By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox Live: No Longer the Gold Standard

Farsala on 04 January 2013
Lostplanet22 said:
It is rather annoying when a journalist who bought a game full price and all its expansions full price...And then pay every month just to play it for more than 5 years (WoW) and do this even for other MMO's aswell then start to complain about MS GOLD.

Mention that to those journalist and they come with logic answers as 'You must be an MS fanboy'!.


Can other MMOs let him play WoW? Did not think so thus he pays for WoW. Can other people offer the same thing MS makes you pay for? Apparently yes.



Around the Network
iFlow on 04 January 2013

I honestly don't see why people are bringing this up so far into this generation. May or may not be the best choice (isn't for me to decide, its your choice), but it is a very successful model. Next generation will be different. Either Gold will gain more benefits, or Sony will start charging. Microsoft and Sony both know that they're endangered by the other.



sunK1D on 04 January 2013
VGKing said:
sunK1D said:
VGKing said:
runqvist said:
As long as it makes money for MS, it should not go away. It is quite simple.

You could argue that Xbox Live GOLD is at a point where it actually drives consumers to the competition. Years ago when I had very little spending money it meantn those $60 meant the difference between playing online or buying a new game. So unless 14 years old are out there working jobs, I expect the free PSN to be a major selling point for PS4 just as it was for PS3.


I'm no insider..

But if LIVE wasn't worthwhile for MS they would have dropped it by now don't you think?

There are ohter factors that drive sales and those factors seem to account for more sales than they lose with a XBL fee.

Never said LIVE wasn't worthwhile to MS, but even when it isn't it will be hard to change. It's hard for companies to accept changes and move away from traditions. Just ask Sony.


Sorry, i meant LIVE as in the $50/y fee and not the service itself as that is obviously a core MS strategy and they would just get rid of it.

Keep i mind that Sony and Nintendo are both traditional Japanese companies. It's far easier to get a western company to adapt under pressure than it is to get a Japanese company to do the same, as Nintendo and Sony have both proven time after time.



fillet on 04 January 2013
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:
Honestly.. I'll continue to support live as long as I think its worth it.

But I think that criticisms like this, specially from major gaming websites is healthy. I then also support the heavy criticism of Live as this puts pressure to MS to implement more features.... USEFUL FEATURES.

I hope that some day, we will get deals like Ps+ does.


Your point of view is the most correct one in this thread.

 

We have the Sony fans - blah blah blah we shouldn't pay for live (and they don't anyway), but they're only saying it as a defensive statement because they know how damn successful it is and can't think of anything intelligent to say and just love to be negative towards MS even if it means making up a load of stupid lies, how sad.

Then we have a reporter who couldn't think of a good story to write to - aimed at those PS3 fans who likely have never even used Live.

Then we have the people who pay for Live.....and to be honest, don't really care.

Sure there's a few of the "I used to own an Xbox 360 now I own a PS3"...most of which are lying, the rest are those types that see themselves as intellectually elevated and smoke a pipe in a library, there's not many of them.

 

End of the day, it makes money, people are willing to pay.

 

 

THERE'S NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THEY AREN'T FOR NEXT GEN...Just a load of anecdotal BS from Sony fans who have never even played an Xbox 360.

Whatever, bad losers! :p ...nobody cares, and nobody asked you.

 

This might sound like a really immature post and it's half in gest, but it's basically how it is...sadly.



Cub on 04 January 2013

"Don't like it? don't buy it" argument is not a bad argument but it has no place in forums where all people like to do is discussing stuff, especially vgcharts.



Around the Network
thranx on 04 January 2013
disolitude said:
Microsoft knows what they are doing with live. If people pay for online gaming, they are less likely to goof off, hack and cheat when they game online. Also skill based matchmaking doesn't work if online gaming is free and people can open unlimited accounts with different emails. If I rank up in a shooter, and feel like I'd like to go own some noobs, I would just open a new free online account.

Microsoft needs to keep up the good work with expanding live and adding features and not worry about making things free...


my thoughts exactly



Lostplanet22 on 05 January 2013
Farsala said:
Lostplanet22 said:
It is rather annoying when a journalist who bought a game full price and all its expansions full price...And then pay every month just to play it for more than 5 years (WoW) and do this even for other MMO's aswell then start to complain about MS GOLD.

Mention that to those journalist and they come with logic answers as 'You must be an MS fanboy'!.


Can other MMOs let him play WoW? Did not think so thus he pays for WoW. Can other people offer the same thing MS makes you pay for? Apparently yes.

Apparently no because otherwise they would go  for that other thing.



 

ice on 05 January 2013

Online gaming should be free, period.
M$ can still make money by making Gold worthwhile



J_Allard on 05 January 2013

Funny, I just got off PSN, and XBLG still seems like the "gold standard" to me.



Normando on 05 January 2013

Well, I think most people are okay with paying for Live. It's not a great value but as long as people keep voting with there money you probably won't see it go away. I'm sure at least some of that money goes into keeping Live secure and smooth aswell.

Anyone just posting things like "Boring" or "we haven't seen anything like this before". Simply want to avoid talking about it because it makes there "team" look bad. Just because a discussion has been repeated doesn't make it any less valid. Maybe if people like that actually added anything meaningful it wouldn't have to be repeated.