By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - A change MS should make before next generation

 

Is this a good idea?

Absolutely 8 66.67%
 
It doesn't matter that much 4 33.33%
 
No, MS should continue to... 0 0%
 
See results 0 0%
 
Total:12

Xbox has gone through many changes during this current generation. Things started out rough, but as of the last couple years I believe Xbox has done a fantastic job at turning things around. They've put themselves in a great position for the next generation with the many studio acquisitions/dedication to 1st party content, gamepass, xcloud, cross-play, and transparency regarding next generation.

One of the last big changes MS needs to make is; not having Free to Play games behind Xbox Live gold. With the recent Call of Duty Warzone, it's hard not to notice Xbox is the only console which has this policy in place. Do I think this will sink the next Xbox if they don't change? No, but making this change will likely bring in more customers than if they leave things how they are.

F2P games have become much more popular on consoles than they were at the beginning of this generation. Gamers who mostly play F2P games like Fortnite, may not pick Xbox over another option, if all the other options don't have a paywall. Why would they if they don't already have a preference for Xbox? If MS decides to get rid of Xbox Live Gold for F2P games, those gamers will at least see Xbox on the same playing field as other consoles when deciding what system to buy. Then services like Xbox gamepass look much more intriguing, and could push them in that direction.

Anyways, that is my thoughts on the situation. Do you think this would be a good move for MS to make or  are things fine how things are?  



Around the Network

Yeah, they definitely need to remove the GWG paywall form free to play multiplayer games.



I'm not really seeing how ppl are now going to choose XSX over a PS5 or Switch just because now it's really free to play, especially when you factor in cross platform play.

While I agree that this requirement should be dropped, we are now at a point where it won't do anything for MS except potentially net them less money.



Probably won't make a huge difference but yeah, I agree. Just like how they locked Netflix and other features for years on the 360, it wasn't a very consumer friendly choice. Change it.



Twitter: @d21lewis

I think Multiplay behind a paywall is wrong even for 60 USD games, so locking for free games is also wrong. But changing that probably won't change Xbox sales in any significant way.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network

You bring up a good point. Sony doesn’t also do this? In any case I think it’s something reasonable that MS would do if enough people petition.

But I don’t see this as a barrier to Xbox adoption. Not even close compared to brand power, console price, exclusives etc.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

sales2099 said:
You bring up a good point. Sony doesn’t also do this? In any case I think it’s something reasonable that MS would do if enough people petition.

But I don’t see this as a barrier to Xbox adoption. Not even close compared to brand power, console price, exclusives etc.

Yeah. I didn't know this either until a couple of years ago. It won't effect me in any way since I've been Gold since like 2007 but yeah, PS4 lets anyone play free online games for free. No subscription required. Meanwhile I couldn't even register my game on RE Revaluations on Switch without paying for online!



Twitter: @d21lewis

sales2099 said:
You bring up a good point. Sony doesn’t also do this? In any case I think it’s something reasonable that MS would do if enough people petition.

But I don’t see this as a barrier to Xbox adoption. Not even close compared to brand power, console price, exclusives etc.

Nope f2p and subscription games can be played without PS+.

But sure probably most people that play f2p and subs games online also probably play some paid game that would need the Gold anyway.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

d21lewis said:
Probably won't make a huge difference but yeah, I agree. Just like how they locked Netflix and other features for years on the 360, it wasn't a very consumer friendly choice. Change it.

That is my feelings towards the whole thing. It won't change how I play games or pay for Gold, but it's the right thing to do. 



I think pretty much everybody agrees.

Unless MS has some of evidence many would cancel if they made the change. I mean its possible many subscribe primarily for F2P games.