@snide: As an non-subscriber, this decision seems totally fair, and I really respect the way you've gone out and explained the rationale behind what you're doing. :)
As someone who bought a yearly subscription, I thought I was paying so they could make the content we all love and never have the word 'monetize' appear.
I don't think you can pay for something that is already free. It's the difference between paying for a product/service and donation. With donation there is no obligation for the recipient to keep on going. It's charity. By introducing the idea that you're paying for additional features (which you are therefore entitled to) as well as supporting the site, it has lead to a confusion where people feel entitled to what they're giving out for free. That doesn't follow. And it's a problem that's come out of them conflating the ideas of supporting something and paying for something.
It's CoD with limited super powers and a little parkour. I know that sounds awesome, but it really didn't impress me. The map design was clearly quite good, though.
I think my problem is that it plays exactly nothing like Crysis. Maybe because it's the multiplayer and you're using a joypad instead of mouse and keyboard, but it didn't strike me as anything special.
@MichaelBach: Strictly speaking, you're only paying for the additional extras you get with being a premium member. You are no more entitled to the podcast than a free member. Remember, they tried to split the podcast in two, attempting to monetise it, and because the backlash was so great they were unable to do it without risk of alienating their user base. If they had succeeded, you may have had a case.
As it stands, justifying the amount of time spent on the podcast, if they can't identify the ROI, must be problematic for them.
I've never understood the staff's opinion about the Bombcast and Endurance Runs being a waste of time when it is their most popular content on the site. Next we'll hear about how Quick Looks are too complicated to set up. I just don't get it, I really don't. "
I remember them talking about this before. Honestly, I think it's because they don't know a way to monetise it or measure return on investment from it. Additionally, two hours plus a week (plus editing on top) for a very high quality podcast is likely a strain on them.
Also, I really loved the Vinny and Brad sketch. For a moment there I thought it was genuine. The funniest way for this to end, though, would be if the NintenDownload X-press was cancelled after only three shows. Just my 2cs.
@Slaker117: I think that earlier on in the campaign you're right, but towards the end where you've got Exodus and The Package I think it's too much. Especially with the way the checkpointing is laid out.
I don't know about Heroic, but Legendary is simply an endurance test. It's not about skill. It is about having the patience of a Dalai Lama and cheesing your way through by exploiting the deficiencies in AI, check-pointing and level design. It's just shit.
I love the Tested podcast and videos, but the articles either really appeal to me or just don't interest me at all. What I'd prefer to see is a more subjective take on things rather than articles that just explain what a thing is/does, or how to do a thing. I don't mean do a Techcrunch and write flame-bait, but I like the other Tested stuff because it's precisely Norm, Will and Gary's opinion. Although how-tos are occasionally relevant to me, what is always relevant, and unique about Tested specifically, is their personal verdict on a piece of tech or news. Plainly speaking, I think Will and Norm should capitalise on their immense experience and start writing more of what they think of something. I follow the writings of people, not websites.
Log in to comment