Thank god, I was starting to wonder when the first DLC will drop. Hopefully it will be a lot better since it's taking so long to release.

These maps look good, so does the gun! :')

The only reason I would but the DLC is for the new guns.

O-O Is it just me, or does containment resemble showdown from Cod 4??

Just you I think lol. Showdown was less natural, and didn't have any trees or sand.

Prim Does maverick AR and Sniper Rifle mean 2 guns?

Yeah, seems likely that it would mean that

Prim Does maverick AR and Sniper Rifle mean 2 guns?

That is probably what it means. They wouldn't mix an assault rifle with a sniper.

Prim Does maverick AR and Sniper Rifle mean 2 guns?

Im sure it does, would be weird if it isnt

Does maverick AR and Sniper Rifle mean 2 guns?

ODST

ODST

Cyimking

ODST I'm sorry but when putting more content, such as "new" weapons, becomes "bonus" content as part of a DLC, that's when DLC has gone too far. It's like developers of CoD (both 3Arc and IW (also ravencrap and smeldgehammer)) are pretending to be good guys for adding in more than the original 4 new maps for CoD and extra for whatever the other game type is (extinction/ special ops/ zombies). You can't say that these DLCs weren't already thought of before the game even released nor can you justify that $15 worth of maps and a "bonus weapon" are worth the value given. DLC is a gimmick and shouldn't be a part of any game unless it comes from the developers well after release and with thoughts from the community so that it draws a community back, not to dump more and more "value" into their games.

Well majority of game developers have DLC's ideas before the game is released. This is due to the fact that they have to focus on making the overall project complete for adding in their ideas. Majority of the time, devs do not include some maps because it doesn't relate to the overall game OR they do not have time to build it up. Same for weapons.

Lastly, every game does this (or the major games; GTA V, Fallout / Elder Scrolls, Assassin's Creed, etc... So do not say that this is a gimmick because it's Call of Duty.

Thanks for the feedback. I see what you're saying but still, DLC should be more of what the community wants rather than a continuation of the story line (Dead Space 3), A re-skinned "return" of a map from previous games that was still saved from files (CoD BO2 etc.), or a pre-planned already in development during the real game (Battlefield: China Rising). I feel like I'm paying $60 for a game that is half-a$sed or money grabbing just so that way I can either compete online or finish the actual game.

Battlefield Bad Co. 1 felt like the last true game I played where no-DLC was needed and it was all around beautiful. The storyline was hilarious and great, the multiplayer was fun, and there was a balance that everyone could find in the game. Bad Co.2 apparently expanded on this but only multiplayer wise which was great (Vietnam DLC excluded).

Don't forget how also DLC can cause for imbalances and unfair advantages to other players (BF3: Close Quarters DLC). In the BF3 DLC, two snipers made huge names for themselves, one that had absolutely no bullet drop across any map and another that was a rapid firing, semi-auto, sniper rifle that killed in 1-2 shots at all ranges. People who owned the CQC DLC could get the weapons and dominate normal servers and destroy most other people.

DLC is a problem to gaming society and should be rejected by the community as a whole. This goes for season passes as well (due to more "exclusives" for paying for all the DLC right there and then with the possibility of never even playing 1 or 2 of the DLCs because of other new releases)

TL:DR DLC sucks and should be stopped by the community as a whole.

Negative on stopping DLC. No DLC means once the game is complete devs will start on a new project and since people like to play a game a lot for the first week or so... the game will quickly become boring. Why pay $60 to play a game for 1 month, get bored, and trade it in for $20? Waste of money and time. DLC is important to us now. Imaging if Fallout didn't include DLC or if COD didn't have DLC for COD 4...

For DLC causing imbalance and unfair gameplay... it's no different from websites offering premium to it's members. TTG offers a chat system that will benefit it's gold members. Is it unfair to not give this feature to non gold members? Yes. Would people get GOLD if all premium features will offered to non gold members? No.

Same idea applies to games like BF. Since BF is still not a popular game like COD it have to offer special awards to those who pay or else they wouldn't pay for premium. I mean people pay for premium on COD if they only promised a badge that says "Premium". Games like BF can not do that. They must include a powerful weapon or some unique XP boost.

WAW_ISO_HOSTER Looks legit to me pretty cool hope that dates right tho xD

It's been confirmed already that the first DLC will drop on the 28th, so yes this is correct.