[QUOTE="_koolgirl_"]

Content, whether it be arcade games, maps or whatever ties itself to 2 places.

1. Your gamertag

2. The original console it was downloaded on, not the harddrive, the console itself.

Anyone who uses that specific console can access the content. If your 360 ever gets replaced, only you, the original purchaser can access it.

So yes, you should both be able to use the maps, I've done it with Vegas.

Matter of factly, you can even do this with 2 systems, as long as you have a mem card or recover your gamertag to the other console. That way it is tied to your gamertag, but the other persons console.

brokenfetus

It will only work on two consoles if you transfer the licenses. Stuff that you pay for is tied to your console.

Transfer the licenses?? I have no idea how to do that, have not heard of it. It is tied to the console which it is downloaded onto. Which is why you can use your tag to download it onto someone elses console (this has to be done the FIRST time you download it). I did not mean to imply that you could download it to your own console first and then redownload it to someone elses, it has to be done on the initial download.

[QUOTE="_koolgirl_"]

Content, whether it be arcade games, maps or whatever ties itself to 2 places.

1. Your gamertag

2. The original console it was downloaded on, not the harddrive, the console itself.

Anyone who uses that specific console can access the content. If your 360 ever gets replaced, only you, the original purchaser can access it.

So yes, you should both be able to use the maps, I've done it with Vegas.

Matter of factly, you can even do this with 2 systems, as long as you have a mem card or recover your gamertag to the other console. That way it is tied to your gamertag, but the other persons console.

brokenfetus

It will only work on two consoles if you transfer the licenses. Stuff that you pay for is tied to your console.

Transfer the licenses?? I have no idea how to do that, have not heard of it. It is tied to the console which it is downloaded onto. Which is why you can use your tag to download it onto someone elses console (this has to be done the FIRST time you download it). I did not mean to imply that you could download it to your own console first and then redownload it to someone elses, it has to be done on the initial download.

Content, whether it be arcade games, maps or whatever ties itself to 2 places.

1. Your gamertag

2. The original console it was downloaded on, not the harddrive, the console itself.

Anyone who uses that specific console can access the content. If your 360 ever gets replaced, only you, the original purchaser can access it.

So yes, you should both be able to use the maps, I've done it with Vegas.

Matter of factly, you can even do this with 2 systems, as long as you have a mem card or recover your gamertag to the other console. That way it is tied to your gamertag, but the other persons console.

So lemme get this straight... X360 fans who've owned their system since 2005 have paid on average an extra $150 besides the price of their console unit? And PC and PS3 gamers have paid zero $$$ to the man for online play? Is that right? And the $50 fee continues every single year?

After five years some of you will have paid up to $650 for your XBox 360 and online play fees alone. $850 if it lasts as long as the PS2 will be around. :o

larshaun

It is true but it comes down to value for the money. Anyone (other than PC gamers) , will find the $50 well spent.

PSN may be free BUT, they are just now introducing Trophies?? You have to replay your 2 year old games to get the trophies?

PSN NOW has in game XMB.

PSN has no standards.

XBL launched with standards.

Every single 360 game has achievements, every single LIVE game has voice chat (something neither of the other 2 offer), all 360 LIVE games have Leaderboards etc.

PSN is not as good as LIVE, I don't have to own a PS3 to know that, all I have to do is continue to have several Manticores on my list who would rather play thier multi plat games on LIVE than PSN.

When you pay for XBL, you are paying for a SERVICE. When Sony or Nintendo step up and offer the same kind of SERVICE for free, I'll quit paying.

I apologise for asking this in System Wars, the question could be answered by either system owner and this board gets alot more traffic :)

Can you, or has anyone figured out how to play bowling/darts/pool against someone on your friend's list?

The various locations to do these activites seem to be closed in freemode.

Is it possible????

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

[QUOTE="C_BozkurT_C"]I laugh @ teh lemmingsAlbanian_Killa

lol why? because psn experiences its issues cause it doesn't have enough users, and xbox live cause it has too many? lol thats kind of sad if you think about it, psn issues being not many good online games, and not being able to find players cause there are so few, and the general fact that even though it uses dedicated servers people still experience lag.


To the fact xbox live has some issues when a hot item is released on market place and the problem lasts for a short time cause there are so many users on its service? lol

P.S: and to any one that wants to know this, paid for service doesn't= perfect service to believe such a thing is stupid we pay 50 dollars a month because xbox live is damn near perfection when it comes to playing online on console games, not because it makes it perfect any company is bound to have problems with any service, its not like xbox live is down every other day, Xbox live is up and running well most of the year sometimes it goes down because of the massive amounts of users online, which microsoft fixes fast nearly every time and impliments more and faster servers to carry said login information..ect to handle the extra usage.

What the hell are you talking about? First of all, there are many people who are on PLAYSTATION Network. You're saying PSN experiences issues cause it doesn't have enough users. What the hell does that mean? You also state dedicated servers lag. I don't know if you've experienced them, but I've played Warhawk in a 32-player game and Resistance in a 40-player game and have NEVER in my life experienced lag. XBOX Live is also not damn near perfection when it comes to online gaming. It's good, but performance wise for online gaming, it can't match PSN, and in the end, performance is more important for online gaming than features. I have yet to see a game with the size of Warhawk or Resistance appear on LIVE. Also, by looking at the sales of 360s monthly, it doesn't seem to be getting so many extra users to make the service crash. In fact, PS3 is selling just above it and I've seen a spike in users, not a drop in performance. See how I can talk trash about another service? The difference here is I provide some facts to back up my statements.

The problem right now is not with new users. COD4 has sold close to 4 million copies on 360. Let's say just 1/4 play regularly online and want the map pack, thats 1 million people flooding the service, all trying to get the same file and as quickly as possible.

As far as dedicated servers go, I can't speak for PSN. However Frontlines does feature 32-50 player online on dedicated servers for 360, and I have experienced lag in many of the dedicated server rooms.

I wouldn't trade the features of XBL. Hot Shots Golf would have been a system seller for me if only it had voice chat, a feature standard in every single XBL game ;)

I guess a better question would be "Do you think games are as fun as they used to be?" Does the amount of fun that one can get from a game change with age? Does it change with mood? Do certain games only feel fun with the right kind of circumstances or setting? Or do games just simply don't seem to be as fun anymore.

Nowadays it seems that every one is bent on doing everything right and having a lot of it when it comes to game design. Do you know what I mean? What I'm saying is, though plenty of games are technical masterpieces, and they do what they are supposed to do, and do it very well. I still find myself getting any kind of real enjoyment out many of those types of games. These games may receive high marks, but they still leave you feeling empty of joy after playing them. I remember back in the day when games seemed to be more weird, wacky, simple, and just plain fun. It felt like the game's goal was to get you to enjoy yourself and nothing more. Perhaps another thing is that most people rely too heavily on what critics have to say about a game. Back then when there was few ways of being able to know what games were good or bad, you just saw a game and bought it, or rented it. And when you played it you had no kind of standards you wanted the game to meet. You didn't worry about how it compared to other games too much. You accepted that the game was now part of your collection and it was your job to complete that game. You didn't really care or notice many flaws back then. Perhaps it's one of those cases where when you are a kid you can get enjoyment out of even the most mediocre of games. But then again there are terms such as "underrated" or "under-appreciated" that are commonly used today in gaming. So...does anyone else think games are less "fun" now? And why are they?

The_Deepblue

XBL got me into shooters, I never would have played one if not for the community, now I try them all, COD, Frontllines, Battlefield beta etc.

The great reviews of Animal Crossing got me to buy a Gamecube, I only own like 5 games for that system, yet those 5 experiences are some of my favorite of the entire last gen.

If your not having fun, you have either outgrowed gaming alltogether or your not playing the right games ;)

[QUOTE="beachbob1"][QUOTE="karasill"]

Yeah, the 360 has the best library right now. But I also own a Wii and love some of the games it has and my PC gets 10 times more play time then my 360 because a lot of the games on the 360 are also on the PC. PC games also cost less and are always better. Aside from Halo 3 (which will be on the PC sooner or later) and two or three other games there really is no reason to own a 360 if you have a gaming PC. The 360 is just a poor mans PC in my eyes, nothing to get excited about.

karasill

I disagree. I have enjoyed Gears, Kameo, Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey,The Simpsons,Assasins Creed,Rock Band,GH3 on and on..............on my 360.

I enjoy COH, Total War2,Sins ect. ect. ect.

I probally play more solo games on my PC but with kids, friends or party the 360 get fired up. The Wii has alot to offer for party games and kids too. The PS3 you can watch movies on. They al have there place.

360 IS a poor man's PC. Whats wrong with that?

Look, I understand that theres little reason to own a 360 if you have a gaming rig. The fact of the matter is obviously alot of people don't, otherwise games like Oblivion and Bioshock would not sell.

Medal of Honor was a PC game right? Yet it sold craploads on PS2.

Some people don't want to deal with yearly or bi yearly upgrades. They just want to play the games.

360 delivers that while still putting out console exclusives like Rockband.

Your a PC gamer, so if you want something different, by a Wi.

[QUOTE="_koolgirl_"]

I bought one. Never really saw a big difference in quality except for in animated movies.

I knew the risks going in, therefore only invested in 2 movies.

However, I still have it , and am looking forward to the drastic price cuts that will surely come for the format as retailers clear out their inventory ;) I wonder how many HD-DVDs I will be able to pick up for $5-10 just because stores are trying to get rid of them :)

WilliamRLBaker

you've all ready missed the deals....I purchased nearly all my hd dvds for 11-15 bux. through deep discount deals and slickdeals deals and bestbuy 30% off.