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

El_Machete on 04 January 2013
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?


this is the core of my problem with xbox at the moment. I wanna play Halo 4 and Gears 3, but don't want pay extra for online. 

And to all the people here saying "not another GOLD is bad" article... how many do we have to see to realize that something is wrong?



Around the Network
dsgrue3 on 04 January 2013
Lostplanet22 said:
Say that to all those MMO players.

 

Slightly different, but the concept is not dissimilar and I have the same gripe with them.

MMO restriction is confined to that one particular game. MS is restricting EVERY game.



Lostplanet22 on 04 January 2013
dsgrue3 said:
Lostplanet22 said:
Say that to all those MMO players.

 

Slightly different, but the concept is not dissimilar and I have the same gripe with them.

MMO restriction is confined to that one particular game. MS is restricting EVERY game.

Damned so MS should let you pay for every game that you want to play online?  Because that sounds like a better thing to do if I read your comment.



 

El_Machete on 04 January 2013
Lostplanet22 said:
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?

Say that to all those MMO players.


do you have any idea what is happening in the MMO space? have you heard of free-to-play? subscribtions are going down hard



kitler53 on 04 January 2013

i have to wonder what MS would look like if online multiplayer was free? would anyone pay for gold? would 360 have been massively more popular than it was? would MS be profitable? would MS be more profitable?

all i know is i had an xbox already in my house and boxed it up and bought a ps3 specifically because of live gold. MS lost a ton of money on me when i moved camps.



Around the Network
dsgrue3 on 04 January 2013
Lostplanet22 said:
dsgrue3 said:

Slightly different, but the concept is not dissimilar and I have the same gripe with them.

MMO restriction is confined to that one particular game. MS is restricting EVERY game.

Damned so MS should let you pay for every game that you want to play online?  Because that sounds like a better thing to do if I read your comment.

How did you get that from my comment?

MS isn't a game. MS is a company restricting online for any and every game - that they had no part in making.

MMO is a game, not a company that restricts other games. 



Jaywood2010 on 04 January 2013
El_Machete said:
Lostplanet22 said:
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?

Say that to all those MMO players.


do you have any idea what is happening in the MMO space? have you heard of free-to-play? subscribtions are going down hard

Pay to Win?  




       

disolitude on 04 January 2013

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...



El_Machete on 04 January 2013
kowenicki said:
El_Machete said:
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?


this is the core of my problem with xbox at the moment. I wanna play Halo 4 and Gears 3, but don't want pay extra for online. 

And to all the people here saying "not another GOLD is bad" article... how many do we have to see to realize that something is wrong?


Help me out here:

You have an xbox, but you dont want to buy Halo and Gears because you will have to pay for onlne?

or

You dont have an xbox and the price of LIve is putting you off, but you really want to play Halo and Gears?

 

I have 2 360, one is rrod (thinking of fixing and giving it to little brother) and i have an slim. I have a silver account. So if i buy Halo 4 i will not be able to play online, and i will not get gold for only one game.



El_Machete on 04 January 2013
JayWood2010 said:
El_Machete said:
Lostplanet22 said:
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?

Say that to all those MMO players.


do you have any idea what is happening in the MMO space? have you heard of free-to-play? subscribtions are going down hard

Pay to Win?  


go back to bed dude...