I'm sorry?

If all of a sudden COD7 PS360 were to cost +20$, while, say, removing online play (and retaining only a short single player campaign), would you be pissed?

If you had to buy three separate full-priced discs for the entire FFXIII, would you be pissed?

If God of War 3 came with only half the game on the disc, and then the second half was promised in free DLC, but then later decided to be packaged into separate full-priced disc, would you be pissed?

Then again, you probably wouldn't - looking at the things that go on with console games (paying for p2p online, whoring out sequals to no end, releasing incomplete games and charging for DLC within weeks of release to complete them), most people would probably go along with it - PS360 gamers, especially 360 gamers, are used to this kind of nonsense, and seem to gladly put up with it.

PC gamers, on the other hand, typically have higher standards.

Where there is more money to be made, and less headaches, by catering to the lower standards, then expect the lower standards to become the norm.  The PC gaming industry is justified to be annoyed at their game being morphed into the same specs the console version has.  You feel shorted and ripped off.  You feel the company doesn't care about you and your interests.  But, if the money is there, and you get less support headaches you do it.  And then expect the rest of the industry to follow suit.  This leaves you, as a console gamer, feeling shafted.  But the market dictates what companies do.  One can say piracy is responsible, but it is in that territory.  In regards to what you wrote, I see the following:

1. Call of Duty is now mapped to the way consoles are set up, and at the same price.

2. Starcraft II is going to be sold as three separate products, to get the full campaign.  So yes, to get the full campaign of Starcraft II, look to spend $100+.

3. GoW3 sounds like what they did with ODST.

But again, that is what the market supports, and is why the videogame industry is moving towards the console model.  It is how they make the most money.  And you can whine and complain about it.  But go ahead and NOT buy the product.  The videogame companies will then say PC sales are way down, and they will stop making PC versions of their games.  And you, as a PC gamer are shafted.  Of course, you can start to demand console owners have "higher standards", but it is doubtful they will listen.  The console owners are used to less people playing in games, and don't care as much about mods or running their own servers.

Thanks for this post, sometimes hyperbole is the only thing you can use to get through to the closed-minded.

Honestly, the users on this board need to stop flaming PC fans because we're upset with Modern Warfare 2. We're getting charged more for what we view as an inferior product. How am I going to find a favorite server where I can get to be familiar with 30-50 people when every fucking game I'm playing with random people? How am I going to save money to afford my PC rigs if I'm paying $10 more for games when publishers don't owe a royalty to console manufacturers? They might as well start charging me just to play MW2 online, or maybe they're saving that for MW3.

Also, those who are flaming PC users for giving such low scores need to get it through their heads that it's NOT about score accuracy, it's about sending a loud and clear message to Activision. Thus far, PC owners have pleasantly surprised me, as I expected the boycott to never work, but it's pretty clear that more PC owners are going to be spiteful than go back on their word and buy the game. This is exactly the response we need to avoid paying $60 for every goddamn game we buy.

I kind of disagree with most of what you said. You just have to look at my other posts if you want to know why.

And it's not ok (whatever kind of message you're trying to give) for PC owners to give a low score to the PS3/360 version. That's pretty much all I'm trying to say.

Lol, I have to look at your other posts? Your posts have been one-dimensional throughout this entire thread, claiming that the game isn't a bad game and that it doesn't deserve those low scores. You haven't addressed ANY of the issues I bring up in my post, so honestly, looking at your other posts doesn't tell me why you disagree, it just tells me that you like to whine about whiners. Like I said, it's not about giving a good game a score it doesn't deserve, it's about sending a message to Activision that a large portion of PC gamers aren't going to put up with their bullshit.

While I agree that there's no reason for PC owners to take it out on the console iterations, they're still sending a message.

Why is it so hard to have a discussion? Y'all taking it so badly. We are not whining we are just discussing. PC discussion.

Anyway the message you are trying to share is rather useless. They decided to concentrate the franchise on consoles and console owners are happy of the product. They don't have to endure the PC version problems.

What do you mean by 'problems'?

If by problems you mean bugs and such, then dampening the PC version sure hasn't helped the PS3 version which has had 2 patches already and growing pains with their content servers or whatever they're called.