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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - CONFIRMED: Free dedicated servers for all XB1 games that want them

Machiavellian on 16 October 2013
SandyVGina said:
Most of the shooter I played last gen on the PS3 had dedicated servers, Warhawk, Resistance 1 and 2, Killzone 2 and 3, MAG.... I really do not see how this gives xbox live an advantage... It doesn't...

You know those are all frist party games you mention right?  What about all those 3rd party developers and publishers out there.



Around the Network
SandyVGina on 16 October 2013
Machiavellian said:
SandyVGina said:
Most of the shooter I played last gen on the PS3 had dedicated servers, Warhawk, Resistance 1 and 2, Killzone 2 and 3, MAG.... I really do not see how this gives xbox live an advantage... It doesn't...

You know those are all frist party games you mention right?  What about all those 3rd party developers and publishers out there.


Yeah, my point is that its nothing new....  Microsoft is bragging about something that Sony gave us even when  the PSN was free. COD is finally offering dedicated servers, though it should of happened long ago with all of the money that game brings in. And I think all platforms will have these dedicated servers for Ghost. I really don't care who pays for them, just glad that we are getting them.



RenCutypoison on 16 October 2013
Legend11 said:

 

There should be no confusion on this point. We do not charge developers for Dedicated Servers.


But they charge publishers more for publishing on xbox one =p



Porcupine_I on 16 October 2013

I was under the Impression that the money people pay for XBL is supposed to go towards supporting that kind of infrastructure, so yes, it should at least be free for developers since the customer already pays for it.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Azerth on 16 October 2013
KylieDog said:

Which goes against what devs have said...

"Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it's far more affordable than other hosting options"

Nobody calls free 'more affordable'.

I'm sure will be some kind of indirect 'price' for this though, like need do something exclusive, be it timed release, DLC, whatever.


They probably got a discount for all there dedicated servers since its also coming out on PC and 360



Around the Network
J_Allard on 16 October 2013
KylieDog said:

Which goes against what devs have said...

"Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it's far more affordable than other hosting options"

Nobody calls free 'more affordable'.

I'm sure will be some kind of indirect 'price' for this though, like need do something exclusive, be it timed release, DLC, whatever.

Could be any number of reasons for that wording.

Like, free. Free is more affordable than other hosting options.

MS changed their policy on this with developers.

Or, MS could have just not wanted developers to let people know it was free.

Either way they're now saying it's free so who cares. This could be huge for Xbone. I am imagining a library with games that never get taken offline anymore. Awesome.



newton on 16 October 2013

Great news. Good move if MS wants to cement Xbox Live as the premier multiplayer service on consoles.



DucksUnlimited on 16 October 2013
kowenicki said:
KylieDog said:

Which goes against what devs have said...

"Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it's far more affordable than other hosting options"

Nobody calls free 'more affordable'.

I'm sure will be some kind of indirect 'price' for this though, like need do something exclusive, be it timed release, DLC, whatever.

thats some very weird logic you have.  free IS more affordable, its very simple.

Why would anyone call it that as opposed to just calling it free?



J_Allard on 16 October 2013
DucksUnlimited said:
kowenicki said:
KylieDog said:

Which goes against what devs have said...

"Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it's far more affordable than other hosting options"

Nobody calls free 'more affordable'.

I'm sure will be some kind of indirect 'price' for this though, like need do something exclusive, be it timed release, DLC, whatever.

thats some very weird logic you have.  free IS more affordable, its very simple.

Why would anyone call it that as opposed to just calling it free?

Maybe MS didn't want people to know it was free. Maybe Respawn just didn't wanna say they were free. Maybe at the time, they weren't free. Who knows.



endimion on 16 October 2013
KylieDog said:
kowenicki said:
KylieDog said:

Which goes against what devs have said...

"Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it's far more affordable than other hosting options"

Nobody calls free 'more affordable'.

I'm sure will be some kind of indirect 'price' for this though, like need do something exclusive, be it timed release, DLC, whatever.

thats some very weird logic you have.  free IS more affordable, its very simple.


Yet you skip the very simple common sense that nobody calls free 'more affordable'.  Are you suggesting XBL Games for Gold doesn't give away free games, it gives more affordable games!


well technically it's not free you have to pay for gold....

 

same here like I said the servers time, use, storage etc... might be free but you still have to pay for the bandwidth and the volume of data transfered....

 

which would nake the OT right and your article right too

 

yeah games for gold are free for paying gold members.... MS servers are free as long as you pay the bandwidth and data usage....

EDIT: it's just an idea though