Does Sony really have an interest in "outcheaping" Microsoft as far as online goes?

[Ail]

Adinnieken said:

Ail said:
Microsoft managed to make people pay for something that is free on PCs and suddenly you consider Sony's option the cheap one ?
I guess Microsoft did its marketing really well..

Otherwise I have no issue paying for additional services, but charging people for a service that hardly costs you is pushing it...Online should be free. I'm ok paying for a service that comes with discounted games and other things..

"charging people for a service that hardly costs you is pushing it"

You have absolutely no clue as to how much bandwidth costs on a monthly basis.  Multiple T3's, along with the servers and personnel necessary to operate and maintain them doesn't hardly cost anything. 

I'd love you to explain how you feel it hardly costs anything to offer online gaming services?

Lets be honest here, when you play CoD Microsoft servers are not hosting the game ( that's where many people get misled they believe microsoft actually gets involved in the online play where in the case of the most popular games they do not even host the servers), so yes they are charging you for a service they don't provide.

In that case the bandwith you use is the one provided by your ISP and Microsoft's server hardly get involved.

Like others have pointed it out there is a reason a much smaller company ( Valve) can provide a similar service for free on the PC...