First | Prev || Next | Last
¿Question #2389?
[Deleted user]: [deleted question]

cgund: I don't really play board games online much in any case.
Woelf: It would depend what games they had, who else I knew that used it, how well the interface worked, and how much it cost to use. The minimum expectations/requirements for the first three items increase exponentially relative to the fourth.
MartinWin: if it is free and there are not too many bugs
hellium: yes indeed
GrimJester: no
mummykitty: What is BSW?
VikingFury: no
Goodjoel: ??? what is bsw and no I would not play at microsoft
kingofthegrill: yes, i would pay for that service too. I imagine the interface would be much better
vandemonium: I don't play the non-microsoft version so no.
Mondior: Probably
shteev: If it was free, probably... unless they updated the tech on the thing every damn week.
chiplee: If it's free, probably.
diemacher: If it worked
DHEK: Sure. Why not, if it's free or very affordable.
Benzebub: Sure.
Sandy Petersen: I work for Microsoft. I would have no choice.
aleo09: i guess
PsyJam: Probably.. I havent' gotten into BSW because of the whole metagame thing.. and the german throws me off, too.
mpw182: sure
michely: Of course, it would be available in English.
Ebon Wendigo: Possibly
bigbadsteve: i dunno
SisyphusX: Perhaps - but the MS ownership wouldn't detract me, just costs.
janiera: Depends on how buggy it is...
bkindt: yes
TamiWhitsett: if it was the only option available, and I needed a gaming fix, yes
scriptorum: Sure.
Bagherra: only if it was also free.
brainrob: No
Wouwter: sure
Chris Page: No.
Joanna Olsen: Bill's wife on their wedding night "Oh, now I know why your firm is called Microsoft!"
LemonyFresh: Probably
Famous Mortimer: Nope.
javelin98: What's BSW?
Loquutus: If it was free. I'm already angry I have to pay them for Xbox live.
richlowe32: Depends if they charged. but then I don't play at BSW, so the answer is probably no.
Agrajag: Yes, unless the rest of their versions are as terrible as their version of Settlers.
modboy: maybe
twentythree: no
GI Joe: Probably
tragicpoet: yes
xlorp: I'll take "Hell, no!" for $500, Bob.
DonO: only if it was a life or death matter and NO other sites were available
CharlieWonka: yes
bored: naw
ssmooth: If it was free and they had games I wanted to play
TMJJS: yes
cray: if it's better
Lord_Prussian: If it was better than BSW for some reason
Belash: if it offered the same features
AWildEep: no
djlg: No. I don't even play at the current one.
heli: maybe, if it were the only game in town
Defdamesdompi: If it's free, yes
Randy Cox: If I were to play on-line boardgames, yes. But I don't do that.
kennyb: probably
dietevil: if it was in English, yeah
mandj2001: if I knew what BSW was.....yes.
2amp: bsw?
thoia: nope it'd cost too much.
Basilius: only if Firefox worked.
melissa: no. I imagine they would charge $$$$
otrex: Microsoft would only host one game on their site: Monopoly. So no, I would not play.
ValJor: I don't play even at the current version...
skelebone: If it was free I might.
snoozefest: no
gnomehome: Sure
UhhhClem: Sure, if it were still free and contained no advertising. Don't hold your breath.
CortexBomb: Heh, no. But I don't play BSW now either, so it's not just my moral stance against MS that's aiding me
nexttothemoon: Probably just as much as now...which is very very little.
jttm: Yes
skrutsch: Definitely NOT. I've very anti-microsoft.
AlorielLelyn: NO
chaddyboy_2000: Sure.
Dave: If the interface was easier to navigate, sure, I'd give it a try.
CDRodeffer: Hmmm. Now that is a disturbing question.
Spielfreak: no
Bearcat89: Yeah, if it was easier to use.