Xbox Live Games with Gold for October 2015

There is no need to argue it, it happens all the time. Lots of people drop out after season one. And new people join. And TWD was not called Season 1 until AFTER it sold well and a second season was created. Making it exactly what you compared it to, a stand alone game with an unplanned sequel.

Originally Posted by futiles

Like I said, I'm sure you can claim it stands alone, but unless the following seasons are completely unrelated to the first, you're inclined to "subscribe" to the series to see it through. It's wonderful from a business perspective, but I'm simply not a fan of the practice as a gamer and consumer.

Like I said, I'm sure you can claim it stands alone, but unless the following seasons are completely unrelated to the first, you're inclined to "subscribe" to the series to see it through. It's wonderful from a business perspective, but I'm simply not a fan of the practice as a gamer and consumer.

Originally Posted by Obsidian Tides

I call bullshit. Especially since the Halo and Assassin's Creed they gave were SEQUELS. Assassin's Creed being part of a 3 Story Arc, and yet you said those were OK. Just admit you were bitching to bitch.

This is why we can't have nice and or free things.

Kind of obnoxious that they make episodic games free; they just want to get you hooked so you'll end up buying the rest.

Originally Posted by Obsidian Tides

So by this logic no one should ever play any games, because they just want to get you hooked so you'll end up buying all future sequels, announced or not. It's like they have some evil plan to produce a sustainable product and attempt to make money off of all those suckers that don't know any better than to keep all their money to themselves.

I bet they got the idea from those free sample guys at the warehouse stores. Dumbass people don't realize you can get a full day's meal if you just put on a few extra shirts before going in.

I see by your game history you've fallen for this several times in the past. Now that you know better and will avoid all new games, what will you do with your time?

Apples to oranges, futiles. A planned trilogy (I'm assuming you meant Halo, but it's not really important) with substantial gameplay and multiplayer doesn't compare to a pay-by-the-ep story that you happen to use a controller for. I'd be happy to explain my reasoning more in-depth since you seem to think I'm just being cynical. Contact me on Live if you like.

Hotdog, you'll have to explain what you mean about game history.

My first post was really just a comment on the strange road games have taken as far as what we're willing to pay for, and even what constitutes a game. I'd think that some of you, being old enough to have seen this evolution for yourselves, would be more aware of all the change that has taken place in the industry, both good and bad. I didn't expect you to read into it so much, so I hope you don't take offense. Free is free, play what you want.

Apples to oranges, futiles. A planned trilogy (I'm assuming you meant Halo, but it's not really important) with substantial gameplay and multiplayer doesn't compare to a pay-by-the-ep story that you happen to use a controller for. I'd be happy to explain my reasoning more in-depth since you seem to think I'm just being cynical. Contact me on Live if you like.

Hotdog, you'll have to explain what you mean about game history.

My first post was really just a comment on the strange road games have taken as far as what we're willing to pay for, and even what constitutes a game. I'd think that some of you, being old enough to have seen this evolution for yourselves, would be more aware of all the change that has taken place in the industry, both good and bad. I didn't expect you to read into it so much, so I hope you don't take offense. Free is free, play what you want.

Originally Posted by Obsidian Tides

Nope, Assassin's Creed (Halo was not a planned trilogy from day one, it became that, then a trilogy with 4 parts...). The Ezio trilogy was planned as three from day one, and they gave you the middle game. You are being cynical, and are struggling like hell to look like you aren't. Point-and-clicks are as old as any video game mechanic, and a game that over-all costs half as much as a "retail" game (Worst case scenario, someone spent $30 on TWD Season 1, and got over 6 hours of gameplay - not everyone plays MP, so, a game like CoD is only a 6 hour game for me, but, I don't give shit when Gears or Halo are the GwG), and gives the same amount of gameplay as many others, and you knock it because you don't approve of the delivery method? But, I'm done. I've called you out on your bullshit. I've proven your bullshit.

AC is a fairly poor example because it represents another negative trend that has come about due to the growth of games: the yearly installments. While 2 improved on nearly every aspect of 1, the property quickly became a cash cow for Ubi that needed regular milking. Although there have been some solid ideas within specific games of the series, most of them have visibly suffered from lack of polish due to the quick turnaround.

It's funny you mention point and click, because I was just thinking about how games like Monkey Island or Myst would be received or even delivered if they had come out today. Interesting to consider.
To follow that train of thought, how would the you of yesteryear perceive the practices of the modern game industry? While you'd undoubtedly approve of the benefits of things like online connectivity that have allowed for instant game updates and post-release content, I doubt you'd have imagined the extent of nickle-and-dime tactics that currently pervade many (though not all) facets of gaming. Even if the gradual acclimation has allowed your current self to accept concepts like season passes, RNG cash-shops, or "episodic" content, I suspect your past self would have quite a few questions, to say the least.
You're a sharp guy, so I'm surprised you're so vehement over an issue like this. If we pretend one of our favorite hobbies is without flaws, how can we expect to improve it?

AC is a fairly poor example because it represents another negative trend that has come about due to the growth of games: the yearly installments. While 2 improved on nearly every aspect of 1, the property quickly became a cash cow for Ubi that needed regular milking. Although there have been some solid ideas within specific games of the series, most of them have visibly suffered from lack of polish due to the quick turnaround.

It's funny you mention point and click, because I was just thinking about how games like Monkey Island or Myst would be received or even delivered if they had come out today. Interesting to consider.
To follow that train of thought, how would the you of yesteryear perceive the practices of the modern game industry? While you'd undoubtedly approve of the benefits of things like online connectivity that have allowed for instant game updates and post-release content, I doubt you'd have imagined the extent of nickle-and-dime tactics that currently pervade many (though not all) facets of gaming. Even if the gradual acclimation has allowed your current self to accept concepts like season passes, RNG cash-shops, or "episodic" content, I suspect your past self would have quite a few questions, to say the least.
You're a sharp guy, so I'm surprised you're so vehement over an issue like this. If we pretend one of our favorite hobbies is without flaws, how can we expect to improve it?

Originally Posted by Obsidian Tides

The flaw in your logic is, I'm not nickel-&-dime'd. I spend less now than I did 5 years ago, and even less than I did 10. I have never let what you describe happen. If I like a game, and want more content, I buy it. If I don't, I don't. Me of yesteryear, and me of today, LOVES change. I long for it. Stagnation is death. The first DLC on the original Xbox, content for Splinter Cell, my initial reaction was "FUCK YEAH! Give me more." Later, horse armor for Oblivion. "FUCKING RIGHT!" Multiplayer maps add-on for whatever shooter. "No thanks, I'm good" "Oh, it adds achievements? Well, why didn't you say that before? But, no, I'm still good." In fact, I see the shooter as the problem, with "substantial gameplay and multiplayer" as where more people spend their money. And worse, the freemium. The iOS rash of the gaming world. The herpes of the mobile gamer, that the console gamer kissed during a breakout, and is now stuck with forever.

Episodic, no issue (in fact, I like the agile method put into place in games, quicker turn-around), if it is a good story, and I like the price, I will pay. Otherwise, I pass. But, I have willpower and standards, unlike the crack-whore gamer you describe, that gets the free hit off the free game crack pipe, and is in the back alley the next week scoring the next 1000 gamerscore.

But none of that matters, because it all started with you bitching about something free. And that is disgusting.

Seriously, this is why we can't have nice things. What a gaping vagina. Just admit you're bitching for the sake of bitching because you like to bitch, and are too dense to realize that your bullshit is just that.

Seriously, this is why we can't have nice things. What a gaping vagina. Just admit you're bitching for the sake of bitching because you like to bitch, and are too dense to realize that your bullshit is just that.

Originally Posted by Dacoto

Why does a discussion about games on a forum made for it bother you?

The flaw in your logic is, I'm not nickel-&-dime'd. I spend less now than I did 5 years ago, and even less than I did 10. I have never let what you describe happen. If I like a game, and want more content, I buy it. If I don't, I don't. Me of yesteryear, and me of today, LOVES change. I long for it. Stagnation is death. The first DLC on the original Xbox, content for Splinter Cell, my initial reaction was "FUCK YEAH! Give me more." Later, horse armor for Oblivion. "FUCKING RIGHT!" Multiplayer maps add-on for whatever shooter. "No thanks, I'm good" "Oh, it adds achievements? Well, why didn't you say that before? But, no, I'm still good." In fact, I see the shooter as the problem, with "substantial gameplay and multiplayer" as where more people spend their money. And worse, the freemium. The iOS rash of the gaming world. The herpes of the mobile gamer, that the console gamer kissed during a breakout, and is now stuck with forever.

Episodic, no issue (in fact, I like the agile method put into place in games, quicker turn-around), if it is a good story, and I like the price, I will pay. Otherwise, I pass. But, I have willpower and standards, unlike the crack-whore gamer you describe, that gets the free hit off the free game crack pipe, and is in the back alley the next week scoring the next 1000 gamerscore.

But none of that matters, because it all started with you bitching about something free. And that is disgusting.

Originally Posted by futiles

It doesn't really matter if you are nickel-and-dime'd personally, but it's good that you realize there are many trends which exist to do so. That's what I'm getting at. I didn't even touch on the social/mobile gaming side, but it's another great example for you to bring up. Ideas like paying more so that you don't have to wait to play are pretty ridiculous when you think about it, and I don't think we would have seen this coming years ago.
As I said, making the game free makes sense from the business side. It's been out long enough that the single free episode that they've already done in the past isn't enough, and they are better served by simply drawing more people into the series. Completely understandable. It's not that I care if it's free or not, I'd just rather see something else get one of the coveted spots instead. I don't think there's anything unreasonable about that.

I want to go on the record as the only person who loves horse armor and didn't think it was overpriced.

Everyone else can keep complaining that people make video games to make money.

I want to go on the record as the only person who loves horse armor and didn't think it was overpriced.

Everyone else can keep complaining that people make video games to make money.

Originally Posted by Kaens

I just said I liked the horse armor...

Horse armor was pretty funny, we really had no idea what to do with DLC yet, let alone how much to price it. It might have become a running joke, but it was an important landmark.

Bethesda/Oblivion, not only the first to charge for DLC, but the first to gain permission to add achievements. Each major DLC, they asked to add to the achievement list, and MS said no. For Shivering Isles, they basically said more achievements or not on Xbox. And MS said OK, but, let's put some on Halo and Gears, too...

Not a great month for GWG, at least PS plus is good