Dvader said:

You know a bad side of me wants to see the big online games go subscription just to see what MS does about people having to pay for Live and then pay another subcription on top of that. I would love to see them address that one.

If I lived in an area with mostly uncapped bandwidth I'd be in favor of subscription for annual sports releases/ shooters.  I mean, if you like htem that much (and there is nothing wrong with that) then what's the problem with paying the same or slightly more for continual product throughout the year instead of waiting for all of the changes to hit at once and then have the devloper stuck with not reversing any bad changes until next year (unless they release a money-losing patch).

How would MS deal with that?  Hmmm....  If it became pervasive enough I guess they could switch to even more tiered levels, with a monthly option that would end up costing you more and annual that costs less.  So for gamers who buy into subscriptions they'd go with the yearly model to save money, but regulars could go for the monthly that ends up more ovr 12 months eithout the commitment.

Not perfect, but the basic premise is gtting the same money out of the pool.  

Better idea would be to pay off the publishers -- so you could lower their licensing fees if they give XBLA subscribers a break on th subscriptions.  Or partner them in bundles.  So XBLA Madden package, one year subscription to XBLA with Madden for less than what they would be seperately.  That would be the ticket.

aspro said:

You have not finished UC2?

 Multiplayer, lol. 

aspro said:

^Picks self up off floor, dusts self off...

Okay...

that makes sense.  I was wondering how someone could start that and not finish it.

Hey I'm playing your game Mass Effect.  It's a trip, about an hour into it.  I like the interactive cinemas, they ar flawless (the dialog choices).  Not sure about the rest of it yet.

 Male Shep or female Shep?

ASK_Story said:

Have any of you guys played Wolfenstein yet? Aspro? Archie?

It's pretty good. I'm playing it right now and it's really a solid FPS. The multiplayer sucks though but the single player is real fun.

One thing I really like about the game is how the level progression is structured. It's not a chapter-based type of FPS but each level is progressed through a open-world town.

I like this design. It makes the game feel more immersive.

I'll pick it up based on your testimony -- it's only $23 USD new now.  I played the original of course, and then Return to Castle Wolfenstein on the XB.  That game warded me off the latest iteration.  But I'll pick it up.

ASK_Story said:

aspro said:

I'll pick it up based on your testimony -- it's only $23 USD new now.  I played the original of course, and then Return to Castle Wolfenstein on the XB.  That game warded me off the latest iteration.  But I'll pick it up.

Cool! I think you'll like it. I'm really having a blast with it. Since I really still like WWII shooters, this is kind of like that but with a fantasy twist to it. It's interesting and has a mysterious feel to it, which is kind of cool. It's like a FPS Indiana Jones game!

But don't put your hopes up with the multiplayer. It's HORRIBLE! Terrible graphics, lag, choppy animation, inaccurate hit-boxes...ugh...it's bad. Too bad since it had a lot of potential. I think some other team did the multiplayer while Raven Software focused on the single player. We know that Raven always makes solid games but whoever did the multiplayer really dropped the ball and they weren't qualified to develop it.

Really was a huge missed opportunity.

S'ok, I don't do multiplayer.  I really liked COD2 and 3, so if they added to that with some fantasy I'll be all over it.

aspro said:

I took all the defaults, so male shep. If I knew there was a choice I would have taken female.

 Do yourself a favor and pick up female Shep, you'll thank me later. It's well worth the replaying of one hour of the game. Jennifer Hale's VA is so much better than whoever chump is voicing male Shep it's not even funny.