

Not just "way back when", TF2 release maps for free that aren't made by the community, granted 90% have been made and then tweaked by devs when released into the main TF2, but others were made by the dev team.

Developers have every right to say what you can and can't do with their game and if they want for people to play as they intend

And I "have the right" not to buy it, and I won't because I find it fucking stupid. The way they limit the content available for more money makes for a much weaker experience just so they can pump out another game quicker.

I'd prefer to (and will) buy titles that have a solid game base, that is bought buy a community and that is good enough to last because people like it enough to put their own time into expanding on it, the community giving themselves what they want, not what they're told they want.

I wouldn't mind so much if they just sold map packs, but it's what they take away at the same time as giving you the option to pay money for them that makes the consumer suffer, it's wonderful from a business stand point, but as a customer it sucks.

If that makes me ignorant then ignorance is fucking bliss.

 

[Midnight Crossroads]

It's fine as long as the developers use a little bit of sense when they implement them. Treyarch fails map packs forever with how they handled WaW on Xbox Live.

Let me explain: I purchased an Xbox, a gold membership, and CoD:WaW. For months I played that game no problem online, then Treyarch released map packs. They cost me money. No problem, you say, just don't go to those maps? Well, that doesn't work. In fact, they're forced onto the rotation. So, every other match, I'm kicked from the server for not buying Treyarch's map packs. Join another server, you say? Problem, Xbox Live doesn't care what server they throw a person on. I get put back into the same server four or five times in a row. If I'm exaggerating, it's because I lost count after five times of being kicked. Vote the maps down? Oh, why didn't I think of that? Oh, I did. The next map was also DLC. Kick for me.

Compare that to MW on the PC and the free maps I get?

Yeah, fuck Treyarch.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not sure I have a hard price point. If I loved a game enough, I might (and I emphasise might) pay the MW2 price point, but I wouldn't do it for just any game, and especially not for one that there would be a new iteration out in a year or so.

 

[nYuknYuknYuk]

MW2 DLC was 15$, but 2 of them were COD4 maps, so there were only 2 or 3 new maps. that's like 5 or 7 dollars per map.

World at War DLC had 3 or 4 new maps and a new zombie map, which is huge because in the original game there is only one zombie map. 15$ as well.

So I don't have a hard price point, it basically the content per dollar. I also bought some Dragon Age DLC and it was a waste of money. Took me like an hour to finish it. And there goes my 15$.

 

[Infinatex]

Love it! I bought both MW2 packs and I was not disappointed. Pricing really depends on just how much you play the game. If you are going to log 600+hrs into online then $20 for a map pack is not a big deal.

 

[Worgen]

eff map packs, I come from pc gaming and when it comes down too it users can make maps that are just as good as most devs and they dont try and squeeze your balls for you to use them

 

[thom_cat_]

well I'm a mapper for Tf2, L4D and CSS myself. So I don't see the point at all.
User created content FTW!

 

[masseyguy911]

Eh, I don't bother with map packs anymore. I do buy some DLC, like the DLC for Mass Effect and Dragon Age, but NOT map packs.
I don't see the point in paying $10 just for some new maps.

 

[Hiphophippo]

Maybe I'm just old school, but the idea of paying for maps in a FPS is laughable at best.

 

[Ertol]

I don't buy DLC or map packs very often, if ever. If it was so important to the game then it should have been included in the game. I'm not paying another ten bucks for something that dosen't add a lot to the overall story. If it was so important, it should have been placed in the game in the first place.