Call Of Duty: Black Ops- First Strike Review (RunDLC)

Activision made a killing with Modern Warfare 2 DLC, so it made sense for the publisher to release downloadable content for its latest cash cow, Call of Duty: Black Ops. The new update, First Strike, adds four competitive multiplayer maps, plus a new Zombie board. As expected, the pack costs 1200 Microsoft Points/$15, but the overall quality makes coughing up the dough a bit easier to swallow.

Chris Buffa (RunDLC)

[lugia 4000]

For 800 ms I would give it a 4/5
But for 1200ms I would give it a 2/5
Price does change something.

These guys are hilarious they gave the same score to this shitty map pack and vietnam
http://n4g.com/news/666313/...

[Pixelated_Army]

FFUUUU Treyarch/Activision!

[RAVEN81]

thank god i trade cod black oops in yesterday

[SpitFireAce85]

Right on price should be a factor..but sadly
most gamers don't see it that way...:(

[just_looken]

under 10hrs a review? yeah...and this: “but the overall quality makes coughing up the dough a bit easier to swallow.” for $15 you can get full games that are better than the dlc

[TKCMuzzer]

It comes to something when DLC map packs reach a price where sites are reviewing them. Their just maps.

[Inside_out]

Great looking and playing maps...thank-u Treyarch for caring enough about the zombie players to include the awesome ascension map.

Aren't you kids embarrassed yet to keep complaining about something YOU DON'T HAVE TO BUY!!! Nobody is forcing you guys to buy anything and you guys act like it's the end of the world...it's $15...O_o

[lugia 4000]

I know, but some people are smarter and get them for free with the second controller method. People upload the maps with their registered account, and upload the profile that downloaded the maps. And all I need is 2 controllers. Enjoy spending your money on overpriced maps including a copy pasted campaign map.

its 15$.
Ok, coming from your mouth, you already spent:
15$x2 on the MW2 map pack
and 15$ on this one.
Don´t you think you could afford 2 old games that are better than this. Or a brand new one? Get a brain.

[Echo307]

Can people get off the price comparisons, please? It's ridiculous to compare DLC to games.

It's like saying, it's stupid to spend 2 grand on a new set of wheels for my car because I can buy a different used car for the same price. Hey genius, did it ever occur to you that maybe I don't WANT a new car? Maybe I just want to make what I have better.

Same situations with map packs; I love CoD and I want new maps to play on a game I love. It's $15 that I voluntarily spend and no is forced to do otherwise.

If you think it's a waste of money, fine. But an even bigger waste than that is you wasting your time by trolling an article and insulting people over a product you're not even interested in.

[xstation79]

Damn dude I see you in all the call of duty aritcles talking shit. Don't you have anything better to do?

[distorted_reality]

The problem with DLC in an MP environment is that it has the potential to split the community, and that is one reason why gamers should be against paid map packs. If other companies can offer continual free content, why can't others?

Answer - greed. Plain and simple.

[Echo307]

It's not that simple. I know it probably seems that way, but it's not. If every game publisher honestly thought they could sell their packs for $15 a pop and make tons of money without driving away their customers, they would. Activision makes their maps so expensive because they know people will pay for them.

Battlefield's community (on consoles) is not as strong as the CoD community is. And every publisher gets something out of their DLC. No one does it out of the kindness of their heart anymore. In the case of CoD vs Battlefield, EA simply chose to combat used games sales by creating the VIP deal instead of charging outright for all their packs. And of the 7 'VIP' packs we got, we actually only received 4 brand new maps (for $15 if you bought the game used, vs $15 for 5 maps on CoD). The rest were just regurgitated from other games modes. It's a shame so many gamers were actually fooled in to thinking they were getting such a great deal.

Also, don't forget that CoD shipped with 14 maps (and MW2 shipped with 16), and BC2 only shipped with 8. Granted, BC2's maps were much larger, but even still, a single map is a single map. They have the same look and feel, regardless of how big they are.

And even if EA really did say, "you know what, we want to give something back to the community for free, so we're going to give these VIP map packs away out of the goodness of our heart if you buy the game new," this is the same company that just posted yet another multi-million dollar loss for Q3 of 2010. I'm all for free stuff, but I want to see more Battlefield games in the future, so please, EA, do whatever it takes to stay afloat. Even if it means charging more for DLC.

Regarding your claim about splitting the community, this is something CoD will never have to worry about. Millions of people play Black Ops every day. There will always be people to play with that have the same map loadout as you.

[Burning_Finger]

God. I hope not a lot of people would buy this s**t. People should stop supporting activition and teach them a lesson to stop f***ing with consumers.

[Hufandpuf]

More games should follow DICE's method. They made BF:1943 a full DLC game for $15! Vietnam comes out, 5 new maps, new era, new weapons, and new vehicles: Only $15!

Black Ops comes out and charges $15 for only 5 maps.
Halo charges $15 for 3 maps
MW2 charges $15 for 5 maps, 2 are remakes.

PS. Dice has never charged for Map Packs 1-7

[Echo307]

Just to clarify, Halo maps were 3 for $10, but I agree with you about Battlefield. Their packs are great value.

[Echo307]

Double post, sorry.