This video here is the video which I'm referring to.

1. From drums-archive@ietf.org Sat Jul 3 21: Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-drums-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-drums-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost 127.0.0.1) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90FA73A697B for; Sat, 3 Jul 2010 21:14:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Amavis-Alert: BAD.
2. About - XBL STRESSER Welcome to Xbl stresser Welcome to xbl stresser. We are currently under construction so boot strength may be low. When we are back up we will be hitting with 90 gbps.
3. I really stress the maybe part, because kids now days aren't exactly the brightest. Can't really say that you have experience with something and then say it wasn't with the real thing, it's not.

The controversy in question is contained in the second part of the show. Jason Rubin refers to the idea of charging gamers per object or feature similar to Farmville on Facebook. He cites the financial success of Farmville in getting bored mothers and teenage girls to purchase features for their otherwise free game. He puts forward the idea that gamers could pay $30 for a free play game initially and then pay extra for all of the rest of the features such as weapons, stages, levels, characters, etc. In theory this seems to function much like modern DLC, except DLC is created to prolong the experience of a game, whilst this idea is made almost solely to nickel and dime the people who actually care about playing a full game, aka the Maple Story method.

Kawasaki Robot Controller E Series Operation Manual Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd. DEB E Series Controller Kawasaki Robot Operation Manual PREFACE This manual describes operating instructions for the Kawasaki Robot Controller E series.

I hate to harp on the whole casuals vs. hardcore thing, but the audience for Farmville is very different than the audience for, say, Modern Warfare 2. Farmville's audience is willing to pay for those apps because, well, they really don't know any better. Let's be honest; Farmville is a desperately shallow game where every action is performed not in the interest of reaching an end game, or for fighting towards the end for some culmination of an experience, or to flex their intellectual muscles against a worthy opponent, or even to simply blow off steam by blowing off limbs. They play to occupy their time; they play because they would be bored otherwise. These aren't real games, and charging people more over the long run in the hopes of 'getting people to play new IP's' or giving them the opportunity to 'have the same experience for less money' is patently ridiculous. It's called Gamefly, it's for renting games. $10 a month for what will boil down to about 2 games a month when shipping and play time are factored in. $5 a game and you don't have to make dozens of micro transactions to unlock the full game.
Bottom line is, if they began doing to games what this panel was suggesting then you would start seeing a

Free Xbox Stresser

decrease in sales of games rather than an increase which is what they were trying to say. After all, why would you continue to buy an incomplete product? Would you buy a blender that you have to buy the extra functions for separately?

Xbox One Booter Online

This video here is the video which I'm referring to.
The controversy in question is contained in the second part of the show. Jason Rubin refers to the idea of charging gamers per object or feature similar to Farmville on Facebook. He cites the financial success of Farmville in getting bored mothers and teenage girls to purchase features for their otherwise free game. He puts forward the idea that gamers could pay $30 for a free play game initially and then pay extra for all of the rest of the features such as weapons, stages, levels, characters, etc. In theory this seems to function much like modern DLC, except DLC is created to prolong the experience of a game, whilst this idea is made almost solely to nickel and dime the people who actually care about playing a full game, aka the Maple Story method.

Xbox Stresser Booter

Xbl Booter

I hate to harp on the whole casuals vs. hardcore thing, but the audience for Farmville is very different than the audience for, say, Modern Warfare 2. Farmville's audience is willing to pay for those apps because, well, they really don't know any better. Let's be honest; Farmville is a desperately shallow game where every action is performed not in the interest of reaching an end game, or for fighting towards the end for some culmination of an experience, or to flex their intellectual muscles against a worthy opponent, or even to simply blow off steam by blowing off limbs. They play to occupy their time; they play because they would be bored otherwise. These aren't real games, and charging people more over the long run in the hopes of 'getting people to play new IP's' or giving them the opportunity to 'have the same experience for less money' is patently ridiculous. It's called Gamefly, it's for renting games. $10 a month for what will boil down to about 2 games a month when shipping and play time are factored in. $5 a game and you don't have to make dozens of micro transactions to unlock the full game.
Bottom line is, if they began doing to games what this panel was suggesting then you would start seeing a decrease in sales of games rather than an increase which is what they were trying to say. After all, why would you continue to buy an incomplete product? Would you buy a blender that you have to buy the extra functions for separately?