Paying $5 for a map, the future is now...

[ThunderTitan]

This is the most depressing thing i heard all week: http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/call-of-duty-t ... 983p1.html

Next they'll start charging for patches...

[Corelanis]

We have been buying maps for a while now and over the years it just doesn't matter to me anymore. At this point I would rather pay to get some extra play time out of a game I own then try to find a new good game to play. I will probably find it funny when they start charging for patches but at least then we might get some decent support for the games we buy. I doubt it though. Though now that I think about it new maps used to be free when the players made them wow not only do I now feel old I feel dumb. The future sucks.

[darknessfood]

In Europe you have to pay for the map packs of MW2. We pay €15, we get 3 new maps, and 2 recycled maps from MW1. That's a scam if I were to see one...

[TheUndeadKing]

We pay €15, we get 3 new maps, and 2 recycled maps from MW1. That's a scam if I were to see one...

It's more than a scam, it's highway robbery. You can buy many retail games for that price.

[Ethric]

Just don't buy the maps then.

Paying for patches, I think, is quite another line to cross. There ought to be some hesitation about being the first company to do it (haven't heard of it so far, at least), and it's our job then to make sure any such scheme fails.

[Kalah]

Some companies are now considering releasing games for free, and instead charge for updates, patches etc. The games could be released before they are finished ...

[klaymen]

This is the most depressing thing i heard all week: http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/call-of-duty-t ... 983p1.html

Take Bobby "pay sum moar, gamer scum" Kotick's greed, add some average CoD player's (~14 years old) stupidity and zeal for everything CoD related and you have fine symbiosis. Bobby gets moar moneyz to bath in, 1337 gamers get more pew pew.

While it is sad, it is how it works.

[Ethric]

So it's the parents fault, for giving their brats money to buy with.

Some companies are now considering releasing games for free, and instead charge for updates, patches etc. The games could be released before they are finished ...

Heard about that. The reasoning seems unclear... game updates are presumed impervious to piracy?

[ThunderTitan]

Just don't buy the maps then.

That doesn't actually help when 10 million other people do... (if we only count MW2, which had only 2 map packs so far).

Aren't there any fan made maps available?! Used to be that within 2 months you'd have hundreds of them available for free...

[Humakt]

CoD MW2 map packs have been some of the most sold items in steam for months now.

[Talin_Trollbane]

i stopped paying for a game after Morrowind was released.

although i payed for Eschalon 1-2.

[klaymen]

Aren't there any fan made maps available?! Used to be that within 2 months you'd have hundreds of them available for free...

On Modern Warfare 1 maybe.
Since MW2 has no dedicated servers, then you can't play any custom map, had you created one. IIRC you only have access to the official ones, plus those which you unlock via buying the map packs, thanks to MW2 being more of a console game (matchmaking and stuff).

[Ethric]

Consoles, I knew it! Where's the torch and pitchfork-smiley...

[SoRHunter]

Just don't buy the maps then.

Paying for patches, I think, is quite another line to cross. There ought to be some hesitation about being the first company to do it (haven't heard of it so far, at least), and it's our job then to make sure any such scheme fails.

Paying for stripped content of a game shouldn't be a successful scheme either, but it is comom practise nowadays. How many games are launched and have an expansion pack on the game stores' shelves less than 6 months afterwards? Or what to say about Mass Effect 2 ou Dragon Age: Origins with its stream of constant DLC - shouldn't it be in the 60 EUR/USD game we bought?

Patches are the result of lack of testing in most cases or the players' opinions (balancing issues or better stuff as in the case of the Extreme Edition of The Witcher). Should they ever charge for correcting game stopping bugs the Pandora's box will finally be open.

Some companies are now considering releasing games for free, and instead charge for updates, patches etc. The games could be released before they are finished ...

Doesn't it happen nowadays? How many games are rushed to be launched - movies' tie-ins and the rush of the Christmas season just popped in my head...

So it's the parents fault, for giving their brats money to buy with.

Some companies are now considering releasing games for free, and instead charge for updates, patches etc. The games could be released before they are finished ...

Heard about that. The reasoning seems unclear... game updates are presumed impervious to piracy?

The reasoning is very clear - first, a game's company need not expend money on the distribution channel - get it by peer-to-peer and it doesn't even need that much bandwidth distributing the main game. Afterwards, people will buy anything to get an edge over their peers - even if some of it be pirated, if the game is widespread enough, it will make a profit - see the business model of Zynga games on Facebook (even though its development costs are low): give the game to millions and scores of thousands will buy something; get some sort of online verification and ban the pirates (or cheaters like STEAM does). Join it with in-game advertising and it's a win-win situation for the studios.

[Ethric]

That presumes an online game; any singleplayer game or part of game can be cracked to play just fine without online verification or components. And I'm sure the online games/parts of games can be too.

And game patching is perfectly legitimate and proper up to a point, as no amount of testing can find and fix every single issue. Rushed games requireing more patches and, if they get patched, never getting truly finished/fixed is not new. That releasing half a game for free and charging for pieces of it-scheme is daft.