| outlawauron said: I don't know why people try and defend Live costing money every month. It's not a good deal and it's stupid that Microsoft charges for basic functionality. |
Lets think, perhaps it's because it's the only business model that makes sense. Everyone seems to forget that the PC model doesn't work on consoles as you're reliant upon the software company providing dedicated servers and also others taking up hosting duties. This is not going to work on consoles so Microsoft have to bear the brunt of the infrastructure cost for Live. Now you can handle this in several ways, you can get the money up front for online by adding to the console price, you can overcharge on content you provide with your online service or you can run it at a massive cost to the company. You can bet right now Sony wished they had started charging at the start of the gen.
The difference between Microsoft and Sony is that one company entered this generation with a sound business model and as largely had a successful strategy, while the other had a appalling business model that has bled the company dry of profits. PSN has also spent most of the gen as a inferior service to Live too might I add. Plus the small fact that due to better infrastructure and I'm sure more proactive maintenence of their servers, Microsoft have never had long term outages like Sony have had on more than one occasion. Perhaps because Microsoft invest the money they've taken in fees into better management of their network.
At the end of the day if you hate it so much I have to question how you can judge the value in the service, it's clear you've not used it for a long time. You're in for a massive shock next gen when Sony start charging...
