<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Magic on the XBox</title>
	<atom:link href="http://metagame.org/2009/06/30/magic-on-the-xbox/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://metagame.org/2009/06/30/magic-on-the-xbox/</link>
	<description>a blog on games and stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 20:24:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: More than an Advertisement? &#8211; metagame</title>
		<link>http://metagame.org/2009/06/30/magic-on-the-xbox/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>More than an Advertisement? &#8211; metagame</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metagame.org/?p=343#comment-26</guid>
		<description>[...] months ago I posted that Magic on Xbox Live was a Trojan Horse of sorts: an online ad calling on lapsed players to come [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[…] months ago I posted that Magic on Xbox Live was a Trojan Horse of sorts: an online ad calling on lapsed players to come […]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc</title>
		<link>http://metagame.org/2009/06/30/magic-on-the-xbox/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metagame.org/?p=343#comment-13</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I agree with the idea that it&#039;s an advertisement.  For those of you that have played, the lack of deck construction, is the frustrating bit.  I&#039;m okay with unlocking cards based on play, but then not being able to set up combos that I want to play, lets me down.

It also reminded me how streaky M:TG is, when I&#039;m drawing 4-5 lands in a row.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I agree with the idea that it’s an advertisement.  For those of you that have played, the lack of deck construction, is the frustrating bit.  I’m okay with unlocking cards based on play, but then not being able to set up combos that I want to play, lets me down.</p>
<p>It also reminded me how streaky M:TG is, when I’m drawing 4–5 lands in a row.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CJ</title>
		<link>http://metagame.org/2009/06/30/magic-on-the-xbox/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>CJ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 08:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metagame.org/?p=343#comment-11</guid>
		<description>After unlocking three full decks, I do not see this anything more then a nostalgic peruse down memory lane. Constantly I&#039;m thinking &quot;Lanowar Elves rock!&quot; or &quot;Why did they stop Counterspells, WhY?!?&quot;. Although things might have changed from a few years ago, both Marc and I have, at least once, thought about picking up a few decks. 

Some of their features choices are interesting though - like the inability to full construct a deck, and only manipulate a &#039;side board&#039; of unlocked cards. M:tG (360) feels like it should nod towards the casual gamer, but not with the first time player in mind. So far though this game has been the best digital emulation of the CCG I have yet played. Never tired M:tG online, but then I can&#039;t see myself buying individual digital cards - or having the persistence to collect an entire digital set. 

Almost every night for the past week Marc and I play a few cooperative games. Worth the purchase? For us, definitely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After unlocking three full decks, I do not see this anything more then a nostalgic peruse down memory lane. Constantly I’m thinking “Lanowar Elves rock!” or “Why did they stop Counterspells, WhY?!?”. Although things might have changed from a few years ago, both Marc and I have, at least once, thought about picking up a few decks. </p>
<p>Some of their features choices are interesting though — like the inability to full construct a deck, and only manipulate a ‘side board’ of unlocked cards. M:tG (360) feels like it should nod towards the casual gamer, but not with the first time player in mind. So far though this game has been the best digital emulation of the CCG I have yet played. Never tired M:tG online, but then I can’t see myself buying individual digital cards — or having the persistence to collect an entire digital set. </p>
<p>Almost every night for the past week Marc and I play a few cooperative games. Worth the purchase? For us, definitely.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Worth</title>
		<link>http://metagame.org/2009/06/30/magic-on-the-xbox/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>Worth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 07:14:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metagame.org/?p=343#comment-9</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the plug, good sir. :) We&#039;re certainly thrilled with how it&#039;s done so far. Glad you&#039;re enjoying it, and it sounds like many at your work have been lured back into the fray...everybody&#039;s doin it, first one&#039;s free (or $10), won&#039;t hurt you the first time...lol</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the plug, good sir. <img src='http://metagame.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  We’re certainly thrilled with how it’s done so far. Glad you’re enjoying it, and it sounds like many at your work have been lured back into the fray…everybody’s doin it, first one’s free (or $10), won’t hurt you the first time…lol</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

