Why do you assume they wouldn't consider this? I think that's ridiculous. If this were to happen I can bet they will give everyone a "trial" period before purchasing the "pass". That gives you X amount of time to decide if you want to pay to unlock this game's online content.

Or OnLive would die off entirely. I don't see this effecting consumers as much as it sounds like it would. You buy a new game, insert the disc (it knows it's a new copy) and you're good to go. Insert a used disc (it knows it's a used game) and prompts to see if you want to unlock the game for X cost.

This could give MS the ability to shake up digital distribution with sales and the like. You are also assuming that you couldn't resell your games. That's untrue. You would just take the hit of the online pass which would mean instead of $12 it would cost you $24.

How do you purpose you share DLC or XBLA games? I think this is an understanding that comes with a digital purchase. This is the way the entire PC game market is with Steam and no one seems to care.

You're thinking too shortsighted. The online pass, that idea, is to cover instances where more and more players are being put into the online servers that haven't bought games new. The cost is to cover the cost those new users to the servers.

It means they are screwed or you could only play their games offline. Honestly, I don't see that as a bad thing. It's an obvious side effect of the online pass regardless.

What are you classifying as out of control?

I don't think they are out of control. Gamestop buys a game back at around $20-25. They sell it for $50-55. None of that money goes to anyone but Gamestop. When a game is sold at retail new, the profits are split between publishers, devs, retailers, MS, and a bunch of other costs.

The problem is that while the used market still exists, devs are forced to charge the higher prices and keep to the same current models and in some cases develop new things like online passes.

I don't think it's more money for MS, it's more money for the devs. Think of it this way, if they could eliminate used game sales entirely (like Steam effectively has done to the PC game market in a sense) you could eliminate the need for paid DLC. I'd happily take that as a trade off considering I never, ever buy…

So would that activation be tied to the console, the GT, both?

I think the point still stands, you get the best guns early in every CoD to keep a level playing field. They've said this over and over again and it hasn't changed for any of the 7-8 games.

If you know about the Kindle Fire, I'm not sure what you are complaining about. The market has set these prices and you are outside the price point for these products. That doesn't mean these products are overpriced.

Kindle Fire $200. The tablet exists. These tablets, the ones in the $500 can and sometimes do replace laptops for those who are buying them. It's the same thing as cheap laptops like netbooks vs. more high-powered ones like macbooks.

Well considering the side-load is essentially a port from the SDK, waiting for the final compiled OS from ASUS (which is coming soon) makes sense. Then again, once that update gets pushed, custom ROMs will follow shortly and you'd be in the same position relatively.

The main goal of any objective gametype is completing the objective. That's the same for both BF3 and CoD, that's how you win. CoD is much more about map control in terms of being able to kill, BF3 would be more about vehicles/equipment/etc outside of kills. Killing in each game is just as easy.

You are just wrong about the AK74u which was unlocked at 17. The FAMAS at 14 and the M16 also a very strong was a starting weapon. All very, very early in the game and easily the best lot of guns to work with. This has been true for every CoD game. They don't put new players at a disadvantage based on weapons.

I would strongly disagree that TF2 is more approachable. There's so much more going on in a TF2 game than in a CoD game. Also, having to land more hits to kill people makes it harder to actually kill people. One of the easiest things about CoD is that it's so easy to kill people that anyone can do it.

BF3 has the exact same issues as CoD. Minus jets. People act like you don't get points for doing things like that in CoD, like K/d is the only thing that matters. You don't get points for that stuff in TDM, but any objective gametype you can play and go negative and still win.

It's not just MW3, every CoD gives you essentially the best gun in the game without having to unlock anything.