Shorty11857 said:
kjj4t9rdad said: I don't mind paying for DLC if the original game came with an acceptable amount of content and the DLC is priced right. In MW2's case it did not come with an acceptable amount of content and the price of the DLC is a slap in the face to all gamers. |
3 game modes, a decent length campaign, and a lot of different multiplayer game modes, a good dozen or so maps with the entire 360 disc filled is not enough content these days?
|
Yes, exactly. It has only 16 muli-player maps. It only has 4 hours of single player game play. If you want more maps they cost 15 for 5 mapswhich is essentialy 3 bucks a map. Eventually no servers will have the older maps or only 1 or 2 of the old ones, and you will lose your ability to play the game without investing another 15 bucks. This does not at all constitute as a complete game in any way to me. This is a game whipped together in 5 or less months with primary goal to be nothing but milking money from poor schlubs who don't know any better.
Imagine if you had to pay 3 dollars for every new map on let's say Quake 3, UT3, Counter Strike: Source, Half Life 2, S.T.A.L.K.E.R or even Crysis. All of these games would have failed miserably.
So no, if a game only has a small amount of maps then offers only a few more at a rediculous price, and to top it off only has little to no single player in it, it is not worth 60 bucks. There should have been a map creation kit that come with the game so you can create your own maps and not be forced to buy map packs are rediculous prices just to extend gameplay that is getting boring because it is just recycling tired maps. At least doing this, there is the ability to extend the life of the game without overcharging for crap.
What's next. A 10 dollar rifle that increases accuracy over the top gun by only 0.25%?