Tim Johnson

Regarding vehicles, IW did implement them in MW2, and they did so seamlessly, you guys didn't even notice. The vehicles you can pilot: predator missile, AC-130, attack helicopter.

Sure, it's not the classic definition of a vehicle in multiplayer, but IMO, it works, and it works pretty well.

On this article, I can't get on board with the reviews at all. Everything here is subject to interpretation. It's not at all an objective, unbiased account of either game. It starts at the beginning, faulting both games with having a "short" and linear campaign, neither quality is necessarily bad if the experience and replayability is there.

You mean lag bubbles? I think "cheating" is the official reasoning they could give without defacing MS, but the lag party chat creates in online games is what concerns me more about this feature.

Personally, I'm glad MW2 doesn't allow it in some lists. It helps keep things relatively lag-free, and it's so easy to just mute everyone else. Though, i do wish IW had provided a "mute everyone who's not in your party" option.

Whatever. They obviously missed the part of MW2 right before the airport level where the rangers discuss the rules of engagement and actually pass by some militants they KNOW are going to attack them.

And part of the point of many of these games is that there really are no rules when things become this dire. In a way, these games aren't about warfare. They're about fighting for your life. Those two things are a bit different, and I think gamers definitely get that. At the very least, I'm sure gamers get that they're just playing a game.

I'm for Thor. I feel like they're both ridiculous superheroes, but Captain America, IMO, is really outdated.

I wonder how much the rampant multiple account creation in Halo 3 skewed the results for that game, since most secondary accounts don't accomplish most of the campaign achievements.

They've already made this movie a million times. Take any war movie and slap "Call of Duty" on the title, and you have a Call of Duty movie. That's why the franchise works: the stories are so malleable that they can fit into any war scenario where you have soldiers shooting at each other.

There are two reasons to make a Call of Duty movie: 1). To be able to slap the Call of Duty label on a war movie and make money off of that fact. 2). To retell a story from one of the games. In either case, I'm not interested.

Don't get me wrong. I love the Call of Duty games. I've played all of them, but I think a Call of Duty movie is a terrible idea.

Wow. Really? I was simply stating my opinion. I don't like the idea of Natal integration. Period. That's not exactly a controversial statement. I wasn't saying it was a bad idea to integrate it. I just personally don't care for the idea of Natal.

Yes, I was disappointed by Fable. It's a good game, but I was hoping it would be better based on the promises Lionhead had made and the way Microsoft had marketed it. I was disappointed by Fable II. It's also a good game, but it didn't make the improvements I hoped it would make. Therefore, I was leaning toward not buying Fable III. And since I don't like the idea of Natal integration, that's more of a reason for me to not buy Fable III.

How can anyone hold that against me?

As for me not buying any of the Fables, here's a link to my gamertag:

http://360voice.gamerdna.com/blog.asp?tag=MADMAN%20Redux

You can obviously see I have played Fable II and actually have purchased all the DLC and have almost all of the achievements. I played through Fable on the original Xbox.

Why did I spend my money on those games if I didn't like them? Obviously, I liked them enough to spend my money on it. In any case, that's my decision to make.

And my expression of my opinion at this point in time is that if Fable III integrates Natal, I'll be less inclined to buy it, and I'm already leaning toward not buying it. Case freakin' closed. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. I will be paying attention to further developments, but since I'm really not into the whole Natal thing, it would be stupid for me to purchase what looks to be an expensive piece of hardware just so I can play a game that will likely disappoint me.

Now get off my case. None of you know anything about me, so it's really stupid for you to be so judgmental.

If Fable 3 integrates Natal, I'll be less inclined to buy the game. I'm already leaning toward not purchasing it, as I've been disappointed by the first two.

I'd be interested to see what the chart would look like if Halo: Reach had been an option. Many in the Halo community play Halo and ONLY Halo.

Paul Bertone also doesn't like the battle rifle, and that's at least partially the reason why it isn't in ODST. This begs the question of whether it will be in Reach.