By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
disolitude said:
bbsin said:
disolitude said:
Nah...Free is something one would say that doesn't own an xbox360 and has a ps3 or a wii, hence doesn't know what they are getting with the 50 dollar yearly fee.

This is sarcasm right?


Nope...no sarcasm here.

People don't realize that you can get free xbox live if you want and play online. Just create a new live handle every month. Live gives you 1 free month of Gold with every handle. If you don't care about stats, friends list, downloads, gamescore...stuff that you don't get on the other 2 consoles anyways...you can play online for free.

I would hate it if Microsoft said "its free" and they stopped the innovation cause its free and is generating no revenue. As far as Sony and Nintendo are concerned, they sit there and just look at 360's online and wait for updates. And when updates come they say..."ok, we will copy this...we don't like this". Thats why its free...


The problem with your statement is that no one is arguing over paying 50/year for the extra services that XBL gold offers over their CONSOLE competition , the problem is that you PAY to play online (without changing your name every month and losing your achievements every time), which is the most basic aspect of online gaming. No one else does this except for Microsoft, for people like me (long time PC user) free online play is basic and always has been. I own all three consoles and split time pretty evenly for everyone (INCLUDING PC) do you think I want to spend extra $$$ just to have a chance to play online with a friend for just ONE of my consoles for select games?? I'm completly happy with the extra features that silver offers, but having to pay for playing with a friend is de-evolution of online gaming. There realy is no argument to be made here, silver should atleast include online gaming, gold can keep the demos, store content and exclusive betas.