Online subscription. Fair or not fair?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Online subscription. Fair or not fair?

Is paying to play online fair?

No. 37 58.73%
Yes. 21 33.33%
Don't know. 5 7.94%
caffeinade said:
The platform holders make a profit when publishers sell games on their platforms.
The platform holders don't provide servers.
Server software should be given or sold to consumers.

There shouldn't be a fee to play online.

That's true, they're basically double dipping. 

Around the Network

Well good games don't need it, look to fornite insane popular and free but a lot of people buy skins/battle passes.

I mean, we haven’t been paying JUST to play online for years now. Each of these services also offers monthly games for the subscription price.

It’s also rather hard to judge because we aren’t really privy to the costs associated with running these services, and what makes it worth it versus the free services on PC.

To me, the monthly games alone make the service worth it, so whether or not it’s right to pay for online on consoles is a moot point so far as I’m concerned.

Yes, to an extent. Running Xbox Live of PSN isnt free. It takes money to run these servers. Look at how shitty PSN was in PS3 days (when it was free), and look at how far along it has come on now.

However, the PSN "free games" and games with gold should be scrapped, because for people who want a monthly subscription for games PSNOW and Xbox game pass exists. And the price should simultaneously be lowered to $20-$40.

60 bucks is too much, imo.

Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

The big three having a sub for online play is more than fair. The gamers who want the service pay for the improvement, maintenance and protection of the networks.

I'm against subs in mmo style games with free-to-play-like micro transactions/loot boxes. It just seems like double-dipping to me.

Around the Network

Online should be free as it was, but it cannot be free anymore as gamers were more than happy to pay for online. Switch owners have been lucky to have free online, but soon it will end. Was it september?
They will try to make money and paying for online is an easy way to make some. Selling cardboard might also prove to be profitable. I don´t know what will be the next thing. Paying to get extra saves...

XBL costs me $60/year. That's $5/month. It's not much. And besides, you get what you pay for. XBL was always a premium service, and it was always a quality service. PSN arguably didn't get to be on par with XBL as a service until it went premium. And Nintendo's free online service has always been a step behind XBL.

I'd rather pay what amounts to $5 per month to subsidize a quality online service than not pay and maybe, perhaps even likely, get a service that's not as good.

It's a scam alright. I don't care about free games I may or may not be interested in or whatever other unnecessary bells and whistles the subscription offers to make you think you're getting a deal. I just want to play my game that I already payed for in full.

Chazore said:
DragonRouge said:

If online multiplayer funcionality on PC is free and high quality, I don't understand why it can't be the case for consoles as well. 

I still remember the days when we had dedicated and private servers for games. New online based games hardly allow for this anymore.

Totally agree though. if it's free on PC, it should be free on consoles as well.

I assume that the publishers would have made online gaming on PC subscription-based if they could have, but that's just impossible as there's always going to be people creating workarounds for it

caffeinade said:
The platform holders make a profit when publishers sell games on their platforms.
The platform holders don't provide servers.
Server software should be given or sold to consumers.

There shouldn't be a fee to play online.

Oh no, you're wrong.

In the case of Xbox Live, MS does provide servers and that's partly why you see their online games remain active longer. EA is an exception as they fought to run their own servers, but they also take older games offline.

Then consider the massive amount of bandwidth being used by paying and non-paying users to download games, uploading/downloading videos, cloud saves, etc. Some publishers actually complained about having to pay bandwidth fees on PS3.

We aren't just paying to play online anymore either, the "free" games is a huge benefit of subscribing.

In a nut shell, services like Xbox Live makes it easier/cheaper for game to have online play, it covers the overhead of online services, and you get a bunch of "free" games.

I subscribe to both PS+ and XBL because I perceive them as a good value. However, I haven't actually paid for XBL in years thanks to Bing rewards and I always buy PS+ when I see a discount, eBay coupon, etc.

Lastly, it worth considering these subscription services help fund the platforms/games. I'm hoping Xbox Gamepass succeeds in the funding more games.

Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)