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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Is paying $50 or less year for xbox live really that big of a deal??

JaggedSac said:
makingmusic476 said:
JaggedSac said:

 

Bungie isn't first party.  Plus, Bungie stated that they would have had to drop several of Halo 3's features if they were to have used dedicated servers.

 

They were until like six months ago, so MS would've been the one to foot the bill at the time.

Also, this still doesn't explain what the hell you're paying $50 a year for.  All those awesome XBL-only features that Silver users get for free? 

You're only paying for online play.  P2P online play, that uses nothing more than your own internet connection, which you already paid for, and your own 360 to host matches, which you also already paid for.

Actually, they left at the beginning of Oct. last year.  More than enough time to know who was paying for what.

Like I said, some want to eat the cost, some find ways to offset it.  If millions are willing to pay, why the hell not charge for it?

 

I didn't ask why they are charging $50 a year.  I asked why are you willing to pay $50 a year.  Why is it worth it?  You even admitted with the bolded that they are ONLY charging because they know some people will pay.

If nobody was willing to pay, you'd be getting a free service.



Around the Network
makingmusic476 said:
JaggedSac said:

Actually, they left at the beginning of Oct. last year.  More than enough time to know who was paying for what.

Like I said, some want to eat the cost, some find ways to offset it.  If millions are willing to pay, why the hell not charge for it?

 

I didn't ask why they are charging $50 a year.  I asked why are you willing to pay $50 a year.  Why is it worth it?  You even admitted with the bolded that they are ONLY charging because they know some people will pay.

 

Because I play the **** out of Halo 3



Speaking from experience I will say this, the Socom release for PS3 was ridiculous, myself along with many others took days off of work to play this game and it did not work. Mind you this is an online game only. Not like I could play the single player game and wait for the servers to work.

360 online service holiday of 2007 (Halo 3, COD 4) worked fine for the most part and I myself had no problems with it.



jpcsfsd said:
Speaking from experience I will say this, the Socom release for PS3 was ridiculous, myself along with many others took days off of work to play this game and it did not work. Mind you this is an online game only. Not like I could play the single player game and wait for the servers to work.

360 online service holiday of 2007 (Halo 3, COD 4) worked fine for the most part and I myself had no problems with it.

 

This is pretty much the reason why XBL is better than PSN...reliability!



yo_john117 said:
jpcsfsd said:
Speaking from experience I will say this, the Socom release for PS3 was ridiculous, myself along with many others took days off of work to play this game and it did not work. Mind you this is an online game only. Not like I could play the single player game and wait for the servers to work.

360 online service holiday of 2007 (Halo 3, COD 4) worked fine for the most part and I myself had no problems with it.

 

This is pretty much the reason why XBL is better than PSN...reliability!


I've never experienced any reliability issues with the PSN.

Around the Network
bouzane said:
yo_john117 said:
jpcsfsd said:
Speaking from experience I will say this, the Socom release for PS3 was ridiculous, myself along with many others took days off of work to play this game and it did not work. Mind you this is an online game only. Not like I could play the single player game and wait for the servers to work.

360 online service holiday of 2007 (Halo 3, COD 4) worked fine for the most part and I myself had no problems with it.

 

This is pretty much the reason why XBL is better than PSN...reliability!


 

I've never experienced any reliability issues with the PSN.

 

I'd blame any issues with Socom on Slant Six rather than the PSN.  This is their first console game.  Had Zipper made the game, it would've had no problems, much like Resistance and Warhawk had no problems upon release.



BenKenobi88 said:

Hmm...would I rather pay $50 a year to play online games, or would I rather own an extra $50 game.

Answer is obvious.

I'll stick to my free PC gaming.

Well said. XBox Live is roughly equivalent to the price of a new game or two or three pre-owned games.

 



@ JaggedSac

Actually, M$ stores a ton of data for each GamerTag. All previous purchases, achievement info, friends lists, etc.


You do realize this "tons of data" weighs in at only a few kilobytes, Sony stores such information as well, but most likely one customized Playstation Home or even a Home avatar will take much more storage space for Sony.

@ bouzane

I've never experienced any reliability issues with the PSN.


I had a problem once within 1 and half years since the PS3's European launch, it lasted a few hours.

Funnily regarding the free XBox Live gold subscription I got with Gears, Microsoft's servers had problems when trying to use the code. I had a few issues during this month and in general XBox Live performance for some reason seemed to greatly fluctuate during the day, not for me with regard to PSN performance.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

@ kowenicki

As a side note, it would be interesting to know how many of those "hell no" PS3 owners are regular subscribers to "Qore" or whatever its called?? (we dont have it in the UK)


Why? It's clearly an extras magazine service with some early peaks at commercial games (the demos will hit the PS Store in time as well) and maybe a small freeware game included in the package.

I am not subscribed to Qore, it's not really a central piece service or anything like that (like online gaming actually is, 360 best sellers like Halo 3 or Call of Duty 4 would get huge magazine rating penalties without their online offerings), just a nice online magazine with timed exclusive content and maybe exclusive information.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales

@ kowenicki

As someone that has access to both, there is no doubt whatsoever that a lot more work goes into the content available on Live than on PSN, and there is a lot more of that content.


I don't think so, what makes you think that?

At least developers have complained about less freedom to implement their own online functionality protocols on the 360. Microsoft seems to dictate a lot more than Sony does.

Qore, doesn't bother me at all. From what I have seen on youtube, quite some effort goes into the online magazine to make it look slick and be well presented. Is it worth it? You decide, it's not critical in any regard. It may be nice to get access to some beta (or see Veronica Belmont in action), but betas are just that betas, anyhow I think a relatively new approach for console gaming.



Naughty Dog: "At Naughty Dog, we're pretty sure we should be able to see leaps between games on the PS3 that are even bigger than they were on the PS2."

PS3 vs 360 sales