dsgrue3 on 04 January 2013
| kowenicki said: These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know. Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now? My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine. I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs. |
The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?
"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"
"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."
"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"
You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for (game + internet)?
