We would like to thank you all for being around ! Our present for you guys: -1 FL slot for everyone -2 invites for all Good pervs (these invites will expire in one week) -3 invites for great perv+ (to a max of 4)

Tracker's Name: Revolution-World Genre: General Sign-up Link: http://revolution-world.ml/signup.php Closing date: N/A Additional information: RevolutioN-WorlD is a Hungarian Private Torrent Tracker for Movies / General Releases.

Tracker's Name: Dutch-Pirate Genre: General Sign-up Link: https://dutch-pirate.org/signup.php Closing date: N/A Additional information: Dutch-Pirate is a Dutch Private Torrent Tracker for Movies / TV / General Releases.

Tracker's Name: Lapausetorrents Genre: General Sign-up Link: http://lapausetorrents.me/account-signup.php Closing date: Soon! Additional information: Lapausetorrents is a French Private Torrent Tracker for Movies / TV / General Releases.

Tracker's Name: Brasil Tracker Genre: General Sign-up Link: https://brasiltracker.org/register.php Closing date: Site is accepting new users with a maximum limit of one thousand Additional information: Brasil Tracker is a new Brazilian Private Torrent Tracker for Movies / TV / General Releases. Note: This is a project of a Brazilian tracker based on Gazelle. The site is still in its BETA phase but is accepting new users with a maximum limit of one thousand.

A new academic paper published in the Information Economics and Policy journal shows that piracy can help many artists to sell more music. Results from the peer-reviewed paper are consistent for both digital and physical sales and affect mid-tier artists. Top musicians are not so lucky, as they sell less. The debate over whether online piracy helps or hurts music sales has been dragging on for several decades now. The issue has been researched extensively with both positive and negative effects being reported, often varying based on the type of artist, music genre and media, among other variables. One of the more extensive studies was published this month in the peer-reviewed Information Economics and Policy journal, by Queen’s University economics researcher Jonathan Lee. In a paper titled ‘Purchase, pirate, publicize: Private-network music sharing and market album sales’ he examined the effect of BitTorrent-based piracy on both digital and physical music sales. We covered an earlier version of the study two years ago when it was still a work in progress. With updates to the research methods and a data sample, the results are now more clear. The file-sharing data was obtained from an unnamed private BitTorrent tracker and covers a data set of 250,000 albums and more than five million downloads. These were matched to US sales data for thousands of albums provided by Nielsen SoundScan. By refining the estimation approach and updating the matching technique, the final version of the paper shows some interesting results. Based on the torrent tracker data, Lee finds that piracy can boost sales of mid-tier artists, both for physical CDs and digital downloads. For the most popular artists, this effect is reversed. In both cases, the impact is the largest for digital sales. “I now find that top artists are harmed and mid-tier artists may be helped in both markets, but that these effects are larger for digital sales,” Lee tells TorrentFreak. “This is consistent with the idea that people are more willing to switch between digital piracy and digital sales than between digital piracy and physical CDs.” The findings lead to the conclusion that there is no ideal ‘one-size-fits-all’ response to piracy. In fact, some unauthorized sharing may be a good thing. This is in line with observations from musicians themselves over the past years. Several top artists have admitted the positive effects of piracy, including Ed Sheeran, who recently said that he owes his career to it. “I know that’s a bad thing to say, because I’m part of a music industry that doesn’t like illegal file sharing,” Sheeran said in an interview with CBS. “Illegal file sharing was what made me. It was students in England going to university, sharing my songs with each other.” Sheeran sharing on TPB Today, Sheeran is in a totally different position of course. As one of the top artists, he would now be hurt by piracy. However, the new stars of tomorrow may still reap the benefits. According to the researcher, the music industry should realize that shutting down pirate sites may not always be the best option. On the contrary, file-sharing sites may be useful as promotional platforms in some cases. “Following above, a policy of total shutdown of private file sharing networks seems excessively costly (compared with their relatively small impact on sales) and unwise (as a one-size-fits-all policy). It would be better to make legal consumption more convenient, reducing the demand for piracy as an alternative to purchasing,” Lee tells us. “It would also be smart to experiment with releasing music onto piracy networks themselves, especially for up-and-coming artists, similar to the free promotion afforded by commercial radio.” The researcher makes another interesting extrapolation from the findings. In recent years, some labels and artists have signed exclusive deals with some streaming platforms. This means that content is not available everywhere, and this fragmentation may make piracy look more appealing. “Here you can view piracy as a non-fragmented alternative platform to Spotify et al. Thus consumers will have a strong incentive to use a single non-fragmented platform (piracy) over having multiple subscriptions to fragmented platforms,” Lee says. It would be better for the labels to publish their music on all platforms, and to make these more appealing and convenient than the pirate alternative. The data used for the research was collected several years ago before the big streaming boom, so it might be that the results are different today. However, it is clear that the effect of piracy on sales is not as uniform as the music industry often portrays it.

“Who the hell is Flint?” was the question on the lips of Agent Melinda May at the conclusion of last week’s Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.Though fans have gotten to know the resourceful Inhuman portrayed by Coy Stewart over the past several episodes, May herself hasn’t had the pleasure. May had been separated from her fellow Agents as she found her way to the Zephyr crashed on the ruins of the destroyed Earth before them. This week’s episode “Best Laid Plans” made it plain that not only is Flint an important new player in season 5, he may, in fact, be the key to getting the Agents home to 2018. May learning who Flint is was the final prophecy of Robin Hinton, the Inhuman seer who lived through Earth’s destruction and the subsequent decades of mankind’s survivors living under Kree occupation. Agents Coulson, Mack, and Yo-Yo met Flint on the Lighthouse through Tess, their ally, and together they watched Flint undergo Terrigenesis and discover his Inhuman power: geokinesis, or rather, the ability to move and control rocks with his mind. Mack and Yo-Yo stayed behind with Flint to help lead the humans in a revolution against Kasius and their Kree oppressors while Coulson, Daisy Johnson, FitzSimmons, and Deke fled to the surface and reunited with May on board the Zephyr. Our heroes made a number of discoveries on board the Zephyr so that the pieces are now falling into place as to how S.H.I.E.L.D. will be able to leave the future they’re trapped in and travel back to the present day: The Zephyr contains a device called an isochronous cyclotron with resonant superconducting coils. This was designed by Fitz but built by Deke’s parents. The cyclotron is able to control a Kree Monolith, which was the means by which the Agents were brought to the future by Enoch and the True Believers. Naturally, since they came forward via Monolith, it’s logical to assume they can also be sent back via the same Monolith. Complicating matters is the fact that Monolith has been broken into pieces and most of it is missing; through Deke, the Agents only possess a shard of the Monolith. But if they can find the rest of the Monolith, either in the Lighthouse or somewhere on what’s left of the planet, it just so happens they have a new Inhuman friend who has the power to push rocks together and reassemble the unique crystalline structure of that very Monolith: our man Flint. However, some questions surround Flint and it’s likely there’s more to him than meets the eye. From what we’ve seen of Flint so far, he seems like a good-hearted person, but he has killed when he has to (though the same can be said for all of S.H.I.E.L.D.) Still, it could be that an Inhuman with precisely the exact ability the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. need to reassemble an ancient space rock that can send them back to the present seems just a tad too convenient.

Early box office predictions for Pacific Rim Uprising point to a disappointing opening for the sequel. While the first Pacific Rim movie under-performed at the domestic box office, its overseas global haul (more than $300 million) was ultimately enough to get Legendary to green-light a sequel. Uprising sees Daredevil season 1 showrunner Steven S. DeKnight take over directing duties for Guillermo del Toro, who parted ways with the sequel after it took longer than expected to get going. Meanwhile, John Boyega is now serving as the protagonist of the franchise – Jake Pentecost, the son of the late Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba) from the first movie. The original Pacific Rim‘s $411 million worldwide gross is nothing to sneeze at, taken on its own. Problem is, del Toro’s original giant robots vs. giant monsters tentpole cost a massive $190M to make, which is why Legendary was so hesitant to fast-track a sequel. Uprising has a relatively slimmer budget of $150M, but (unfortunately) early opening weekend box office projections don’t bode well for the film’s overall commercial prospects. BoxOfficePro has revealed the current projections for Pacific Rim Uprising, and the sequel is only expected to open to $20M in the U.S. right now. This is nearly half of Pacific Rim‘s $37M U.S. opening take from back in 2013. Not only are the opening weekend numbers low, but Uprising isn’t expected to heave great legs at the box office either. The outlet is projecting that Uprising will finish its domestic run with less than $50M in total, which again is only about half of what the original film did stateside ($101.8M). Few were expecting Uprising to become a proper box office juggernaut, but these numbers are underwhelming all the same. Part of the problem could be the Uprising trailers, which haven’t exactly gotten fans in general excited for the sequel. Many are also skeptical of the film’s Transformers-esque look, and worry that the movie is missing that special touch that del Toro would have brought as director. If the actual box office receipts for Uprising fall in line with these projections, Uprising will need to do even better than the first movie overseas to warrant making additional Pacific Rim sequels and/or spinoffs. The Pacific Rim brand name also doesn’t carry a ton of weight at the box office at this point, which isn’t great when looking at its release window. March has begun evolving into the kick-off for blockbuster season in recent years, and that will continue in 2018. Case in point, Disney and Ava DuVernay’s highly anticipated A Wrinkle In Time opens two weeks before Uprising does, followed by the Alicia Vikander headlined Tomb Raider movie reboot one week after that. Uprising will have to compete with both of those films during its opening week, before then facing off with Steven Spielberg’s Ready Player One adaptation a week later. All things considered then, it’s going to be pretty difficult for the Pacific Rim sequel to perform above the current box office projections for the film. Here is to hoping that Uprising proves up to the challenge, all the same.

Steven Spielberg is eyeing a 2019 production start date for Indiana Jones 5, which is due for theatrical release in the summer of 2020. Though Star Wars has definitely been the main attraction at Lucasfilm since the studio was acquired by Disney in 2012, there has been steady progress on a new adventure for Dr. Henry Jones, Jr. over the past couple of years. Spielberg, who helmed the previous four installments, signed on to direct back in 2016. Harrison Ford will star in the title role once again, with Spielberg drawing from a script by David Koepp. Updates on the film have been hard to come by, which may have as much to do with Spielberg’s busy schedule as the premiere being so far off. The legendary filmmaker has kept himself occupied with a number of projects, including Best Picture nominee The Post and this year’s adaptation of the sci-fi novel Ready Player One. But as we inch closer to Indiana Jones 5, Spielberg and Ford are going to have to reunite sooner, rather than later. As it turns out, the cameras on the tentpole should be rolling some point next year. In their report detailing the widespread casting call for Spielberg’s planned West Side Story remake, THR mentions the director hopes to start production on Indy 5 in 2019. This would give him plenty of time to complete the film for July 2020, meaning Disney shouldn’t have to delay it any further. Previously, the movie was scheduled for July 2019 before getting pushed back. It’s probably for the best Spielberg is going to begin Indiana Jones 5 in the near future. Ford will turn 77-years old in 2019, which raises some questions about how an elderly Dr. Jones will be portrayed. Granted, the actor earned high marks for his performances in fellow legacy sequels Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Blade Runner 2049 (proving he could still tackle a set piece), but he was more of a supporting player in those films. It will be interesting to see if Spielberg seeks out a younger co-star to handle the more physically-demanding stunts, as it might be too much to ask Ford to be dragged behind a truck or leap onto a tank again. Of course, Tom Cruise is surfing helicopters and leaping off buildings for Mission: Impossible – Fallout, so age may just be nothing but a number for these aging action stars. By all accounts, Spielberg is looking to make Indy 5 next before tackling anything else, so fans will hopefully learn more about the project soon. Other than confirmation Shia LaBeouf’s Mutt Williams will not return, nothing has been revealed about the plot. On the flip side, John Rhys-Davies is game to reprise fan-favorite character Sallah, and it would be great to see him on the big screen again. Time will tell what Spielberg has in store for what should be Indiana’s last big quest.

Dileep Rao has been confirmed to return in the Avatar sequel . The first Avatar film introduced viewers to a number of key secondary characters, including Dileep Rao’s Max Patel. One of the civilian scientists working in the Avatar project, Max seemed to have been working on Pandora for a number of years. He became fiercely loyal to Grace Augustine’s leadership, and warned Grace that Jake was reporting to Colonel Quaritch. According to Deadline , Rao is the latest member of Avatar‘s supporting cast to be confirmed for the sequel. It seems James Cameron is reuniting most of the original cast, aiming to create the same kind of dynamic that made the first film a hit. The Avatar sequels remain one of the most intriguing projects in Fox’s current slate. The studio believes the future is bright for the franchise, and are keen to see Cameron launch a series of sequels. Avatar 2 officially began production last September, and is expected to release on December 18, 2020. So far, plot details have been kept highly secret, but the sequel is expected to dive deep into Pandora’s bountiful oceans . FOX isn’t the only one to believe great things are in store for the Avatar franchise. Disney has announced an unprecedented deal to purchase the bulk of FOX’s assets , and the Avatar sequels have been described as the “crown jewels” of the purchase. The first film grossed over $3 billion in the global box office, although its cultural impact was surprisingly muted. Both Disney and Fox believe that the sequels will be box office successes. But there’s more riding on this than just a film franchise. Disney is seeking a rival for the Universal Studios/Warner Bros. Wizarding World of Harry Potter theme parks, and they believe the World of Pandora parks could be just what they’re looking for. The first of these theme parks only opened recently , although it became something of a gamble; it opened a full seven years after the first film’s release. Thankfully, the gamble seems to have worked out. The FOX purchase is currently with government regulators; should it be approved, Disney will hope to stagger further theme parks in time with release of the sequels. Can lightning truly strike twice? The reality is that Avatar simply hasn’t had a pronounced cultural impact. That makes James Cameron’s sequels, with their hefty budgets, another gamble. Only the release of Avatar 2 will tell whether or not this one will pay off.

Warner Bros.’ upcoming adaptation of Ready Player One is now slated to hit theaters a day earlier than previously expected. The new movie is based on Ernest Cline’s 2011 novel of the same name, which centers on a teenager, Wade Watts (Tye Sheridan) who attempts to discover an easter egg hidden inside a virtual reality game known as the OASIS. Whoever finds the easter egg inherits ownership of the OASIS as well as its creator’s $500 billion fortune. Although Cline co-wrote the film’s story and screenplay alongside Zak Penn (The Avengers, X2: X-Men: United), the movie won’t be a direct adaptation of the novel. Instead, Ready Player One will be an original story that remains faithful to the source material (think: comic book movies). The underlying story about Watts hunting for the easter egg in the OASIS, however, will stay the same. Ready Player One is being directed by Steven Spielberg and was originally scheduled to release in mid-December 2017, but it was delayed to March 2018 to avoid direct competition with Star Wars: The Last Jedi . And now, its release date is being changed once again, but only a little. Deadline reports that Warner Bros. has moved Ready Player One‘s release date up one day to Thursday, March 29, 2018. Opening one day earlier at the box office will allow fans of the book as well as families to see the film before crowds descend upon movie theaters over the long Easter weekend. The last weekend of March typically does well for spring blockbusters, particularly Universal’s Fast and Furious franchise. It’s also the same weekend that Zack Snyder’s Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice released in 2016 and opened to $422.5 million worldwide (the sixth highest of all-time). Warners is looking to capture a similar level of interest with Ready Player One. Also, that’s about the time school kids go on spring break in the U.S., which will help boost the film’s earnings at the domestic box office – but by how much is yet to be determined. Video game movies typically don’t work on the big screen, but Ready Player One presents an opportunity not only to tell a story about a video game but also have it primarily take place inside said game. While many people may find the idea of a movie being set in a virtual reality world foreign (even in this day and age), the concept was intriguing enough to attract Spielberg back into the world of science fiction, a realm he’s remained decidedly absent from in recent years as he’s focused on real-life/true stories such as Lincoln, Bridge of Spies, and The Post .

Some significant changes are taking place in the DCEU, many of which are worth getting excited about. Following the lackluster critical and commercial reception to Justice League, it looks like the DC slate has been shuffled once more, and the sequel to Man of Steel has returned as one of the potential projects to watch out for. No director has been announced for the film just yet, but now it seems that Marvel Cinematic Universe alum and Pacific Rim Uprising director Steven S. DeKnight wants to take Henry Cavill's Superman into Man of Steel 2. That's not a direct "yes" answer to the question, but it's hard to not assume that a classic Superman catchphrase implies a desire to take the reins on Man of Steel 2. Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean that he will get the job. Plenty of directors have shown interest in projects that never came to fruition over the years, but it's an intriguing development for a sequel that has thus far flown under the radar in the DCEU. Steven S. DeKnight already has plenty of experience dealing in the world of superheroes -- albeit on the other side of the aisle in the MCU. Specifically, he was a producer and writer on the first season of Netflix's Daredevil, which is still widely regarded by many fans as one of The Defenders universe's best seasons to date. As far as feature filmmaking experience goes, Steven DeKnight doesn't have much credit to his name, but his first foray into the realm of blockbuster directing will likely prove whether or not he can handle something as massive and intense as a Superman movie. In addition to his work in The Defenders universe with Daredevil, he is also currently gearing up to launch his directorial debut in the form of Pacific Rim Uprising -- which is set to debut in theaters later this year on March 23. Steven DeKnight isn't the only filmmaker whose name has been thrown around for Man of Steel 2. In addition to DeKnight's tweet, a few possibilities have been suggested over the course of the last few months, with X-Men: First Class helmer Matthew Vaughn consistently popping up as a potential favorite to get the job. One thing is clear: plenty of critical details for Man of Steel 2 remain up in the air, and will likely stay that way for quite some time. That said, we will bring you more information related to the project as new details break. For now, hop over to our movie premiere guide to see what films are set to debut in 2018; in the realm of the DCEU, James Wan's Aquaman is next on deck, with a release date set for December 21, 2018.

This upcoming summer is jam-packed with sequels, reboots and superheroes (Oh my!...sorry). And among the heavy competition, Pacific Rim: Uprising is just one of the films looking to make an impact. Despite starring John Boyega, the giant robot sequel has just not seemed to build up much hype for its upcoming release. That more or less tracks with the first Pacific Rim, which didn't have a very strong performance domestically. Unfortunately, a new report is predicting that things will be even worse for Uprising, which is tracking to earn about half of Pacific Rim's total domestic debut. According to BoxOfficePro, Pacific Rim Uprising is tracking to open domestically for a three-day weekend total of $20 million. Comparatively, Pacific Rim opened to $37.3 million, creating a pretty sizable gap between the two movies. Sequels typically aren't as strong of performers as originals, but it doesn't get much better from here. The report goes on to project the overall domestic total for Uprising at just $50 million. That's about half of Pacific Rim's overall domestic gross of $101 million. Should the report prove true, those numbers certainly don't look good for Pacific Rim Uprising, but there are a few factors to consider. First, Uprising was likely never really expected to open big in the states. The true source of the original film's success came mostly from overseas, where it scored $300 million. This is Uprising's real target market. The above report only predicts the domestic performance, so we'll have to wait and see how the sequel plays internationally. Still, a movie that cost $150 million to make doing poorly in the U.S. is probably not good news for the studio. As for why the numbers are as low as they are, one reason could be that it's been five years since the first Pacific Rim. That's a long time, and the gap doesn't create much urgency to see this sequel. Plus, the original didn't hold much box office weight to begin with. We also have to consider that there isn't much buzz right now, and wider audience members don't seem particularly impressed by the trailers. It also doesn't help matters that March is a packed month of high-profile movies. Disney's highly anticipated A Wrinkle in Time plays two weeks before Uprising, and Tomb Raider comes one week after that. Then, a week after its own release, Uprising will have to contend with Ready Player One. That's some tough competition, and it will be difficult for Uprising to make an impact when its surrounded on all sides like this. We'll see how accurate this report ends up becoming when Pacific Rim Uprising arrives in theaters on March 23, 2018.

Dan Buckley, president of Marvel Entertainment, has hinted that no new series will be added to the Marvel Netflix slate. In 2019, Disney plans to launch their own streaming service . It’s clearly intended as a rival to Netflix, a fact that has left Marvel fans tense and concerned. Back in 2013, Marvel announced an exciting partnership with Netflix that has seen them launch a series of popular and critically-acclaimed superhero shows. How would Disney’s plans affect the partnership between Marvel and Netflix? In the first official statement to date, Marvel Entertainment president Dan Buckley has suggested the existing series will continue. “We obviously want the Marvel Television series currently on Netflix to have a long and lauded run,” he told Bloomberg in an email. That said, he added, new projects would seek out “networks and platforms that are the best fit for that content, including the Disney-branded streaming service.” This is the first time anyone from Marvel has actually addressed the issue. Buckley’s statement suggests that Marvel intends to continue working with Netflix on their current slate; including Daredevil , Jessica Jones , Iron Fist , Luke Cage , The Defenders , and The Punisher . That news will leave fans delighted, but it makes perfect sense. Why mess with success? At the same time, Buckley hints that Marvel won’t be looking to increase their Netflix slate. Notice that he calls out the Disney-branded streaming service. It’s already been confirmed that this service will launch with at least one Marvel series , and it seems to be the natural home for future shows. While Buckley doesn’t explicitly address the issue, fans will also note that he doesn’t deny a rumor that’s been circulating since November. The Hollywood Reporter revealed that Marvel was pulling the New Warriors series from Freeform . They noted sources suggesting that Disney-owned Marvel “is no longer able to sell to outside companies.” It’s worth noting that this doesn’t mean all future Marvel TV series will skew towards a less mature audience. This is a time of real change for Disney, who have launched an unprecedented bid to purchase the bulk of rival 21st Century Fox . Disney’s goals include acquiring the Fox Vault, which would massively bolster the potential contents of their streaming service. This Vault includes horror franchises such as The Omen or Aliens . If Disney really want to capitalize on their new acquisitions, they’ll have to create age-appropriate versions of their streaming service. Shows similar in style and tone to the Marvel Netflix series would naturally be part of the more mature offering.

Black Panther won’t serve as a direct prequel to Avengers: Infinity War . The film will officially cement Chadwick Boseman as the newest power player in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and along with him a whole country full of interesting people just waiting for their time under the spotlight. The movie’s pre-release ticket sales are going well, and even outpacing Captain America: Civil War , proving people’s eagerness to immediately see what the flick is all about. But the buzz that surrounds the flick is bigger than its Marvel branding as it’s expected to have a huge effect in terms of social awareness and proper representation in media. So far, Black Panther‘s box office projections suggest that it is expected to nab $120 million during its opening weekend, an amount that surpasses Spider-Man: Homecoming ‘s $117 million record for a debut solo film. SR’s recent visit to the set of Black Panther revealed that Marvel Studios did not ask director Ryan Coogler to make his film in a way that it will directly set-up Infinity War. Timeline-wise, it would’ve made sense, but producer Nate Moore says that while the flick will serve its purpose in the overall franchise, it will also work well as a standalone with its own self-contained story: SR: “Scott Derrickson talked a lot about the freedom that he had on Doctor Strange and getting to just tell a Doctor Strange story that happened to be in the MCU. Obviously this is a little more linked to the MCU coming out of Civil War. How interlinked with the MCU is it and how much does that dictate what you’re able to do with the story?” Moore: “I think it’s inherently linked because of the Civil War connections and because of the Ultron connections with Klaue. So there are strings that we are playing with. But again, much like Doctor Strange, we felt this had enough storytelling that it could stand alone beyond those things. We wanted to give Ryan the freedom to tell a story that wasn’t relying on other things that were happening in the MCU. Now that doesn’t mean what happens in the film won’t have ripples in the MCU but the film itself isn’t relying on other plot points in the MCU.” While Coogler was not given a clear roadmap to follow in his film, in Feige’s blueprint, Wakanda is already going to be a huge part of Infinity War. The trailer for the ensemble flick has indicated as much with the fictional country being the backdrop of what seems to be a huge action set piece including several of the original Avengers alongside T’Challa’s men. It’s not entirely clear why it’s being attacked by an army of Outriders, creatures from Thanos’ invasion force. A popular theory is that it will be where the last unfound gem – the Soul Stone – is being kept which offers some sense as to why the Mad Titan is singling out the nation. In hindsight, Black Panther doesn’t really need to set-up Infinity War any further. More than a dozen prior MCU films have already done that. What it has to do is establish a new hero that people can get behind, as he will be a pivotal game player down the line for the MCU after its principal heroes have retired. His home country of Wakanda has long been part of the franchise and was first an Easter Egg in Iron Man 2. The mere existence of Captain America’s shield (which is made of Vibranium) is further proof that it has always been there, just waiting to be explored. Coogler’s film promises a deep dive into the hidden country, especially its cultural and political dynamics, both within its borders and outside of it.

A new rumor suggests that the extra Superman scenes releasing on the Justice League Blu-ray are less than 2 minutes long. Ever since news broke that Zack Snyder’s latest superhero film – starring Ben Affleck (Batman), Henry Cavill (Superman), Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman), Ezra Miller (The Flash), Jason Momoa (Aquaman), and Ray Fisher (Cyborg) as the world’s finest heroes – would be cut down to 2 hours in length, fans started to wonder if Warner Bros. was gearing up to release yet another extended cut on home video. Upon seeing what Joss Whedon and the studio did with Justice League during post-production – particularly with trimming the bulk of Superman’s scenes as well as removing the backstory for most of the characters in favor of a more streamlined good-vs-evil story arc – fans started campaigning for an extended cut, one filled with Snyder’s original scenes shot during principal photography ( including the rumored black Superman suit ). When it became clear that the studio wasn’t going to release such a cut, some fans were happy to find out that at least a few deleted scenes will be on the film’s Blu-ray. Unfortunately, there won’t be as many as previously thought. According to a post on the Blu-ray forums , The Return of Superman deleted scenes releasing on the Justice League Blu-ray have a total runtime of only 1 minute 51 seconds. That’s much shorter than what people might have been expecting. It’s certainly less than the deleted scenes that were included on Wonder Woman‘s Blu-ray release – and Wonder Woman included every scene Patty Jenkins wanted . We postulated that the extra Superman scenes may actually be scenes that were shown in various trailers, such as the one in which Superman visits Alfred outside the Batcave . It was a scene that was teased at the end of the film’s SDCC 2017 footage, and one that was heavily speculated upon by DC and DCEU fans. But with the extra scenes adding up to under 2 minutes in length, it’s unlikely that more than two scenes will be included in the Blu-ray release. At the moment, the only scene that people can definitely look forward to watching is Clark retrieve his Superman suit (a scene that calls back to his first time wearing the suit in 2013’s Man of Steel). Any extra scene on the film’s Blu-ray is warmly welcome, but it’s a far cry from what fans wanted (and were expecting). Sure, it’s possible that Warner Bros. could eventually release a Justice League Snyder cut, but that prospect is looking less and less likely as time goes on, especially as the studio is trying to move forward with new projects under Walter Hamada’s new leadership at DC Films .

The reviews aren’t pretty for the third and final chapter in the Maze Runner film series, The Death Cure. Expectations should never be all that high for a Young Adult franchise threequel, especially not one released in the barren box office wasteland that is January. The fact that Maze Runner: The Death Cure arrives well after the Young Adult movie trend has come and gone certainly doesn’t help, either. The film series did get off to a fairly promising start with 2014’s The Maze Runner, a solid dystopian thriller with a compelling lead (Dylan O’Brien) and an impressive cast of up and coming talent (Will Poulter, Ki Hong Lee, and Thomas Brodie-Sangster, among others). The follow-up, The Scorch Trials, was cobbled together and released less than a year after its predecessor debuted, however, and it showed onscreen. Despite the sequel representing a noticeable step back for the franchise, the modestly-budgeted first two entries combined to pull in over $660 million at the box office. So yeah, a third film was inevitable. Unfortunately, it looks like The Death Cure is more Scorch Trials than Maze Runner. Though it’s far from the worst threequel the Young Adult genre has ever seen (oh hey, Allegiant! Didn’t see you there!), critics certainly aren’t being kind to the film. It’s currently under fire for its lack of originality, compelling characters, and, well, reason for existing. When you make a movie simply to finish a story and make money, you’re going to get called out on it — here are The Most Brutal Reviews For Maze Runner: The Death Cure. The lack of tight plotting and a sprawling narrative that rarely challenges expectations leaves The Death Cure as a bloated, meandering mess that shows why the YA genre, at least in terms of dystopian futures, has died off. It doesn’t move the ball forward in a significant way, it doesn’t consistently play to its strengths, and even relies on tired plot points like a character who has special blood. Rather than carving out a space in the YA genre to call its own, The Death Cure showed that the Maze Runner series peaked in its first installment, and could never find its way to the finish line. — Collider Maze Runner: The Death Cure is 142 minutes that you can never get back … There’s really little point in investing more thought in this movie than the filmmakers, is there? — San Francisco Chronicle The bad news is that Maze Runner: The Death Cure is so bloated and runs so long that it begins to feel like two movies. Interminable dull stretches blunt the impact of undeniably exciting action sequences, making the series finale unlikely to leave even fans wanting more … By the time the villainous scientist played by Aidan Gillen sighs in the middle of a fight scene, “OK, that’s enough,” you’ll have long since come to share his weariness. — THR Now the Gladers are fighting WCKD to eradicate all the Cranks stricken with the Flare. Confused? Then stop right here. Seriously. Bye. Maze Runner: The Death Cure, the uneven and unwieldy finale to the dystopian Us-against-Them trilogy, is strictly for fans that have journeyed this far and need certain closure. — US Magazine And so they run. And run some more. Run for their lives. Run for much of that bloated, ah, running time. They’re captured, imprisoned, freed, pursued, recaptured and … you get the idea. They run endlessly, through tunnels and corridors and sewers. They get injured and are lugged to safety by their uninjured pals, who themselves are then injured, and the cycle repeats. Before long you find yourself wondering, “Say, didn’t I just see this?” Answer: Yes. And then you see it again. And again. I thought it would never end. — Seattle Times Little about The Death Cure can be considered satisfying on any level. Canyon-sized plot holes remain, salvation frequently comes out of thin air, and character motivations become matters of narrative convenience. — ReelViews So, explain to me again why the answer to all apocalypses is to kill and torture teenagers? … I feel if you just simply asked unaffected teens to help find a cure, maybe gave them free pizza, you could have avoided the trouble of creating a high-tech Potemkin village to stimulate their adrenal glands to secrete hormonal jamba juice. Or something. — Original Cin Maze Runner: The Death Cure is for diehard Maze Runner fans only. Between the extended wait, the extended length, and the characters without character, it’s unlikely anybody else will have the constitution required to get the end of this maze. — CinemaBlend Fans of the dystopian franchise may find a satisfying conclusion to the YA trilogy among the rubble but boy, the actual acting is very poor. O’Brien as determined rebel leader Thomas is as wooden as ever and Kaya Scodelario, as turncoat rebel Teresa, nearly overdoes him in that regard … I’ve never wanted a eugenical, post-apocalyptic totalitarian regime to crush a brigade of teen rebels so much in my life. — RTÉ (Ireland) It utterly fails to do anything surprising or spectacular that hadn’t already been laid out in the previous chapters. In fact, it’ll just make you cranky … If you haven’t seen the other two films, why start now? Don’t make this your entry point. Maybe it’s best you sit this series out, full stop. — SassyMamaInLA

Garrett Hedlund admits that Tomorrowland ‘s poor box office performance affected TRON 3 ‘s chances of happening. Long-awaited sequels can be hits or misses; there’s no guarantee that a film which was successful in one year can have a sequel release years later and be equally successful, especially if studios wait decades to release the next installment. A clear example of this is Joseph Kosinski’s TRON: Legacy , which released 28 years after Steven Lisberger’s TRON and takes place 27 years after the events of that first film. Jeff Bridges and Bruce Boxleitner reprised their TRON roles as Kevin Flynn and Alan Bradley, respectively, in TRON: Legacy, with Hedlund playing Bridge’s son, Sam Flynn, and Olivia Wilde playing Quorra, an isomorphic algorithm who Flynn believed could change the world. Of course, that outcome was never explored. Unfortunately, the sequel’s box office performance – $400 million worldwide against an estimated production budget of $170 million – wasn’t strong enough for Disney to justify a third film, though it was something that they had on their minds for several years. A third film was finally confirmed in 2015, but Disney ended up canceling TRON 3 altogether that May. As it turns out, the cancellation was partly because Brad Bird’s Tomorrowland underperformed (something that was believed but never confirmed). In an interview with MTV’s Happy Sad Confused podcast, Garrett Hedlund explains that TRON 3 fell through partly because Tomorrowland had some issues at the box office (which is code for flopping). He said: “When the next TRON was supposed to start – we were greenlit and ready to go – and then [Disney] had troubles with how Tomorrowland did. And I think they asked them to give them like a hundred reasons why they should do [TRON 3]. And if that didn’t fall through, I never would’ve been able to work with [Stephen] Soderbergh on [Mosaic].” Tomorrowland was the last ambitious sci-fi project Walt Disney Studios has backed. The movie released in a prime summertime slot and significantly underperformed at the worldwide box office, grossing $209.2 million globally against an estimated production budget of $190 million. Ever since then, the Mouse House has seen overwhelming success with live-action remakes and reimaginings of classic fairy tale and animated stories, such as The Jungle Book and Beauty and the Beast – and they don’t plan on slowing down production on those films anytime soon. Despite receiving mixed-to-negative reviews from critics, TRON: Legacy was generally more warmly received from audiences. And the film has since become a fan-favorite amongst sci-fi enthusiasts, which is why fans continually ask Disney to green light a third film. While TRON 3 is unlikely to ever happen, Disney is working on a TRON reboot with Jared Leto in the title role.

Fans of the witchy soap opera Charmed are finally getting the long-awaited reboot they’ve all been dying for. The CW has officially agreed to a pilot order for the series. The Charmed reboot has been in the works for years now but was never able to gain enough traction to make it onto TV screens. The original plot of the reboot was intended to take place in the ’70s. Plans to incorporate the show’s original stars , Shannen Doherty (Prue), Holly Marie Combs (Piper), Alyssa Milano (Phoebe), and Rose McGowan (Paige), were initially in the works. But the writers – Jane the Virgin‘s Jessica O’Toole, Amy Rardin, and Jennie Urman – ultimately dropped that angle , planning to cut out any connection to the original series. The network ended up passing on the reboot when things didn’t end up quite the way they envisioned. TVLine now reports that The CW has given the official green light to the Charmed reboot, offering a pilot commitment to the same Jane the Virgin writing crew. Director Brad Silberling and Ben Silverman round out the showrunning side. The newly reworked reboot will take place in present-day and is promised to be a “fierce, funny, and feminist reboot.” The supernatural plot will follow three sisters as they discover themselves to be witches. The newfound magic-users will navigate their recently acquired abilities while simultaneously “tearing down the patriarchy.” So, it’s exactly like the original Charmed, but set in a college town, basically. There is still no word on whether or not the original actresses will put in an appearance, either in a reprisal of their original roles or some other capacity. Nor is it clear whether the reboot will be disconnected from the Halliwell universe completely. Anyone familiar with the original series knows that the Halliwell sisters were frequent proponents of women’s rights. Episodes explored everything from breastfeeding in public to sexual harassment. Nowadays, the show’s actresses are continuing their fictional counterpart’s crusade. Alyssa Milano has been a champion of the #MeToo movement , popularizing the hashtag and inspiring women of all ages to share their personal stories of assault and harassment. Rose McGowan has been one of the most vocal accusers of Harvey Weinstein, detailing her assault and accusing other celebrities of both being aware of and hiding Weinstein’s behavior from the general public. McGowan will soon be featured in a documentary series, Citizen Rose , that will chronicle her attempts to release her memoir, Brave, as she learns to heal through art and positivity.

The first trailer for Christopher McQuarrie’s Mission: Impossible 6, subtitled Fallout, is confirmed to air during Super Bowl LII on Sunday, February 4. Tom Cruise is reprising his role as Ethan Hunt for the sixth installment in the long-running action-spy franchise (based on the 1960s TV series of the same name created by Bruce Geller) with the Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation director returning at the wheel. This marks the first time in the series’ history that a director has helmed two Mission: Impossible installments. Cruise and Paramount Pictures revealed the Mission: Impossible 6‘s official title this morning along with a short cast list and a new synopsis. While the synopsis doesn’t give much of the story away, it does state that Hunt and his team reunite after a mission goes wrong (as per usual with these films). Simon Pegg, Ving Rhames, Rebecca Ferguson, and Michelle Monaghan are all reprising their roles from past installments, with Henry Cavill, Angela Bassett, and Vanessa Kirby making their franchise debut with Fallout. Unfortunately, Jeremy Renner won’t be returning for Fallout due to a scheduling conflict with Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers 4. Still, fans are excited about Mission: Impossible 6, and they will be getting their first real look at the film next Sunday. The first trailer for Mission: Impossible – Fallout is scheduled to debut on Sunday, February 4, presumably during Super Bowl LII alongside a handful of other movie trailers. Tom Cruise made the announcement on Chinese microblogging platform Weibo this morning, saying that the film’s first trailer would arrive in 10 days. Fallout will presumably feature all the bells and whistles that distinguish the Mission: Impossible series from other action franchises, such as death-defying stunts and outrageous missions, but many moviegoers, particularly DCEU fans, will undoubtedly be interested in seeing how Henry Cavill’s mustache factors into his character’s role in the film. After all, the fact that McQuarrie and Paramount wouldn’t allow Cavill to shave his mustache for last year’s Justice League reshoots caused quite a stir – and the result wasn’t quite what people hoped to see on-screen. McQuarrie turned the franchise on its head with Rogue Nation when the film opened with its biggest stunt – Cruise hanging on the side of a plane. While it’s unclear what Cruise’s major stunt for Fallout will be, the first look image (above) that shows him hanging on the side of a helicopter might have something to do with it. Then again, McQuarrie and Cruise may be playing their cards close to the chest for a special reveal later on down the line. Mission: Impossible – Fallout‘s first trailer should shed some light on the matter, though.

Site is Freeleech until tomorrow.

Hello everyone! We just pushed some big updates to our site. Details as follows: ######################################## # INVITATION SYSTEM ######################################## TorrentBD closed the door to Open signups back in 2011. If you wonder why so, basically it was because of the philosophy "QUALITY OVER QUANTITY". But our dated invitation system has not exactly been helping that purpose. So we had to make some changes. The changes are - # System will automatically allocate invites to users based on their Ranks and activites. So if you are active and maintaining your account well, you won't have to trade seedbonus for invites anymore. The higher rank you are in, more the number of invites system allows you. # Use of seedbonus to redeem invite is still available. But the cost is higher. It's for the best. On top of that you have to meet certain requirements in order to redeem invite with seedbonus. Invites you can redeem with seedbonus is also limited as per your rank. But again, you don't need to worry about all these. Just maintain your account, system will take care of your invite allocation. # Often asked, "what's the benefit of inviting someone?". Well we didn't have any substantial answer to that. Now there's one to begin with. Whenever someone invited by you gets promoted to higher rank, you'll be rewarded with seedbonus points accordingly. ######################################## # THE DARK THEME ######################################## Lights out! The responsive look of the site has been incomplete without an option to switch the color scheme. It's finally here. Something that's easy on the eyes. You can expect more options in future. ######################################## # SEEDBONUS REDEEM OPTIONS ######################################## # The big addition: You can now redeem FREELEECH hours with seedbonus. So have your self declared Sitewide Freeleech when you need. (Redeem option limited to 1/week) # Redesigned seedbonus page. Contents are presented in more straightforward way. # Upload traffic trade values were updated/adjusted to add more balance. ######################################## # REQUEST SECTION ######################################## # We offer you a cleaner, updated Request section. Easier than ever to use and browse through. More options to be added in the upcoming update. # Users can now add more bounty (from 20 GB upto 100 GB) according to their ranks. ######################################## # FORUMS ######################################## As always forum section received some improvement updates. # Settings have been added to customize how you view the forum posts. You can choose how many posts you want on each page. You can also choose to hide user signatures and avatars for readability.

As part of the national anti-fraud awareness campaign Take Five, this week the Federation Against Copyright Theft asked consumers to consider whether the site or service they're using is pirate or not. Their sound advice is to do research to find out, but there are actually plenty of tell-tale signs for those lacking clarity on the pirate high seas. There’s a persistent theory that people exist who are using pirate sites but don’t realize that they’re unauthorized and/or illegal. While that seems likely, it’s hard to believe the volumes are particularly significant. Nevertheless, numerous campaigns have attempted to enlighten consumers as to what is and isn’t legal and this week the Federation Against Copyright Theft raised the issue once again. Tagging onto UK anti-fraud awareness campaign Take Five, the anti-piracy outfit asked people to take five minutes to consider the legality of the site or service they’re currently consuming. FACT’s advice above is basically sound. They ask people to do their research on the sites FindAnyFilm and GetItRight, both of which should give consumers an idea of where content can be obtained legally. Trouble is, neither resource is comprehensive, so five minutes of research could turn into ten or fifteen, by which time people could get bored of trying to do the right thing. So, with this in mind, here are a few light-hearted tips to help people spot whether the site they’re using is authorized by the movie industry or a product of a swashbuckling mind. Does the site want your name, address and life history? If the site you’re accessing looks really polished, has a positive Wikipedia page, but won’t give you anything more than a trailer without handing over your full identity and credit card details, this is probably a legal platform. Since they have to license movies from Hollywood and other filmmakers, sites like these cost a lot of money to run. As a result, they want your money to pay the bills and they like to make sure you can pay up front. When you think about it, it makes perfect sense. No money, no access – capiche? Does the site look polished but doesn’t ask for a dime? If the site you’re looking at seems like the one mentioned above but doesn’t seem to care who you are, this is starting to look like a pirate site. If it then offers up thousands of movies and TV shows without accessing your wallet or dental records, you’re definitely on the high seas. While this position is pleasurable for people with a penchant for piracy, there are plenty of points to ponder. Is the site already starting to get on your nerves a bit? You’re browsing a site, looking at all the beautiful movies and TV shows on offer, then one takes your fancy. You click it with both anticipation and excitement but instead of the video appearing, a new tab or popup appears in your browser. If this unexpected visitor offers a penis extension, a night out with a girl in your area, or a get-rich-quick scheme you feel you need but don’t understand, this is probably a pirate site. These stupid offers are the price you pay for not paying. This is how it works. While movies and TV shows cost money to create and require financial support from the consumer, pirate sites use various techniques to obtain that content for free. Then, with a wave of a magic wand, they cover the costs of delivering it to pirates using advertising. However, due to pressures put on them by the content industries, pirate sites generally have to serve up poor quality ads. Crappy ads everywhere = almost definitely a pirate site. The movie site i’m using is really confusing, is it legal? After obtaining your banking details, mother’s maiden name, and blood type, legal sites are generally very straightforward. Pleasurably content and feature-rich, services like Netflix and Spotify are simplicity itself to use. Their interfaces are clean, tidy, and don’t do anything unexpected. These are just some of the key features you get in return for handing over your money to a legal service. On the other hand, however, if you’re on a site that has six different download buttons and none of them seem to actually download anything, this is probably a pirate site, and a low grade one at that. Back away quickly, regroup, and never go back – unless you have an ad-blocker turned all the way up to 11, of course. Wow! This site has all the latest movies! Is it legal? Some of Hollywood’s greatest assets are its just-released movies. It holds these tightly, like a protective mother, restricting viewing only to those who pay large amounts of money for the privilege. As a general rule, if you’re watching them for free on the Internet, chances are it’s not only unauthorized but probably illegal too. That being said, most people don’t give a damn due to all the excitement, free content, and tiny chances of being caught. Note: If a movie came out today, last week, or even last month, and you’ve spent a large sum of money to watch it alongside hundreds of noisy others in a big room while eating over-priced taste-free snacks, CONGRATULATIONS! You’ve found the only way to watch the latest movies legally. I really love this site, it has everything I want in one place. Is that legal? STOP. This is definitely an illegal site. While it is the movie and TV industries’ job to entertain the masses, it also has a side mission to ensure that you will never – EVER – find all the content you want in one place. Remember: to stay legal and have access to the broadest range of video content, you need to subscribe to several official services while handing over handfuls of cash every month. If you find that after parting with large sums of cash you still can’t find all the content you want, then you can be sure you’re doing this by the book and entirely legally. Only people using pirate services find all the stuff they need in one or two places. A service is offering me every TV channel for £10/$10/€10 per month. Legal? If your local TV cable or satellite provider demands a pile of cash an inch thick to access every channel they have for a month, please be informed they have worked very hard to achieve that monopoly position. There is no way on planet earth that another legal supplier will be able to undercut them by 90%. Yes, that includes fully-loaded Fire TV Sticks bought off Pete down the pub. As a rule of thumb, if you’re delighted with the ‘special’ TV service you bought off Facebook yet still have enough money to take the family out for a meal at a half decent restaurant, alarm bells should be ringing. Legal buyers can generally afford to gorge on either TV or food. If you’re full to bursting due to excessive consumption of both, you’re either using a pirate service or have enough money not to need one. These tips are not exhaustive – feel free to add your own in the comments

The operator of a Tor exit-node faces tens of thousands of dollars in potential damages because his connection was allegedly used to download a pirated copy of Dallas Buyers Club. The movie company used the operator's lack of response as proof, but the defendant is now striking back, questioning whether the company actually owns the proper copyrights. The copyright holders of Dallas Buyers Club have sued thousands of BitTorrent users over the past few years. The film company first obtains the identity of the Internet account holder believed to have pirated the movie, after which most cases are settled behind closed doors. It doesn’t always go this easily though. A lawsuit in an Oregon federal court has been ongoing for nearly three years but in this case the defendant was running a Tor exit node, which complicates matters. Tor is an anonymity tool and operating a relay or exit point basically means that the traffic of hundreds or thousands of users hit the Internet from your IP-address. When pirates use Tor, it will then appear as if the traffic comes from this connection. The defendant in this lawsuit, John Huszar, has repeatedly denied that he personally downloaded a pirated copy of the film. However, he is now facing substantial damages because he failed to respond to a request for admissions, which stated that he distributed the film. Not responding to such an admission means that the court can assume the statement is true. “An admission, even an admission deemed admitted because of a failure to respond, is binding on the party at trial,” Dallas Buyers Club noted in a recent filing, demanding a summary judgment. The unanswered admissions Huszar was represented by various attorneys over the course of the lawsuit, but when the admissions were “deemed admitted” he was unrepresented and in poor health. According to his lawyer, Ballas Buyers Club is using this to obtain a ruling in its favor. The film company argues that the Tor exit node operator admitted willful infringement, which could cost him up to $150,000 in damages. The admissions present a serious problem. However, even if they’re taken as truth, they are not solid proof, according to the defense. For example, the portion of the film could have just been a trailer. In addition, the defense responds with several damaging accusations of its own. According to Huszar’s lawyer, it is unclear whether Dallas Buyers Club LLC has the proper copyrights to sue his client. In previous court cases in Australia and Texas, this ownership was put in doubt. “In the case at bar, because of facts established in other courts, there is a genuine issue as to whether or not DBC owns the right to sue for copyright infringement,” the defense writes. As licensing constructions can be quite complex, this isn’t unthinkable. Just last week another U.S. District Court judge told the self-proclaimed owners of the movie Fathers & Daughters that they didn’t have the proper rights to take an alleged pirate to trial. Another issue highlighted by the defense is the reliability of witnesses Daniel Macek and Ben Perino. Both men are connected to the BitTorrent tracking outfit MaverickEye, and are not without controversy, as reported previously. “oth parties have previously been found to lack the qualifications, experience, education, and licenses to offer such forensic or expert testimony,” the defense writes, citing a recent case. Finally, the defense also highlights that given the fact that Huszar operated a Tor exit-node, anyone could have downloaded the film. The defense, therefore, asks the court to deny Dallas Buyers Club’s motion for summary judgment, or at least allow the defendant to conduct additional discovery to get to the bottom of the copyright ownership issue.

New players forced to pay extra for bundled, cosmetic loot boxes. If there's one seemingly ironclad rule in video games, it's that the suggested prices for hardware and software don't get higher after launch day (aside from a few used game rarities, of course). Enter Ubisoft, seeking to be the exception that proves the rule by introducing a $20 price increase for most versions of Rainbow Six Siege roughly two years after the game's initial launch. The price adjustment isn't as simple as an across-the-board price hike for the same content, though. For one, PC players will still have access to a $15 Starter Edition, which includes the full game but requires a lengthier gameplay grind to unlock playable "Operators." Players who want to reduce that grind have had to opt for the $40 Standard Edition, which was available on PC and console. Ubisoft says that option is going away and being replaced with a $60 Advanced Edition that includes 10 new Outbreak Packs—randomized loot boxes that include one of 50 cosmetic items. Existing players will only receive four Outbreak Packs if they log in during a four-week in-game event, and all players can purchase more with real money (players can't get duplicate items this way, so buying 50 packs guarantees the full set). The price for existing $70 Gold Edition will increase to $90, and the Complete Edition price will increase from $110 to $130, Ubisoft said. Those editions now include 10 Outbreak packs and access to "Year 3 pass" DLC, which will cost $30 for players who previously purchased those editions at their lower prices. All editions of the game will now come with 600 R6 credits, which can be used for in-game items. The game's subreddit is already (predictably) full of irate commenters reacting to the move. "Considering that the starter edition is really shitty, new players will have to pay $60 for a two-year-old game," user Azagorath wrote. "I have friends who are considering buying this, but this just guaranteed them NOT buying it because they neither want to pay $60 for an old game nor grind 12.5K per basic Op," user iiii_Hex added. Going in reverse As games evolve significantly after their initial release these days, it's not uncommon for publishers to release "Game of the Year" editions or other such "complete" packages that round up all the post-launch DLC into a slightly more expensive package. What makes Ubisoft's treatment of Rainbow Six: Siege different is that the cheaper, DLC-free editions are being removed. In practice, new players are essentially being forced to pay $20 more than earlier players for a handful of cosmetic items. The price hike could reflect Ubisoft's continued confidence in Rainbow Six: Siege, which climbed to 25 million registered players last month and attracted over two million daily players as of last summer. The company seems to be betting that new players will be willing to pay a slightly higher price to join a competitive tactical shooter with such an established player base. But other successful shooters usually go the other way with their pricing years after launch. Blizzard has used occasional sales to lower the entry point for the wildly popular Overwatch, giving more players the opportunity to buy its loot boxes. Overkill offered a permanent price cut on the Payday 2 and DLC just over a year after launch. Valve stopped charging for Team Fortress 2 altogether in 2011, leading to a 12-fold increase in revenue thanks to increased purchases of in-game hats. On the other hand, free-to-play MMO Rift announced just last week that it will be bringing back paid subscriptions in the near future. By charging more for new players to get in the door, Ubisoft might be grabbing short-term pennies but missing the longer-term dollars that come from having a larger and more engaged player base. Then again, Ubisoft might just be recognizing that proven and continued high demand for its game means it can raise more money with a higher entrance fee.