It turns out that the Xbox Live downloadable maps for Return to Castle Wolfenstein weren't downloaded at all - the download just unlocked content that was already on the disc. If we cared about Wolfenstein would you feel ripped off?

unitdaisy: I don't understand the big deal - so what if it's already on your disc? You paid for the original concept game which is already on the disc and this is extra material that is only available to those that have Xbox Live.

peccaui: I think that it's fair - cheap, really fucking cheap of them but fair. I can understand those that feel burned, and perhaps once they finally open up the other three maps they make may some 'real downloadable' content. But yeah, I'd feel a bit burned.

unitdaisy: The only reason I can understand people being upset is if the supposedly downloadable maps are taking up space on the disc that could have been spent on the main game - but if that's just extra space, why not put the downloads there? If they had sacrifice some detail in the game to make room for the maps then they aren't being true to the game. And anyways, wouldn't you rather download a key than a large file?

peccaui: The main point is that downloadable content is viewed as content to sustain the game's value after it has been released - in this case, the maps were created before the game was released. It's a cheap gimmick.

unitdaisy: I don't think it's a bad thing if they created something they felt was an addition to the gameat the same time as the main part of the game and wanted to release it later. So what if they didn't work on it after the release?

peccaui: I think most users would want to have the extra maps on the CD open to them when they buy the game - if they have to wait longer for the new, really downloadable maps to be released, they won't mind. Hell, even if they had just slapped the maps together previously and released them as real downloads and not unlockables this wouldn't have turned into as nasty of a PR event as it has turned into.

A recent article from MSNBC speculated that the price point for console games will rise now that PC games have gone over the coveted $50 mark. Do you think they know what they're talking about?

peccaui: Personally no, I highly doubt that many console games will break the $50 price tag. For as long as I can remember, and even before that games have been $50. And while some of the hardcore PC gamers are willing to shell out $60 for NeverWinter Nights, the majority of console gamers are not. $49.95 looks a hell of a lot more reasonable than $59.95 doesn't it? I think it was a slow news day in the MSNBC offices and nothing more.

unitdaisy: I think it's about time that the price of console games started dropping.

peccaui: Well both Sony and Nintendo have taken steps to start dropping prices - most of Sony's first party software is now priced at $39.95 and Nintendo has struck deals with some third parties to release games at $39.95 as well. I think they're referring to larger games that they know they can milk, because they know the fanboys will not be persuaded just by an extra $10.

unitdaisy: Since the console gaming market is back on the rise, they can't expect your average casual gamer to pay $50 for a game that he's going to play occassionally. So if they want to reach that market, they have to lower their prices.

peccaui: Right - and if the console makers want gaming to truely go mainstream they will have to cater to that price point. $60 is just too much and something like the X-box's lackluster Platinum line isn't going to hook them.

Nintendo has announed that they will be unveiling a 3D effects chip for the GBA, basically on par with the FX chip that powered old SNES games like Starfox. Thoughts?

peccaui: I think it stinks of desperation - to combat the hype of the PSP Nintendo is literally falling back on the same tricks they did with the SNES. Do I think this will improve some games? Certainly - but hyping it like this makes Nintendo look really weak in my eyes.

unitdaisy:I don't see any reason why they shouldn't hype a new development when they have one - the GBA is huge, this will effect a huge number of gamers - it could be exciting for them.

peccaui: Nintendo is going to have to move smarter and faster if they want to compete with Sony, especially when more details start surfacing about the PSP - this move just looks to me like they're running scared and trying to create more interest. Like I said, I do agree that in the end the customer will win however 3D gaming is not the appeal of the GBA. Perhaps some developers will be able to push interest into 3D games, but I just don't know.

unitdaisy: I think Nintendo is just making improvements on a popular product and they know that after the GBA SP that users aren't ready to buy another new GameBoy yet so this is a way to improve the system without forcing them to buy a new box.

peccaui: And I think they're going to need more than this. Who even knows when the games that utilize this chip will see the light of day?

unitdaisy: Who knows - when Sony releases the PSP, Nintendo might have an entirely new GameBoy out.

peccaui: We can only dream.