alternate

" What the hell? Who are these people in the picture? "

Check out this skin for SSF4 on trashy UK tabloid newspaper site The Sun www.thesun.co.uk 
 
Originally I had a double take on what it even was as it is not branded or click able and the art style is pretty weird.  Loading it in IE (without adblocker) made more sense as an obnoxious video pops up.
 
Also strange they would advertise on such a mainstream site - one that carries game reviews in a dark corner but is pretty disdainful about the whole pastime - while major game sites seem to have been overlooked for ad-bucks.

 http://www.giantbomb.com/forums/general-discussion/30/apb-pricing-revealed/412301/#1

It surprised you the the actor from one film sounded a lot like himself in another film?

via 1up.com
 
 Surprises me they are going monthly fee still - even if it is a touch less than the MMO norm.  I though the game would go for $60 and be free to play personally - then supported by paid expansion and content if it did well.

As explained on the updated ABP FAQ (that title is really kind of awkward when placed directly next to another acronym, isn't it?), the game will cost a standard $49.99 when it's released, and that'll include 50 free hours of "action game play" and unlimited time in the game's social districts for "customizing, socializing and trading in the marketplace." Once those 50 hours are over, there are two payment options: $6.99 for another 20 hours, or $9.99 for an unlimited 30-day pass. Realtime Worlds also promises discounts if players opt for 90 or 180 days, but specific prices for those packages weren't revealed.

Interestingly, there is one other way to get more gameplay time in APB: by earning it in the game itself. The press release states that APB "provides avenues for accomplished gamers or creators to earn rewards for their creativity and subsidize their ongoing costs with their in-game efforts," although it remains vague about how these merit-based game-time rewards are specifically earned.

"We wanted to provide a simple and flexible way for occasional and core players alike to pay for their play without being financially tethered to the game," said creative director Dave Jones in a statement. "The model also provides an opportunity for customers to subsidize their costs by leveraging their talent or market savvy in the 'points' Marketplace. Highly talented players could potentially even play for free in this way."

Despite the promise of potentially being able to play for free, the inclusion of a payment model is an about-face from Realtime World's announcement last year that APB "will not require a monthly subscription." 

" Because people like Jim Sterling and the GB crew are "into it" so naturally people eat it up. "

He only seems to scoop Activison so it seems more likely he has just scored a premo source.  Doing good work though.
 
I think the news blogs do a lot of "journalism".  People don't realise because there is a very high crap content that comes with posting everything and anything newsworthy - the good stuff is often buried - but checkout the attributions of a big site like IGN or Gamespot and see how much they lift direct from kotaku, joystiq, etc.

As has already been said - fair use for promotion is one thing but once you start charging you would have to licence every single piece of content.  Given that GB/WM don't even seem to want to leverage their name for merchandise bucks I can't see them being interested in this.

It makes sense.  They needed someone to do the publishing/marketing for their new IP and as MS only publish exclusives it was going to be either EA partners or a similar deal with Activision.
 
As to Activision - minimal risk for them as a Bungie game is always going to sell and while they prefer to own the whole pie - getting a small slice of a potentially huge pie for just publishing - and taking it away from their competitors - is a no loss proposition.
 
This whole situation surprisingly makes MS look good.  Faced with a rebellious studio that was going to splinter anyway they showed some class by accepting the situation and setting them free rather than having the whole thing self destruct like with IW.

who was the reviewer?