@colts-500 Oh, I don't know about that. Several debates are circulating around a cost-benefit analysis towards XBL and it competitors. Some writers offer more sophisticated stances than others, but the overall theme has value, imho.

@Gondorei @deathjr96 I understand this shouldn't include full-on expansions packs that are largely a game unto themselves. I just think that MS can cover small add-ons that would otherwise be a small fee on PSN or PC. It would better justify the $60 annual fee.

@deathjr96 For me, the issue is the add-on expenditures. My Xbox Live fee should do a better job of covering the expansions to the games I play. I shouldn't have to pay $60 for a game, $60 for my online status and also pay for dlc content such as weapons and armor in an rpg or expansion maps in a shooter.

@Gelugon_baat @Tripwolf BioWare, Ubisoft and Rare came to mind for me as I wrote my response.

I am confident others can add to that list rather quickly.

Here's to hoping Blizzard stays off it =)

Blizzard's track record is probably as good or better than anyone's, but I have been burned before by studios I thought could be trustworthy.

Lessons learned: Trust no one and never buy a game without consistent critical acclaim