@ProtossRushX: There appears to be a war in the gaming industry. The game developer contracts the musical score to be written and they claim to own it, since the work was under contract (all rights retained by the developer). The musicians seems to be fighting back, saying that is not the standard in the rest of the music industry. And thus, the war rages on.

But going back to my primary point. "IF" copyright and licensing requirements are met, then anyone can play anyone's music. They just can't use it for commercial purposes (i.e., to sell a product) without permission from the owner of the song(s), which may or may not be the actual composer. For example, the Beatles don't own most of their own songs. So, if you perform any song of the Beatles, or a whole album, you are required to pay an appropriate fee through licensing channels (to Sony/ATV). End of story. On this basis, Jeremy can't complain... unless the UK company and Bethesda are not following copyright and licensing laws - perhaps because of the aforementioned war.

As for movies, IF you pay for the right to show a movie (i.e., any TV network, or Netflix, or Crave, etc.), then you can play the whole thing. It's a question of whether the rules are being followed, and right now there may be lack of clarification on the rules in regards to music scored for games.

There is no 1 or 2 songs thing. People and companies are allowed to use a small clip of a song or a movie in promotional materials or in media coverage (without any cost), but there are guidelines. However, if you pay to perform/play the whole thing in a concert (not for commercial use), then you are allowed.

That was my point - IF the laws are followed AND IF licensing payments are made it's all legit... period. It just gets more complicated in the gaming industry (which is why I alluded to the fact that this article is not actually addressing the real issue causing all the problems behind the scenes).

On one hand Jeremy Soule has a very good point, particularly since the score is transcribed. On the other hand, orchestras and various musicians have played music written by others (from movies, TV shows, theatre and Broadway, other games and other sources) for a very long time. A performance doesn't need the original composer to be involved (assuming all copyright issues are properly adhered to). Hey, there are tons of covers of various songs all the time and various tribute bands for pop and rock groups, and these are performed in a multitude of concerts. Also, you don't need Gershwin or Mozart's approval to play their compositions and name the concert accordingly. So, yes, composition and therefore performance quality may lack due to not having access to the actual score (which it would appear Jeremy chooses to keep to himself) and on that note "fans should be careful about what they are getting". But I think Jeremy is over-reacting. Someone else playing your music should be considered an honour (again, assuming all copyright issues are addressed, and he is paid accordingly). Me thinks, Jeremy's reaction has more to do with a perceived slight or a relationship with Bethesda that has gone sour, or perhaps an inflated ego (or all of the above). Please know that I am someone who loves Jeremy's Skyrim score and bought the soundtrack on CD. He created something awesome and ought always to get credit for it, and paid through copyright and licensing channels when others perform it, but he need not be involved or even consulted when others play it. Surely school bands can play his material without having to get his approval. So, the UK sponsored concert is not the real issue. The real issue is behind the scenes and not covered by this article.

This song isn't nearly as bad as GameSpot and others say it is. It may not end up being a classic, but I don't see why it's being trashed. I guess if it's too far away from the original that many have a nostalgic love for, you've done a bad thing. There were those who didn't like the U2 version of the Mission Impossible theme, Well, Taylor Swift did say that haters are gonna hate, and she oughta know. I should also say that i also liked the new Japanese version (separate article), for different reasons. In the end, it's just a movie and just a theme song. Some will like them. some won't. Don't sweat it. Everyone is a little but different. And before you know it, another movie and another song will captivate your attention above all others... kind of sad really, because there are more important things in life.

Titanfall was a decent first game from Respawn, which Jason West and Vince Zampella started up after being exited from Infinity Ward (original creators of COD). It was intense action, great graphics, and included Mechs - all cool and garnering various game industry awards. However, the released product felt somewhat rushed and unfinished, and gameplay became too much of the same thing. There could also be a major disparity between novice or casual players and veteran players. Significant pieces were also missing, though they did add a few bits after the original release. I am hoping that they will have had enough time to develop Titanfall 2 and that it will be robust and have a lot of diversity. The grappling hook is good addition, but I am hoping that other new mechanics will be included, some of which they may not announce until right up to release. Nonetheless, to be a deep and rich game with high replay value, Titanfall 2 needs:

- An Offline Single Player Campaign (rumoured to be included)
- More Maps
- More Gameplay Modes
- More Character Customizations
- More In-game Challenges (i.e., Diablo 3 or Borderlands), or Medals (with rewards)
- More Variety of Guns
- More Special Abilities (for Pilots and Mechs)
- More/Better support for Private matches between Friends (to mimic LAN Parties)
- The ability to summon not just a Mech, but a Turret or a handful of other Vehicles

I wasn't a big fan of the "card" system, but if they don't replace it with in-game challenges, perhaps they can improve on it. Overall, Titanfall 2 has great potential, especially with greater diversity throughout.

NEVER. I have enough patience to wait a bit, so there is NO need to "switch from one console system to another". They all have their pros and cons, and it is shameful that GameSpot would even suggest that such a thing happen. GameSpot should be impartial and true advocates/fans of gaming... PERIOD. As has been said by others, timed exclusives are a travesty, but I doubt there is much we can do if a company such as Sony is willing to spend big bucks to get a month's head-start over the competition. All DVDs and Blu-rays can play on any player regardless of manufacturer. All TV shows can be watched on any TV regardless of manufacturer. All CDs or MP3s can be played on any music player. It is time for the gaming industry to grow up, eliminate exclusives, and allow any gaming hardware to play all games. I have no qualms with PlayStation systems. I do think the last several Nintendo systems have been under-powered and gimmicky, but they have been extremely family friendly and that is worth something. I have all 3 generations of the Xbox. Although there are things I do NOT like about the Xbox One, I am committed to this gaming ecosystem (i.e., Gamertag, Gamerscore, achievements, Xbox Live, other features). I also have limited money, am not a game reviewer, so I will not be buying a PS4 ever. Stop suggesting that I should. Let's celebrate the diversity that different systems bring to the table and stop the sales pitch. At some point the developers and publishers will stop playing these childish games in marketing and realize it is better to get their products on as many machines as possible at the same time - it is to their benefit. WAKE UP GAMERS. The more we fight among ourselves, and allow publishers to jerk our chains like this article describes, the less united we are and the longer they can get away with their shenanigans. I say, let's stop the insanity and celebrate good gaming wherever it is found and over time demand equal access. Stop the fanboy nonsense. Boycott companies that mess with us gamers (consider yourselves forewarned Activision, EA and others).. As gamers, let's support one another, not rip each other apart - otherwise the gaming industry will never REALLY pay attention to us and will never truly mature.

@MODNAR11: I agree with most of what you write. And I am well aware that I fall into a minority with System Link gaming on the Xbox 360. But I wanted to make a point (which Microsoft should pay attention to). Although capitalized only by a minority, it was a unique feature that helped differentiate Xbox consoles, all the more now that PSN is not free. Microsoft missed out on leveraging this as a benefit. I also realize that it adds development and testing time for any game developer, and I tend to think that was the bigger issue (as well as locking people into Xbox Live). I have already begun the slow migration back to PC gaming, but I am not yet convinced that it holds all the answers. We are in a volatile transition period. Some are turning more to mobile games. Some are faithful to their console history. Some are embracing Steam and PC gaming in new ways. But there is more shifting to come. With various Steam boxes and other potential consoles being released (i.e., will rumors of Apple and others getting into the game become reality?), nothing is certain. Less so now than ever before. I think the face of multiplayer gaming will look quite a bit different in 5 years. Where that will be I could not hazard a guess, and that's part of my problem. As a result it makes me realize that the gamefests I've been hosting almost every month for the last 16 years is either going to end or change rather radically. I have already begun the grieving process, because these have been some very good years with tons of fun with excellent friends, and there have been many classic memories.

And so I will adjust as certain things are made more clearer, and I will return back to more PC gaming (where I started before I bought the original Xbox). But gaming on PCs has changed as well. For example you used to be able to play Blizzard games on a LAN. Not anymore (due to pirating, predominantly in South Korea). So many PC games require an Internet connection to a Server to play multiplayer. Not necessarily a difficult thing (I have all the necessary hardware), but it's not peer to peer LAN-based gaming like it used to be.

In the end, I'll just have to find new ways to have gaming fun with my friends, or move on to other things that are just as fun or more so. But I've been a gamer for a long time. I am in my mid 50s, but consider myself young at heart.

Here's hoping the NX is a true gaming machine and not "just" another family friendly jaunt into a parallel universe. If done right it could provide new options for gamers and benefit the industry. Innovation, diversity and providing gamers additional options is almost always a good thing. However, I personally am invested in the Xbox ecosystem (Gamertag, Gamerscore, achievements, exclusive games, Xbox Live, etc.), owning each of the three generation of Xbox consoles I also play PC games, going back to the mid 80s. Nintendo has never been on "my" radar and I doubt the NX will change this. But I wish them every success, because it makes the industry more robust, mature and more diverse.

@MODNAR11: The short answer. Two very important reasons.

1. Not everyone who has an Xbox 360 has a Gold account. Many live on a tight budget and usually only play when we play together.

2. Often guests who don't have a console of their own join in on a borrowed console, or in rare cases (where it is accommodated) double up on a console.

System Link was a throw back to the old LAN party days with PCs, where you didn't have to PAY $$$ to play games together when connected over a local network. Because of pirating, PC games have moved away from this. I could easily come up with 10 benefits to System Link gaming, but perhaps another time. And yes, some of us (a subset who have Gold) have played as a party over Xbox Live or together in the same location connected to the Internet. However, we get larger numbers with System Link and it's a whole lot more fun. I have often borrowed a friend's console to play with my younger nephews and others. Remember, the original Halo didn't need Xbox Live - just 4 consoles connected together to get 16 players having great fun. Those days seem to be forgotten, disregarded, passe.

Last point. In 20 or 30 years when you pull out a couple of Xbox 360s to show your kids or grandkids some "old school" console games, the 360 Servers will no longer be running. You will only be able to play split-screen and over System Link to play any multiplayer. System Link is FREE, doesn't require an Internet connection and works forever (as long as the consoles and games work). Can't say that about Xbox Live, though it is good and has many other benefits.

But as far as the Xbox One, which only a few of my friends have or will get, we have no choice but to do as you are doing.

I'm rather tired of this endless rehash of an old formula. Sure some interesting tweaks are introduced here and there, but three studios on rotation and dedicated to an annual release? Nonetheless, it seems enough people keep buying it. Remember what happened when people got tired of Rock Band and Guitar Hero? I guess not enough are tired yet. However, I must admit that since COD is one of the few titles that has supported System Link on the Xbox 360, it has been a staple for gamefests at my house for years. Too bad System Link is has been abandoned by Microsoft (on Xbox One). Many of you may not care, because you play primarily over Xbox Live. But then, you've never been to a gamefest (particularly at my place) where gaming all in the same space creates a camaraderie that is a LOT harder to reproduce online.

BTW, the article doesn't mention this, but Infinity Ward is the developer created by Jason West and Vince Zampella who started the whole COD phenomenon with the original Call of Duty and Call of Duty 2, who were then cast aside by Activision, but ended up depleting Infinity Ward staff who moved over to their new company Respawn Entertainment (and created Titanfall). To complete Ghosts, Activision had to pull in support to help what remained of Infinity Ward from Sledgehammer Games and a few other studios. Too bad Titanfall wasn't fully fleshed out with more diversity and an off-line campaign, falling short of the hype and the hopes of many. Maybe Respawn will get it right in round two, and not release an incomplete game. I'm rooting for them. Infinity Ward used to be the predominate studio for COD (think Modern Warfare), but they've fallen to third spot after the fall-out. We'll see what they do with Infinite Warfare, but it may only be released on new gen consoles and may not give us anything new at our System Link gamefests. It's such a shame. And it's all beginning to fall apart.

The end of an era draweth nigh, on a number of levels.

This may be the biggest transition for gaming in a long while. PS4 will do quite well. Xbox One will do fine (with fewer units sold). But people just want to play good games and are tired of consoles holding exclusives captive. New options are popping up and Stream has re-energized PC gaming. The future of gaming (regarding platforms) and of Call of Duty and other worn out titles is uncertain. I have an Xbox One and I really miss System Link, among other things. I am anticipating a very different landscape in about 3 years (and I'm not just referring to a PS4.5 or a rumored Xbox One.5). We'll see. But one way or another change is in the air.