endimion said:
albionus said:
As others have said it depends on what you like to play and what you're willing to pay. I had live for my Xbox though I barely used it except to occasionaly get my ass handed to me by foul mouthed 10 year olds. Nevertheless the Xbox was still a good purchase. Admittedly it was $150 when I got it so only having 6 or so games was worth it. At $350 I think most people would need more than 6 games (I know I do) for it to be worthwhile but again that's a personal call.
It seems to me the big advantage of live now is that if you're really into the services it provides then it is more than worth $50 a year. Then again for some people, such as myself, who wouldn't download many XBLA games, don't play games online much, and have a laptop with an internet connection to get movies and shows then it probably isn't worth $50. It isn't too expensive though which is why I had it on my Xbox despite not using it often. Well the point I'm trying to make here is that no one here can answer whether the 360 without live is worth it for you. All that can be said is that the 360 isn't a total write-off without live since many gamers manage without it. Whether you would be one of those gamers is up to you. |
hum you don't have to pay a gold membership for that.... the only service you have in adition with the gold is the multiplayer online for games... that's it.... with that post I realllize that a lot of people are not aware of that... and maybe MS should be saying that more clearly in the future... |
Yea i had no idea what you got with just a silver membership at first. Whwn I realised it was simply for multiplayer it seemed absurd...until i played online, 3-4 months down the track your not even thinking about the price, if your into multiplayer. I'm going to get a year gold for halo 3 and not look back.
Not to mention you can trial live for free for 3 months (1month per profile)
