What does the Bitmob community think... everyone OK with the four-person format? It gives everyone a bit more time to talk and cuts down on people talking over each other. But it's one less topic/guest, too. Let us know what you think.

How about 4 guys five topics? Each one comes up with a topic then do one mail bag topic? I am liking the four people sound quality right now. Only 33 minutes into it right now and enjoy the banter.

Hey Shoe. I really enjoyed this format. I have missed some of the past episodes, but I had to listen to this one, as the topics seemed really interesting. And they were. Glad to hear Aaron again, I was a big fan of his sports show he used to record with Shanker S. and Brian Ekberg! As for the format, I think it's great, four topics are more than enough for me for an episode, makes for better memory for me. Oh yeah, and I'm totally a Hitman fanboy, the first one was crap, I admit, but the rest... awesome stuff. I played all of those, all their missions, VARIOUS times taking different approaches and all of that. I played those so much I managed to record some direct footage from Contracts (whole game) and a bit of Blood Money.

Hey Shoe, great podcast this week. I honestly think 4 people is better than 5, but then I also enjoy the large amount of special guests you guys have so I wouldn't want that to be affected either. Thanks.

If there's anyway to get Robert Ashley on the show more often, I'm indifferent to the total number of people. The man is electric. Oh, and I am the only person who heard "X-Men" when discussing the series people are obsessed with? My initial reaction was "Those were some shitty NES games" until I heard "X-Wing."

I think it's much less important to have a set number of contributors with each podcast and much more important to get INTERESTING contributors who can bring something to the table. I appreciate that the Mobcast is trying to have different line-ups every week but the reality is certain people are better at podcasting than others. Get those people on board and the podcast will be enjoyable, whether it's with a crew of four or five. ----------------------------- In other news... I really found myself frustrated by Aaron Thomas' opinions about reviews. I don't think it's worth it to get THAT upset about whether a Battlefield 1943 review mentions the game's online problems or not. I understand that it was an issue and that it might affect people's enjoyment of the game, but simultaneously Aaron's opinion implied that readers take review content as absolute gospel, bought down from the mountain. The age of reviewers as keepers of ultimate wisdom died with the invention of the internet. Instead of spending so much time worrying about whether or not a review should be updated to reflect modern conditions, I think reviewers should spend more time educating audiences to the fact that a video game reviewer is a mere human whose opinion is simply their opinion and not THE FINAL WORD. Also when you talk about people reacting negatively to a review being late, be aware that you're dealing with a sub-section of the community. Not everyone feels that a review should arrive Day One. Most of the people who are looking for a Day One review are people who have already bought the game (or will) and simply want you to justify their purchase for them.

Chris, you make some excellent points. I don't think that review content is the gospel, but as someone as a former full-time game reviewer, I take reviews very seriously -- certainly more serious than most, but again, that was my job. The fact is that far more people still get their game information from traditional review sites than any other source. My Madden review last year easily surpassed a million hits. If I glossed over something or got something wrong, that's a million people that have been misled by my review. Sure, many of them will read other reviews as well, but my concern is/was getting it right on my end. The BF 1943 issue was really important to me because so many sites glossed over the game's issues. Like you said, people that gripe about reviews being late are a very small sub-section of the community. But by that same token, people that read multiple reviews and visit message boards and Twitter are a very small portion of gamers as well. Basically I think game reviews need to be accurate and 100% honest. I don't think the BF 1943 reviews meet that criteria.

I liked Aaron and Jason. Good stuff. I'd also like to point out that Jason's appearance on Rebel FM was great.

@Andrew Thanks, Andrew! I still feel uncomfortable with my Rebel FM appearance because I stammered and stuttered so much. I wish I could control that better.

Ah, glad to hear Aaron's found a new home.