COD 3 maps for 800 MS points

[carocat]

Name: Call of Duty 3 Valor Map Pack
Price: 800 Points
Dash Details: Five all-new Call of Duty 3 multiplayer maps for online, split-screen, and System Link play! Battle it out in abandoned prison camp in Stalag 23. Engage in epic house-to-house fighting in a rural French village in La Bourgade. Navigate the battered warehouses and naval machinery of an oceanfront shipyard in Ironclad. Launch an all-out assault across a battleground choke point in The Crossing. Take cover in the thick trees and overgrowth of a mountaintop listening post in Wildwood
Major Nelson (http://www.majornelson.com/archive/2007/01/18/call-of-duty-3-valor-map-pack.aspx)

Don't run off downloading it though, it seems that there are issues already:
Well folks... it has been a crazy and hectic day, and we are continuing to work towards a solution through the night. We've made some progress through cooperation with Microsoft. We had hoped to resolve the technical issues with the map pack by the end of the day today, but it looks like that will not happen.

We do know that the package posted to Marketplace this morning is not valid and will not work with the game, so deleting the old file through the system blade of the dashboard will at least put users a step ahead when the new package goes live.

I realize that this is disappointing news - I assure you that we are doing everything that we can to resolve this as soon as possible. Please hang with us as we work through this, and stay tuned for further updates.
Official xbox.com forums (http://forums.xbox.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=9720092)

So what do you think? Are 5 new maps worth 800 points?

[Jedi Minds UK]

Nope, They shoud be give free like in GOW.

After all we have already forked out the money for the game.
If it was an expansion pack like for the PC well that a diffrent story.

[Addict 74]

Nope, They shoud be give free like in GOW.

After all we have already forked out the money for the game.
If it was an expansion pack like for the PC well that a diffrent story.


Wasn't the new maps for GoW sponsored by the Discovery Channel?

I understand what you are saying and yes you have paid for the game, but you paid for the single and multiplayer game which is included on the disc. I think most people that play any sort of game like this would want extra maps after a while in order to prolong the multiplayer experience. It will cost the developers time and money to create them, so why should they not be allowed to charge for them?

I'm not defending the price point, but if you are going to get the play out of the maps, is

[Jedi Minds UK]

Multiplay maps are that hard to program the disk data for a map is not much in deveopment the game engine is already there. These map can be producted buy a simple programme. ( Just look at the Map building tool you get with most pc games.)

I feel that if a developer add something new to the game then thay have are wright to charge. A map is not changing the game in anyway is just adding a level to the existing game (no new weapons etc ).

I will now not Play COD3 as much as the i not forking out extra money on levels that i think should be give to the players free.

[BlueHoopedMoose]

Multiplay maps are[sic] that hard to program the disk data for a map is not much in deveopment the game engine is already there. These map can be producted buy a simple programme. ( Just look at the Map building tool you get with most pc games.)

I feel that if a developer add something new to the game then thay have are wright to charge. A map is not changing the game in anyway is just adding a level to the existing game (no new weapons etc ).

I will now not Play COD3 as much as the i not forking out extra money on levels that i think should be give to the players free.

*swoosh* <- the sound of your sweeping statement

Map Editors may be available for PC games but that doesn't mean the developers have the same toolset at hand for their particular product. Think about - they would have to develop the Editor first and that costs time.

What makes a good map "good" is the balance - that is something that the developers work hard to achieve. Their time isn't cheap (especially when you consider they have new games to develop) so I can see why maps aren't free.

[sub]

"These map can be produced by a simple program"

It takes so much more work than simply using a program, you have to design the map (usually fully on paper first), then build the map geometry, then texture it (creating textures where needed), light the map, compile the map, leak test the map and then fix them, then playtest the map extensively to find choke points and gameplay problems, then go and fix them, leak test again, playtest again, it takes a lot of work to design a single map.

Sure getting them for free would be nice, but I'll pay a few hundred points if its a game I like playing, like Vegas I'd gladly pay 800 points for 5 or so multiplayer maps.

[kurosaki7]

*swoosh* <- the sound of your sweeping statement

lol, exactly even if they do have a good toolset to reproduce maps as moose says its all in the design and how to use those assets which takes time and money. As for the new GoW maps well im less than impressed with those so its a good job they were free/got sponsored.

I remember building maps using the UT tools and although they were very helpful and fairly easy to use to create a map that worked took 'alot' of hard work and planning, where do you put the redeemer on the map? :)

That said you still do have to look fairly closely to see how much work has gone into it and if it does indeed justify the price, i would say if you played COD alot and were getting plenty of hours play out of the maps then

[Liam]

I dont think its worth it. They should be free...

[Addict 74]

I dont think its worth it. They should be free...

Because?, please backup your statement, it adds a bit more to the discussion!

[DayC]

Because?, please backup your statement, it adds a bit more to the discussion!

I'll back it up for him.

[Addict 74]

We have just been discussing that!

[Liam]

Because?, please backup your statement, it adds a bit more to the discussion!

Well, people pay

[DayC]

[QUOTE=Liam;4581]Well, people pay

[Liam]

they're greedy b*****ds .


Language. I believe its pronounced "bar stewards" or is it "bar stools"? :eek:

[Jedi Minds UK]

Where will it stop.
Look at the Playstation 3 models their are going to release GT4 with the basic course and cars.
After that you have to download tracks and cars at extra cost. All the tracks and car will cost more than the

[Xg Corkin]

Call of Duty 5 new maps are back up on the marketplace for download. Im downloading them now. :cool:

[BlueHoopedMoose]

[QUOTE=DayC;4591]

[Chet Webley]

yeah, extra content is fine, as long as it's 'extra', not just some lame attempt to pad out a not-quite-finished game. i do find the romantic view that some people on here have of the games industry quite amusing - they exist to make money, dewds. it's all about the bottom line, and there aren't many companies better than m$ at squeezing a couple of extra dollars out of your squeaky fist....

.... a couple of m$ space-bucks here, a bit of DLC there. it all adds up. the thing is, do you accept it and carry on, or do you find an alternative?

episodic content is the way forward, guys - how many developers have you heard mention it over the last couple of years? how many developers do you think will be able to continually invest millions of dollars into games that they won't see any pay back on for 3 or 4 years?

i say bring it on. producing smaller chunks of games, regularly spaced at lower prices with less investment will allow smaller independent studios to make games that won't be "pop-music".

i'd rather that than just have EA games.......