BiG_Weasel

I download it the instant it goes up and listen to it Wed and Thursday on my drive to/from work. To me, its like a rush hour radio talk show, but with profanity and games talk. Plus, Brad's from the next town over, so I'm supporting "local guys" by listening (hey, Brad- I still think Bojangles seasoned fries beat out their Botato Rounds!). I have noticed, and mentioned before, that when Ryan's gone, and Jeff takes the reigns, the podcast is usually an hour shorter and more focused on talking points.

I think I may buy in. Steam has it for $7.49 this weekend.

It comes down to a matter of value for me. The games don't justify the price. I think once the "affordable bundles" they're touting hit for Christmas, if they're reasonably priced/packaged, the Vita will get the boost it needs. More Vitas sold= more developer interest in making games for it= everyone wins. I'll definitely be interested in the Assassin's Creed bundle, if its priced well.

I went raptor. Give me the quick death and get it over with.

Just checking to see where the offical "This is my Steam ID- add me as a friend" thread is. I know there is one, but damn if I can find it. Anyone got a link? Feel free to lock/delete this afterwards.

I think if you can draw in, and keep, a loyal clientele while generating revenue and new content, then you're successful. Gotta give the players what they want- fun with their friends. Everything else beyond that is gravy.

I just got a new Logitech G800 gaming mouse, so I'll be playing with setting up hotkeys and one-button macros so I jump right in on the 25th.

F2P should also not be confused with "pay to win (P2W)". I'm a big supporter of F2P games that *are not* pay-to-win, namely Guild Wars 2 and the like. F2P games generally rely on microtransactions to cover their costs. When these are items that unbalance the game, or create two classes of player (pay-for-power games, and regular Joes) then I start having issues. Convenience and cosmetic items, which do not unbalance the power structure of the player base are perfectly acceptable, and are becoming more the norm. P2W, as most gamers know it, is almost exclusively found in Eastern Asian (mostly Korean) developed MMOs. I think once MMO players get over the mental "hump" of F2P not equaling "pay to win", then we'll really see the subscription model go away.

Out of the four, I think that Brad actually "gets" MMOs better than the others. Vinny doesn't play them, and Ryan has a general feel for them. Jeff, based on what I've heard him say, likes the concept, but I don't think he has the time/patience to stick with a game for very long. In his defense, he plays a lot of games, too, and can't devote time to an MMO like we can. Who wants to bring work home with them, anyway? MMOs are not a sprint, like most other games- they're a marathon. They typically reward players for time invested. I am glad, though, that they acknowledged "pay to win" vs "cosmetic/convenience items" in terms of the two styles of F2P games. Thinking "play to win" is synonymous with F2P is a big misconception that people have with most of these games, and I think that a little public service announcement like that goes a long way.

The thing about it is, once a person (or their lawyer) wins a case against one of the publishers for an infringement, a legal precedent will be set, and all subsequent cases will be judged from that viewpoint. What this means, is that the first winning lawsuit gets a windfall, and sets up future lawsuits to reap that same windfall, instead of a lump-sum settlement being doled out for all who opt-in on the class action. This could actually spell bigger trouble for these publishers.