Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

[woodyear99]

Strictly speaking this is normal for console games, DLC is pretty much the norm, it will only be exclusive temporarily as well. Haven't you bought DLC for other games?

[Arcmanov]

...ahm, I'm talking about the PC version, where it has always been free.  Remember CODs 1, 2, and 4?  Remember those?
Free 'DLC'.  You can thank M$ sucking IW big fat d!@k for this current trend of wanting to charge money for every little s#!t.


Not that I bought it or anything, but oh F@CK it man, throw gamers a bone nah.  All tha money done made, and STILL
they wanna wring every last dollar from you.  F@CK that!!!

[woodyear99]

I don't have it for PC, only playing it on PS3 these days.

[ViCe]

LOL @ PNM spin doctors
arc yuh ain easy nah

Strictly speaking this is normal for console games, DLC is pretty much the norm, it will only be exclusive temporarily as well. Haven't you bought DLC for other games?

yea woody it only exclusive for 30 days too LOL
M$ pay money for a 30-day timed exclusive lol

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/microsoft-clarifies-mod-war-2-dlc-deal

[TriniXaeno]

lol @ spin doctors

Arc on a rampage yes. I say he woulda lose steam in 2010 but the man going strong in his love/hate bromance with IW.

[W1nTry]

lol @ spin doctors

Arc on a rampage yes. I say he woulda lose steam in 2010 but the man going strong in his love/hate bromance with IW.

Which is just to show that he's still 'hurt' by IW actions and WANTS BADLY for MW2 to have all the things MW and previous versions had XD. His other 'HOSSes' must not be keeping him occupied enough to stay away from the IW fail XD

[Spazosaurus]

Im hoping for about 5 maps.

[Arcmanov]

Ok, I'll admit it...I have a MW2 tabanca, but it aint intense enough to make me buy it.

...and I have to echo Blu_Vice's sentiments.  All that money M$ shell out, for only 30 days exclisivity?

On another note though, the 'classic maps' part of the DLC is to be totally Xbox 360 exclusive.

I dunno, you release a game multiplatform, and then only jump on one side when it comes to the DLC?  I know its 'just business', but something about that just seems unethical, but then, ethics don't write checks. 

[woodyear99]

Ah it's all about exclusivity no matter how short. Think about it, when you are buying a system if both PS3 and 360 are pretty close getting content earlier on one platform may sway your decision. This is even more powerful when you see early content coming out for titles you actually plan on purchasing. This strategy will be used to push xbox 360 sales.

[Berzerk]

dunno if this was posted before

http://www.destructoid.com/ea-plans-to-launch-a-strong-attack-on-call-of-duty-159883.phtml

Arc this is for you.

"In March we will launch Battlefield: Bad Company 2, which is our first strong attack on Call Of Duty," boasts European boss Jens Uwe Intat. "The shooter space is one we don't want to give up. It's an important genre and we were the number one. So we are certainly working on how we can get that crown back and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is an important product in that context.

[W1nTry]

As good as BF BC2 will be and I do HOPE it is better than MW2, I was never a big fan of the massive maps and Large player numbers. Honestly I get frustrated when on a small team with little-poor communication, so on a MASSIVE map with 10-20-30 ppl and everyone just running around like headless chickens it PISSES ME OFF. Either way i'll be getting BC2 since yuh could never go wrong with more GOOD options.

[woodyear99]

Ah it's all about exclusivity no matter how short. Think about it, when you are buying a system if both PS3 and 360 are pretty close getting content earlier on one platform may sway your decision. This is even more powerful when you see early content coming out for titles you actually plan on purchasing. This strategy will be used to push xbox 360 sales.

lol, sorry bro, that ent cutting it, is just 1 month and there will be no way to justify the money they put out as there is no way to verify if this DLC thing made people buy the game.
 30 days exclusivity could never influence the decision of any informed adult (as the game is for mature audiences) on this product as it is now post release. Had it been a brand new game just about to launch then yeah, it would have mattered a lot! But seeing as they got so many sales already, the main factor affecting people with more than 1 platform is probably gonna be based on what their friends are playing.
You are a gamer interested in online play and you have a 360 and a PS3, on each platform you have 20 friends on your buddy list. Of the 20 on XBL 5 have MW2; of the 20 on PSN all 20 have MW2... now you are about to buy MW2 and you see this 30 day thing telling you that the 360 gamers alone getting this, but only for 30 days: do you think this will be a more important factor for your purchase than what the people on your friend list playing?
IW outsmart MS with that one, the 360 versions of the game would have sold regardless of the DLC being available on one platform before the others.

I didn't mean that people will choose the 360 over ps3 just because of one exclusive DLC. You are right with individuals wanting to play with friends on their respective systems. My point is that there are still some that are buying a 360/PS3 for the first time, having exclusive DLC is one way of swaying people to your platform, and while a 30 day exclusive may not seem like a big deal if more titles get similar treatment with 360 getting it first you can be sure that this will sway some people.
Take me for instance if I was a first time buyer of either a ps3 or 360 it would be a very hard choice short of buying both consoles/games, reason being I have a bunch of friends on either system. Both systems have their merits and getting content first would be a draw to some people where their budgets are limited from buying both.

[TheApprentice]

I've been readin the forums and usually ps3 gamers complain alot when Microsoft gets exclusivity for something, but alot seem really happy lol
MAG, Heavy Rain, God of War 3 amongst other exclusives for PS3 are incoming.
That 30 days is nothing though that ethics point is so true.
 

[W1nTry]

'Ethics' is nothing more than an opinion, a human conceptualization of what they define and right and wrong. MS $$$ suggest it's right and ethical, those who are bitter at the idea that one PAYING customer should get early access to a 'feature' are just not getting paid. If MS was paying YOU, you'd shut ur mouth and know ur role XD.

If early releases are an 'ethical' debacle then why are exclusive titles like GOW3 and MGS ok? why shouldn't all developers be REQUIRED to release on all platforms. It's NOT PRACTICAL is 1 easy and obvious answer or you make more on a particular platform perhaps? regardless of the definitive reason this 30 days exclusivity is NOTHING to even piss in the wind about.

[TheApprentice]

I don't think that exclusive titles is an issue of ethics.
There's too much reasoning behind a game being exclusive, i.e., in-house developers, budgets, experience.
Its never been an ethical issue where people are offended because a game isn't released on their console.
They wish it was...but simply this point is pretty silly.

The ethics in this is that the game has been released on 3 platforms yet the developer due to a suspect paid agreement with Microsoft chooses to release dlc on one platform, then release some of that dlc on the other platforms 30days after.
In my "opinion" a developer should release dlc for all the platforms there game is on simultaneously. It just seems so silly that you give to a platform this small time of exclusivity. But as its known money talks.

Anyway... I'm not "pissing in the wind" about this. I'll be playing MW2 as I have been playing during that period along with other games.

[W1nTry]

And who's to say MS didn't pay for the extra DLC for the 360? Meaning if I as the console manufacturer, think that my supporters would appreciate certain 'extras' and I decide to PAY the game developer to add certain extras, why should the developer let the other platforms benefit from MY expenditure? If I go to Intel and say i'm willing to aid ur R&D and pay upfront in return for early release (*cough* Apple *cough) and access to your tech isn't that me paying for a service?

When did paying for a service or item or anything for that matter become a crime? I am trying to differentiate my product, what's wrong with me paying more money to do that?

(i'm no MS picketer mind you, I just trying to be devil's advocate).

[Redlum08]

But also, Xbox Live is not FREE like PSN, so....paying $50.00 a year should come with certain perks like early release on DLC...don't ya think?

[TheApprentice]

No no...you all have valid points yes.
Just like premium Live, premium PSN (Qore) has its perks also (BF2BC beta etc.)

I'm not making an issue of where Microsoft should not get what they paid for.
I'm simply stating a simple opinion....not trying to argue anything.
I'm just saying basically, everyone who buys a particular game REGARDLESS of platform should at least enjoy all of that game's content.
Its like buying Modern Warfare 2.1, and you get Modern Warfare 2.2 on another console.

Its just plain damn stupid that someone owns the PC or PS3 version of any game but some "paid" dlc is only available on another platform or for some limited time even.
Why can't that point of view be understood.

Yes MIcrosoft paid money as they always do for these things...and yes they should get what they paid for but thats not the point.
I'm just voicing that I don't like that. Thats all. So stop justifying it :|

[woodyear99]

Ah well enough talk, goin to play some modern warfare 2.

[Arcmanov]

But also, Xbox Live is not FREE like PSN, so....paying $50.00 a year should come with certain perks like early release on DLC...don't ya think?

I am at pains to find fault with this, but still, I don't have to like it.