PDA

View Full Version : 800 Pts, 3 or 4 Maps?


Destro
04-04-2009, 06:36 AM
I was reading a review of the snowblind map pack of GOW2 on the website and that the reviewer was kind of happy it was 4 maps for 800 pts, even if 2 are recycle...So is it just me or the standard have been 4 maps for that price originally. And i think its fine, 200 pts per map, if you play the game enought its good. There is only 2 game that comes to mind that do 3 maps for that price, Halo, and the other GOW2 for only 1 pack.

Personally i think 3 maps only for that price is outrageous, not that there is so much of a big difference between 600 and 800, but thats for the principle of it. If they continue like that, we could get 2 maps for 800 pts...

I downloaded Snowblind, since Fuel Depot is GOW's best Map and i never played the other recycled since i didn't yet pley GOW PC, but im curently boycotting the other map pack with 3 maps, especially considering GOW2 is far far away from the original GOW, but thats another story.

On halo, they lowed the price to 600 for the last pack, wich i tought was now ok, and i hope they gonna do it for Gears. Or i don't know, give a free map, to balance.

What you people think about that?

roy1751
04-04-2009, 11:17 AM
There are too many stupid people out there buying overpriced DLC for us people who examine the value of what we're getting for our money to make any difference. Although there has been an uptick in threads like yours on the various forums so maybe there is hope.

X monkfish69 X
04-04-2009, 11:29 AM
There are too many stupid people out there buying overpriced DLC for us people who examine the value of what we're getting for our money to make any difference. Although there has been an uptick in threads like yours on the various forums so maybe there is hope.

I agree.

If people didn't all go out and buy the DLC straight away then people might sit back and take notice. But when the DLC sells 1000's of copies in the frist few minutes of release etc, then people will think the prices being charged are ok.

Ultimately though Microsoft has the last say on what is being charged for the content, so the buck stops with them. If they dont take notice, then things will continue as they have done...

Waggaz
04-04-2009, 11:35 AM
yeh i agree wit post 1

Deadly Moves
04-04-2009, 11:44 AM
Yeah i was boycotting the Combustible Pack. But the other week i bought a 1000 MSP pack. and when i entered the code it said it was 2100. :) so i thought i'd spend my extra points on the Combustible Pack

Pheonix_Assassin
04-04-2009, 01:09 PM
Overpriced DLC Fail =[ Make It Free =]

Elit3 m0nkey
04-04-2009, 01:31 PM
Overpriced DLC Fail =[ Make It Free =]


Not all DLC will be free. Sure you get the odd thing but generally it will cost money. Remember that the companies have to make money inorder to pay for the extra money spent on making the DLC. Some comapnies can do more free DLC because of all the DLC they release (Harmonix and Neversoft are 2 examples).

InkedUp
04-04-2009, 02:02 PM
I agree that some dlc is just to expensive, but as long as I get some new achievements out of it I usually don't complain about it. The GoW team really figured out how to stick it to you this time out though. You can get the achievements for reaching lvl's 5,15, and 25 but to get the lvl 50 and 100 achievements you HAVE to have the Snowblind map pack

Deviant_Thug
04-04-2009, 11:13 PM
Three new maps costing 800 mp isn't too bad if you spend 20+ hours on them, but for a 3 hour addition (Fable 2, Fallout 3)...

Crimson Ridley
04-04-2009, 11:15 PM
TBH I don't give a crap about how many maps you get, I buy DLC for Achievements only. Operation Anchorage lasted about an hour, I knew it would, but I wanted the 100g.

Before anyone has a go at me for being like that, keep in mind, it's my money and I'll do whatever the hell I want with it. :p

jason86586
04-04-2009, 11:35 PM
Well i will only buy maps packs if i know i will play that games multiplayer a lot in the future. I was a bit hesitant with the snowblind because of gears 2 disappointing multiplayer but i got it anyway cause i believed in the new ranking system and hoped it would get better

Evil Demon55
04-04-2009, 11:40 PM
Should be cheap, we bought the game! I also thought DLC achievements were 250, not 100/125/150 BS!

DLC achievements sshould be 400-600MSP, and should come with 250GS!!!!

Destro
04-05-2009, 06:32 AM
It seem Microsoft is going for games over 1250 now, wich is not that bad in a way, i wish Oblivion for exemple had more achievements, since the game is so huge.

But its more about the way of being just MAPS, not even new stuff in the game, but just a location. I mean, if they had new story, new characters, or stuff like that in an expension of a story mode, im willing to pay more since they work there asses.

But i feel maps are like "cheap way of getting money" Remember the tony hawk serie? You could built your own skate park, and even if creating a new map is more complex than that for EPIC, i still think 15$ for 3 damn maps is way overpriced since i can have a good game for 20$ new, as long as its old.

I taught EPIC was right doing what they did with the GEARS1 pack, making it free a couple months later, but now it seem they go the cheap way and overcharge maps...

Like i say, its much more about price vs what you get. If i buy combustible, i will feel like im paying for achievements, and not really good stuff, and that annoy me.

Blackjaw x
04-05-2009, 06:40 AM
Three new maps costing 800 mp isn't too bad if you spend 20+ hours on them, but for a 3 hour addition (Fable 2, Fallout 3)...

This.

I play so much multiplayer that spending $10 on maps that will give me dozens of hours of more playtime is perfectly fine. Whenever I get a new map pack it makes the game feel brand new again.

Plus, I'm a student without a job and no money and I don't complain about $10. You spend hours a day playing xbox, when 1 hour working could get you that $10. You spend $10 on lunch every day, just bring a sandwich one day and there you've got your maps.

The only DLC I've ever felt ripped off for was Operation: Anchorage, and I love Fallout 3.

dakisbac
04-05-2009, 04:26 PM
I refuse to pay 800 MSP for 3 maps. I always wait until they become free (like the Halo maps do) or get discounted before I get them.

antnie
04-05-2009, 04:51 PM
The halo 3 maps are discounted and I still refuse to buy them.

EmptyApartment
04-05-2009, 06:59 PM
This.

I play so much multiplayer that spending $10 on maps that will give me dozens of hours of more playtime is perfectly fine. Whenever I get a new map pack it makes the game feel brand new again.
.

+1 i agree w/ these guys...i really have no problem payin for $10 for extra maps...they were well worth it for Halo and the time i put in on that

iKiddo
04-05-2009, 07:59 PM
The halo 3 maps are discounted and I still refuse to buy them.

Discounting = Taking cost off.

What they did with Halo 3 maps.

Remove Bungie Pro
Knock cost down 200 points.

Not a discount.

DanTheManGum
04-05-2009, 08:18 PM
There are too many stupid people out there buying overpriced DLC for us people who examine the value of what we're getting for our money to make any difference. Although there has been an uptick in threads like yours on the various forums so maybe there is hope.

Think of this: You buy one new game for about $60. That game has 1000 achievement points attached to it. One thing of DLC is usually $10 and almost all will give you 250 achievement points. So really if you buy a single new game your not looking at value vs. achievement points (which if your on this site you probably care about but not everyone does). So just rent evberything and dont buy DLC :).