DarkidRising

God, people are being typically defensive in response to this topic. Certainly, you (the poster) go off-topic somewhat, but there is a legitimate point being raised here. Sadly, the responders seem more interested in defending God-knows-what than actually attempting constructive discussion.  DLC IS a business maneuver to tempt further money from the consumer and should be placed under scrutiny. Furthermore, games are becoming increasingly bland and uniform and we, as the consumer, should hold companies accountable and demand more from them. For instance, the shocking amount of terrible Kinect-enabled tripe shown at the MS conference. If we, the consumer, do not stand up against this then the very shape of gaming could alter beyond any form we currently enjoy. So, all those having a rage-fit over this guy's choice of topic should calm down and become more discerning and considerate.

love sf3 and all but... no 16:9 support (from the look of the thing) and that horrible visual ' enhancement' (which will hopefully be turn-offable) make this less than tempting

Not trying to put people off getting this as I love the game.
 
However, as a proud owner of the original Xbox version, I noticed that the HD re-release appeared to be more 4:3 than 16:9 / 10 when I played it in 1920 x 1080 (1080p) settings on my widescreen monitor, despite the image filling the entire screen.
 
To elaborate, the original version of BG&E featured a forced widescreen / letterbox image which meant that, even if played on a non-widescreen TV, you were still provided with a widescreen view. This is something that those people who might play Xbox 360 games on a non-widescreen TV / monitor may be familiar with if they have adjusted their display settings from Widescreen to Normal - the 360 displays games in a forced widescreen / letterbox image.
 
However, despite this re-release running on a widescreen monitor at 1080p, the image seemed to lack the horizontal width of the original, and the vertical width also appeared slightly enlarged or stretched. Forever the geeky nerd, I whipped out my dusty Xbox and the original BG&E and did a compare and contrast only to find that I was correct in my assumption - the re-release offers a lesser horizontal viewing angle than the original! 
 
Now, I can only assume that this is simply a case of the game not being true 1080p, and that in order to fill the screen the image is altered. However, I could not shake off the irk I felt. So I knocked my display settings down to 1280 x 1024 and knocked the Xbox 360 from Widescreen into Normal settings. 
 
Upon re-booting the game, I now found myself presented with a letterbox view but the full widescreen experience I had with the original. Not only this, but the graphics look just as sharp and the subtitles are smaller and less intrusive whilst the text appears crisper.
 
So, the issue was fixed and I have ended up with the same viewing experience as provided by the original. However, it cannot but bug me that this HD re-release isn't properly configured to run widescreen on a widescreen monitor without me sacrificing screen real estate to get the effect.
 
Anyone know why this is?

loved Q3 back in the day, and Quake Live is sweet. Quake 3 was (and in many ways still is) the fastest and purest example of a Deathmatch FPS. The Xbox version, however, feels like a lazy port ... no concession has been made for playing with a controller - feels like how FPS games used to be on consoles before Halo - just a PC developed title ported over with little thought. Also, considering the stat tracking available with Quake Live, I'm surprised at its apparent absence in this game... there's no player profile page to view W/L, K/D ratios or how many medals you've earnt. 
 
At its core though, Quake Arcade is Quake 3 and Quake 3 is still fun as hell. The game moves at a smooth frame rate as well, so much so that when I returned to Halo Reach after a quick Quake bash I thought something was wrong with Reach - the frame rate seemed so jarringly clunky. But no, that's just modern day FPS games for you, all running at 30fps instead of 60 (that said, I got over it pretty quickly).
 
In many ways Halo is the natural evolution of the Quake 3 formula - more so than Modern Warfare or Battlefield. Its slower, certainly, but that actually benefits the game when played on a controller. If you love Halo and haven't played Quake before you might find Quake Arcade a tad simplistic or you could love it's pure, fast take on what is essentially the same formula. However, if you have the ability to play Quake Live on a PC, then I'd stick with that. If not, and you don't feel my above observations will adversely affect your enjoyment, you should certainly give it a go, even if just to play one of the most influential games of all time :)
 
That said, I'm not getting - I'll stick with Quake Live and Halo Reach.

First things first - I'm a huge fan of Quake 3... at least in memory. Played the feck out of the Dreamcast version of the game. Also played the PC version and can happily concede that it is superior - the weight, speed, inertia etc are all clearly built for mouse and keyboard controls. But then that is what happened 10 plus years ago, before Halo made FPS workable on consoles - developers would port their deathmatch masterpieces over with no re-engineering of the mechanics to suit the 'limitations' of the controller. And we (the players) knew no better. But things have changed since then and we console owners have a wide range of FPS games that are built from the ground up for console use.
 
I mention this as I have been very excited at the news of Quake Arcade Live and have download the demo. I hoped that the game had been configured for console use and am hugely disappointed that absolutely no concession has been made, other than a slight slowing down of the game's speed. This just makes the game feel like a lazy, cheap-ass port and not a legitimate attempt to re-invigorate Quake 3 for the online Xbox masses.
 
Also, there is (from what the demo shows) absolutely no stat-tracking or player profile page... yet again, Deathmatch shooters are ripe with various stats that are interesting to view and Quake Arcade's refusal to provide them further enforces the sense of this being a lazy port, especially when viewed alongside the PC version of Quake Live.
 
Sure, you could argue that this is 'just' an Arcade game and these demands are unfair,  but we're also talking about a port of a 10 plus year old game for a charge of 1200 MSP...
 
What do you guys think?

Had a mate who bought one (the 'cheap' model). Immediately he traded it in for the more expensive model (at a loss of £200!). Saw him the other day and he had it with him, but also his laptop and iphone. Laptop and iphone were in use, ipad wasn't. It just lay there untouched :)

yeah, I noticed it to. Hasn't bugged me too much atm, though initially made me feel a bit 'separate' from the action. But hour in not particularly noticeable  :) I do get your fustrations though - its a bit different but I was bummed by the PGR series dropping from 60fps to 30fps - that took a long time to get over. Overall, I'm pretty impressed with the look of Reach - the skyboxes are absolutely stunning, as are the fog, smoke and particle effects. Art direction in general is pretty sweet. As always, a few iffy textures here and there (when will Bungie to rocks properly?) Personally, I'm more gutted that they have (seemingly) removed the light bloom effect so used in 3. Loved that.