Quantcast
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%
 
Total:63
Flilix said:
Mr Puggsly said:

No, that's just part of the package and a great benefit. The reason most people subscribe is to play online.

Frankly, I don't get why people complain so much. PS+ and XBL are some of the cheapest subscription services around.

Of course people suscribe to play online, but why can't it be free? It doesn't cost them millions to maintain their servers.

Heh, I'm sure it cost millions to build/maintain their servers and online services. Perhaps many millions. I mean they have a staff and the services are used by many millions of people whether it be online play or any other service that uses their servers.

But their goal isn't to lose money or break even, these subscription services are part of what makes these platforms profitable and relatively speaking its cheap. I mean PS+ and XBLG COMBINED is about same price as a year of Netflix.



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)

Around the Network
outlawauron said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

So then, why is it the platform holders and not individual developers who are charging for the servers?

Good thing you already pay money for the ability to access the game's content before you pay for an online subscription. 

If this service was a requirement, than Steam and Origin would cost money to use, too ...

Because the architecture behind a network is far more intensive than setting up P2P servers. When you play a game online on PS4, you're playing it on PSN, not the server list that varies wildly from dev to dev. While netcode isn't created equal, you know the product will work.

To summarize all the work that has gone into it as the same thing as digital storefronts or to deny the leaps and bounds in product quality.... Man, I don't even know what to call that. Blissful ignorance? It's like how people falsely say that PSN/XBL are doing the same thing as Steam when Steam hosts absolutely nothing off store. They don't offer the same product at all.

If you don't think the value is worth the cost, then don't buy it. I will pay for it because I place very high value on cloud saves, PSN discounts, and free games.

You know, we are on an online forum with the ability to reply to people ... you could just ask for clarification instead of calling others ignorant instantly. I will admit I worded that badly as there is a common misconception that Steam and PSN are the exact same, so I can see why you assumed I was being ignorant ... however that's not what I was getting at and you could just simply ask me for clarification before hammering down judgment. Just to be clear, I *know* that PSN and Steam are different, PSN is much more complex and hosts multiple games. However, even if PSN has higher costs because it's an entire network and not just a system of servers spread around one individual product ... that doesn't really change the fact that you're paying money for a console for the purpose of playing those consoles games, no? That's kind of the point of the consoles, and in 2018 you'd expect that the ability to use internet freely comes in that package. 

Simply put, PSN's problem isn't the value, it's the fact that you have to pay to use online in the first place. Your excuse and Sony's excuse is the value, but that value could just be put behind any other subscription service. So they have to lock the value behind the ability to play online. Most people who have PSN are paying for it JUST BECAUSE you have to use it to play online. You can use the excuse all you want of the "value" but I would rather just play online for free and have the option for a separate subscription service ... 



Of course it's fair. This isn't a game of cards, this is capitalism.

It's fair for them to charge $200 if they wanted. It's their product, they have that right. No one is entitled to "free online" or any other feature.

At the same time, of course, consumers have the right to not buy that product.



Mr Puggsly said:
Flilix said:

Of course people suscribe to play online, but why can't it be free? It doesn't cost them millions to maintain their servers.

Heh, I'm sure it cost millions to build/maintain their servers and online services. Perhaps many millions. I mean they have a staff and the services are used by many millions of people whether it be online play or any other service that uses their servers.

But their goal isn't to lose money or break even, these subscription services are part of what makes these platforms profitable and relatively speaking its cheap. I mean PS+ and XBLG COMBINED is about same price as a year of Netflix.

Aren't the online services free on PC? Why would developers waste millions on their PC servers?



pokoko said:
Of course it's fair. This isn't a game of cards, this is capitalism.

It's fair for them to charge $200 if they wanted. It's their product, they have that right. No one is entitled to "free online" or any other feature.

At the same time, of course, consumers have the right to not buy that product.

Many felt that they had no other option, than to suck it up and pay. Were are not entitled to anything. Microsoft first tested the waters and gamers gobbled it up, then Sony followed and everyone was fine with it and now Nintendo is about to do it, because why not? We gamers made it easy for them.



Around the Network
Flilix said:
Mr Puggsly said:

Heh, I'm sure it cost millions to build/maintain their servers and online services. Perhaps many millions. I mean they have a staff and the services are used by many millions of people whether it be online play or any other service that uses their servers.

But their goal isn't to lose money or break even, these subscription services are part of what makes these platforms profitable and relatively speaking its cheap. I mean PS+ and XBLG COMBINED is about same price as a year of Netflix.

Aren't the online services free on PC? Why would developers waste millions on their PC servers?

Nothing is free in this world, making a server cappable of catering a traffic of thousands of conections and keep the players accounts secure is not free.



A point can be made for both sides. It's unfair in that consumers who enjoyed free online now have to pay for the service, which would be upsetting to them. On the other hand, servers aren't free, so I figure companies would want some money to cover the costs, especially for better services.

Either way, I'm not happy about paying.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

I mean we pay for online, and get free games every month. Put 100 hours in Slime Rancher since I got it for free on GwG, got to try some other games I would never try otherwise like Vermintide.
But a payed online service can help prevent spam accounts, on PS3 I got riddled with spam accounts and bots, on Xbox I was free from that, only had to deal with those nasty little critters on COD also known as squeakers. If the hardware publishers could only profit from game sales and hardware sales, then they would be screwed.
Microsoft who is in last place rn, is also resting easily with services like XBL and game pass growing as hardware sales are slowing down. Microsoft would be out of the race without paid online services existing and keeping Xbox afloat.

Who cares if it is unfair to the small few that can't afford $5 a month, it is good for the majority of us actual gamers who want the companies to succeed, and depend on competition for good games to play.



TheBird said:
I mean we pay for online, and get free games every month. Put 100 hours in Slime Rancher since I got it for free on GwG, got to try some other games I would never try otherwise like Vermintide.
But a payed online service can help prevent spam accounts, on PS3 I got riddled with spam accounts and bots, on Xbox I was free from that, only had to deal with those nasty little critters on COD also known as squeakers. If the hardware publishers could only profit from game sales and hardware sales, then they would be screwed.
Microsoft who is in last place rn, is also resting easily with services like XBL and game pass growing as hardware sales are slowing down. Microsoft would be out of the race without paid online services existing and keeping Xbox afloat.

Who cares if it is unfair to the small few that can't afford $5 a month, it is good for the majority of us actual gamers who want the companies to succeed, and depend on competition for good games to play.

Not sure how I feel about that ... I'd like to see companies succeed because they make a quality console and quality games that people want, not because they are being subsidized.

It would be interesting to see numbers on what each company has invested in infrastructure, maintenance, and the "free" games on offer.  If they are making a huge profit on these services then I'd be less ok with it.



TheBird said:
I mean we pay for online, and get free games every month. Put 100 hours in Slime Rancher since I got it for free on GwG, got to try some other games I would never try otherwise like Vermintide.
But a payed online service can help prevent spam accounts, on PS3 I got riddled with spam accounts and bots, on Xbox I was free from that, only had to deal with those nasty little critters on COD also known as squeakers. If the hardware publishers could only profit from game sales and hardware sales, then they would be screwed.
Microsoft who is in last place rn, is also resting easily with services like XBL and game pass growing as hardware sales are slowing down. Microsoft would be out of the race without paid online services existing and keeping Xbox afloat.

Who cares if it is unfair to the small few that can't afford $5 a month, it is good for the majority of us actual gamers who want the companies to succeed, and depend on competition for good games to play.

Your individualism is shinning right through this egocentric affirmation.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909