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

Forums - Gaming - Let's Clear Up Some Video Game Myths!

rf40928 on 06 September 2011
oniyide said:
rf40928 said:
oniyide said:
rf40928 said:
oniyide said:
rf40928 said:

i think this is a worn out topic.. but most Xbox non-fans like to bring up how XBlive cost 59.99 a year.. but from a relaibility stand point and features Live simply has more to offer.. they usually have it first.. they had netflix almost 2 yrs before PSN and the first year PSN had to use a netflix disc.. and although PSN has a sports equivalent , I like ESPN on XB Live..

If you can't afford 59.99 a year ( only 4.99 a month ) you honestly have no business buying expensive video  games multiple times a year for your console.. because if you already can't afford to EAT....an additional $4.99 a month might mean you cant afford to SLEEP ?!

I spend more money on a week of drinking 'mountain dew' soda then i do on a month of Xbox Live.. Im pretty sure the average person spends more money weekly on pretty trivial stuff as well.. my brother buys a new game for his PS3, Xbox 360, Wii almost monthly..  If you're doing well enough to buy alot of games yearly then the PSN free / Xb Live cost argument holds little value because GAMING is not a necessity, its entertainment and entertainment is never free.. If you buy a console to play  ONE game you love such as those who play COD ( therefore meaning you can waste money to buy a console to play a single game ) it means nothing.. If you own all three consoles like my brother.. it means nothing.. If you own a PS3 and want to say how MUCH of a rip off 4.99 a month is I guess thats fine..

its the principal, they are charging us to pay for a feature in a game we ALREADy bought. If they want to have extra features like ESPN for Gold, thats fine, but at the very least silver members should be able to play games online

 As a person who has owned a PS3 ( and my brother still does  - he all all three consoles ) and owns a Xbox 360 I can tell you when looking beyond basic online gaming there is a difference.  In basic function PSN does a good job for COD.

..but now that Sony has started Playstation Plus ( 49.99 a year in USA ), it seems Sony is trying to do something similar to MS... offer more premium services at a small cost.. Conversely, now that Playstation is gonna charge for PS Plus, Microsoft has decided to give some previously 'Xbox Live Gold Members Only content' to the (FREE)  'Xbox Live Silver membership content '... the changes should be happening soon.. so Xbox users using the free service should be getting alittle more bang for nothing..

When it comes to your above coment, I dont think you have a valid argument.  Any Xbox game does have a spot on the bottom back of the game case, it reads:  *Xbox Live System Requirements: Paid Subscription required for online multiplayer.* So if you actually own a Xbox and havent see this somehow - I will tell you that you 'AREN'T' getting charged for any feature you already bought.  Xbox Live Gold ( paid ) has always offered full game demos of new games.. Xbox Live Silver ( Free ) does not.... Playstation Plus ( 49.99 a year ) will offer a very similar thing over PSN's (Free ) content.. .. So I guess you can see why Xbox Live Gold cant be free?

When it comes to downloadable content I've been on PSN on my brothers PS3 a few times in the last few months ( again, he has all 3 consoles  ) The amount of demos, trailers and other gaming content available On XB Live is way larger than the Playstation Network. Xbox Live offers nearly 200 full retail games for digital download as well.. and im not talking older games - most of them are newers like Halo Reach..

From an online gaming community point of view... This is where the Xbox Live is way ahead of the Playstation Live. On Xbox LIVE talking to your friends, cross game invites, voice chat, video chat over cams, text messages ( texting can be done easier with the mini qwerty keyboard for the controller ) and many other things with the press of a single button- much more seemless and refined. In the Xbox Live community your profile will show your friends last played games, displays their personal slogans, latest gamer score, in game achievements and many other things. Now while most of this is in the PSN as well .. PSN has some drawbacks .. i.e. ..you would have to exit a game before you can look into one of your friends’ profiles... its small things like this that are so much easier to access and more useable on Xbox Live. 

One more thing where XB Live scores is the presence of sponsored events by MS which will keep gamers hooked. The Playstation Network never really has many Sony sponsored events although there are rumors that there will be more so in the future.

Subscription money is used by MS to maintain server quality, reliability, and continously update features and continously add content .. I can say unbiased that PSN is good for a free service, but when you have problems you can't really complain.  What do you say?  "Fix this or I'll say fix this, again.." ?

I think PS3 fans that enjoy a wider variety of content will pay for the PlayStation Plus.. I can say I dont mind paying what little I do for the service I enjoy.. Ive always payed for Xbox Live, but Ive always liked having more content and quality..


Xbox live Gold has some great features, thats not what this is about. IMHO I could give a crap about ESPN, Cross game chat and all that stuff, i just want to play games online, so when people tell me about all those features i really dont care so the cost of the service has no value to me, thats just me. Subscription money is usedd to maintain server quality and update features?? Xbox live cant be free?? OK thats cool, but why cant Silver members play their games online? Im not buying that they need the money to maintain server quality and add more content. Sony has been doing the same thing for years without charging Nintendo too and PC games have been doing it forever (MMOs notwithstanding). As for PSN Plus, it sucks, im just gonnna keep it real. Its a waste of money, the only thing you get is discounts which will probably end up costing the same if you never pay the fee anyway

I'll give you that one thing -  because  I do beleive they could make Xbox Silver offer free online play at this current time ( but looking at the whole picture this change makes little sense because most of us are ok paying for a service we feel has more content we're already used to - and they know this ) .. Case-and-Point: You have to consider Xbox Live went online 2 years before PSN was announced.  So they could charge, because nothing else existed !  To most of us this is OUR COCAINE, a very cheap cocaine.  XB Live Gold also  started off much cheaper then it is now ( back in 2004 it was a mere $2.50 a month if you paid yearly ) ..  since no one else had anything it was the very best of anything..

 When PSN launched online gaming was 'free' so to speak..( not really, you still gotta pay for high speed internet, buy a console , buy a game you want to play online, and pay your electric bill ) .. but PSN was very very basic back then  and very 'bare' ..PSN has improved, but since then PSN has always been a step behind Xbox Live.. and this includes reliability.  If you don't think MS uses some of that capital income to give more quality to the user you're sorely mistaken, more people play COD on XB Live then PSN ( which is a give-in because COD - both #1 games on both consoles - sold more on XB 360 ) and when more people play - this uses more bandwidth and cost more. You need to pay for more 'blades' (servers)  ..but honestly the real cost is  having thousands of games, demo's and videos  available for download like XB Live has ( and what PS Plus is offering - which is why it cost ).. the bandwidth you need on a free online gaming service like PSN  -sending a few packets for games back and forth- versus - 500,000 Xbox Live users ( of your 30 million subscribers ) downloading  the same 3 gig demo all within 2 hours is pretty vast in difference ..Also consider XB LIve has had BEEFY security from the start compared to PSN !  How many people do you think have tried to bring down Xbox Live ?!  ALOT !!  XB Live has proven more secure and reliable - and this isn't because its free and undermanned . Sony found out the hard way that not only does good security cost alot.. it cost even more if that security is breached.  Looking at Xbox Live's content-  again -  This is why Sony has launched Playstation Plus, to me this is recongnition by Sony that you simply can't offer all the content for free, unfortunately better things  arent free. 

Again, I do admit they have in the past 2 years made PSN alot better then it was.. they've tried to mirror and copy Xbox Lives model.. but they only now are charging for PS Plus because you can't offer full demos and other goodies without cost.. once again back to what I said - demos being available will LARGELY increase the bandwidth being used to Sony servers GREATLY and this COST ALOT of money..


actually thats not true, MS has said that about 50% of people use Live Gold, so their are alot of people who have Xbox and do not use live gold.  So im thinking it might not be a small minority who do not enjoy paying to play online. I agree you cannot give everything away for free, i get it. But why lump something that IMHO should be free in with stuff that they would have to charge?? I barely play demos, so PSN Plus is not enticing. Better things are not free, but some of us dont want neccersarily better, we just want it to function

(Post is below )



Around the Network
rf40928 on 06 September 2011
oniyide said:
rf40928 said:
oniyide said:
rf40928 said:
oniyide said:
rf40928 said:

i think this is a worn out topic.. but most Xbox non-fans like to bring up how XBlive cost 59.99 a year.. but from a relaibility stand point and features Live simply has more to offer.. they usually have it first.. they had netflix almost 2 yrs before PSN and the first year PSN had to use a netflix disc.. and although PSN has a sports equivalent , I like ESPN on XB Live..

If you can't afford 59.99 a year ( only 4.99 a month ) you honestly have no business buying expensive video  games multiple times a year for your console.. because if you already can't afford to EAT....an additional $4.99 a month might mean you cant afford to SLEEP ?!

I spend more money on a week of drinking 'mountain dew' soda then i do on a month of Xbox Live.. Im pretty sure the average person spends more money weekly on pretty trivial stuff as well.. my brother buys a new game for his PS3, Xbox 360, Wii almost monthly..  If you're doing well enough to buy alot of games yearly then the PSN free / Xb Live cost argument holds little value because GAMING is not a necessity, its entertainment and entertainment is never free.. If you buy a console to play  ONE game you love such as those who play COD ( therefore meaning you can waste money to buy a console to play a single game ) it means nothing.. If you own all three consoles like my brother.. it means nothing.. If you own a PS3 and want to say how MUCH of a rip off 4.99 a month is I guess thats fine..

its the principal, they are charging us to pay for a feature in a game we ALREADy bought. If they want to have extra features like ESPN for Gold, thats fine, but at the very least silver members should be able to play games online

 As a person who has owned a PS3 ( and my brother still does  - he all all three consoles ) and owns a Xbox 360 I can tell you when looking beyond basic online gaming there is a difference.  In basic function PSN does a good job for COD.

..but now that Sony has started Playstation Plus ( 49.99 a year in USA ), it seems Sony is trying to do something similar to MS... offer more premium services at a small cost.. Conversely, now that Playstation is gonna charge for PS Plus, Microsoft has decided to give some previously 'Xbox Live Gold Members Only content' to the (FREE)  'Xbox Live Silver membership content '... the changes should be happening soon.. so Xbox users using the free service should be getting alittle more bang for nothing..

When it comes to your above coment, I dont think you have a valid argument.  Any Xbox game does have a spot on the bottom back of the game case, it reads:  *Xbox Live System Requirements: Paid Subscription required for online multiplayer.* So if you actually own a Xbox and havent see this somehow - I will tell you that you 'AREN'T' getting charged for any feature you already bought.  Xbox Live Gold ( paid ) has always offered full game demos of new games.. Xbox Live Silver ( Free ) does not.... Playstation Plus ( 49.99 a year ) will offer a very similar thing over PSN's (Free ) content.. .. So I guess you can see why Xbox Live Gold cant be free?

When it comes to downloadable content I've been on PSN on my brothers PS3 a few times in the last few months ( again, he has all 3 consoles  ) The amount of demos, trailers and other gaming content available On XB Live is way larger than the Playstation Network. Xbox Live offers nearly 200 full retail games for digital download as well.. and im not talking older games - most of them are newers like Halo Reach..

From an online gaming community point of view... This is where the Xbox Live is way ahead of the Playstation Live. On Xbox LIVE talking to your friends, cross game invites, voice chat, video chat over cams, text messages ( texting can be done easier with the mini qwerty keyboard for the controller ) and many other things with the press of a single button- much more seemless and refined. In the Xbox Live community your profile will show your friends last played games, displays their personal slogans, latest gamer score, in game achievements and many other things. Now while most of this is in the PSN as well .. PSN has some drawbacks .. i.e. ..you would have to exit a game before you can look into one of your friends’ profiles... its small things like this that are so much easier to access and more useable on Xbox Live. 

One more thing where XB Live scores is the presence of sponsored events by MS which will keep gamers hooked. The Playstation Network never really has many Sony sponsored events although there are rumors that there will be more so in the future.

Subscription money is used by MS to maintain server quality, reliability, and continously update features and continously add content .. I can say unbiased that PSN is good for a free service, but when you have problems you can't really complain.  What do you say?  "Fix this or I'll say fix this, again.." ?

I think PS3 fans that enjoy a wider variety of content will pay for the PlayStation Plus.. I can say I dont mind paying what little I do for the service I enjoy.. Ive always payed for Xbox Live, but Ive always liked having more content and quality..


Xbox live Gold has some great features, thats not what this is about. IMHO I could give a crap about ESPN, Cross game chat and all that stuff, i just want to play games online, so when people tell me about all those features i really dont care so the cost of the service has no value to me, thats just me. Subscription money is usedd to maintain server quality and update features?? Xbox live cant be free?? OK thats cool, but why cant Silver members play their games online? Im not buying that they need the money to maintain server quality and add more content. Sony has been doing the same thing for years without charging Nintendo too and PC games have been doing it forever (MMOs notwithstanding). As for PSN Plus, it sucks, im just gonnna keep it real. Its a waste of money, the only thing you get is discounts which will probably end up costing the same if you never pay the fee anyway

I'll give you that one thing -  because  I do beleive they could make Xbox Silver offer free online play at this current time ( but looking at the whole picture this change makes little sense because most of us are ok paying for a service we feel has more content we're already used to - and they know this ) .. Case-and-Point: You have to consider Xbox Live went online 2 years before PSN was announced.  So they could charge, because nothing else existed !  To most of us this is OUR COCAINE, a very cheap cocaine.  XB Live Gold also  started off much cheaper then it is now ( back in 2004 it was a mere $2.50 a month if you paid yearly ) ..  since no one else had anything it was the very best of anything..

 When PSN launched online gaming was 'free' so to speak..( not really, you still gotta pay for high speed internet, buy a console , buy a game you want to play online, and pay your electric bill ) .. but PSN was very very basic back then  and very 'bare' ..PSN has improved, but since then PSN has always been a step behind Xbox Live.. and this includes reliability.  If you don't think MS uses some of that capital income to give more quality to the user you're sorely mistaken, more people play COD on XB Live then PSN ( which is a give-in because COD - both #1 games on both consoles - sold more on XB 360 ) and when more people play - this uses more bandwidth and cost more. You need to pay for more 'blades' (servers)  ..but honestly the real cost is  having thousands of games, demo's and videos  available for download like XB Live has ( and what PS Plus is offering - which is why it cost ).. the bandwidth you need on a free online gaming service like PSN  -sending a few packets for games back and forth- versus - 500,000 Xbox Live users ( of your 30 million subscribers ) downloading  the same 3 gig demo all within 2 hours is pretty vast in difference ..Also consider XB LIve has had BEEFY security from the start compared to PSN !  How many people do you think have tried to bring down Xbox Live ?!  ALOT !!  XB Live has proven more secure and reliable - and this isn't because its free and undermanned . Sony found out the hard way that not only does good security cost alot.. it cost even more if that security is breached.  Looking at Xbox Live's content-  again -  This is why Sony has launched Playstation Plus, to me this is recongnition by Sony that you simply can't offer all the content for free, unfortunately better things  arent free. 

Again, I do admit they have in the past 2 years made PSN alot better then it was.. they've tried to mirror and copy Xbox Lives model.. but they only now are charging for PS Plus because you can't offer full demos and other goodies without cost.. once again back to what I said - demos being available will LARGELY increase the bandwidth being used to Sony servers GREATLY and this COST ALOT of money..


actually thats not true, MS has said that about 50% of people use Live Gold, so their are alot of people who have Xbox and do not use live gold.  So im thinking it might not be a small minority who do not enjoy paying to play online. I agree you cannot give everything away for free, i get it. But why lump something that IMHO should be free in with stuff that they would have to charge?? I barely play demos, so PSN Plus is not enticing. Better things are not free, but some of us dont want neccersarily better, we just want it to function

Whats not true ? I never said the MAJORITY of Xbox owners subscribe to Gold.. as an example I said "500,000 people trying to download a 3 gig demo once in a two hours period ( out of 30 million subscribers )" .. FIRST: I didnt say those subsrcibers were all GOLD.. SECOND: Even if you use the FREE SILVER you still have to subscribe and get a gamertag, which means IM RIGHT and you're wrong ( all members are subscribers - not just Gold ).. Even if its 'Free' you do have to sign up / thus subscribe to PSN - give them your email, and have some issued username/tag/ indentity .. do you not ?? ..... THIRD: Silver members can still download/purchase/rent 1080p movies on Zune which has its own cost, obviously thus covers the download cost - but I focused on GOLD because downloading demos has a cost which is covered by a subscription to gold ( the same way PS Plus is doing game demos ) ....and FOURTH: The current number of subscribers now 35 MILLION.. which means around 15+ MILLION users PAY for GOLD... Revenue reports that Xbox Live GROSSED 1 BILLION dollars ( this take into account people buying points, games, movies, not just Gold subscriptions ) and this is another reason Sony is offering PS Plus because alot of money is to be made from premium services. Again people will pay for what they want.

I dont think anyone should spend several hundred dollars on a console and buy games for 40 to 60 dollars a package if they can't afford a few dollars a month on any subscription.. My honest opinion is people who complain about a small price at this either... A) dont have the console and want to try to compare a service like PSN to XB Gold, when there is none - or Sony wouldnt have come out with PS Plus... B) They really can't afford to own a console.  People like this get their cars re-po'd all the time.  They buy something they can't afford -or- they can barely afford it, but cant afford to maintain it.. so they are living beyond their means.. gaming is a luxury.. If they can afford 4 dollars a month &  dont enjoy it enough to hack up the cash ..they really shouldnt even be playing.  I dont feel bad at all saying its better to pay less then 5 dollars a month for  a gaming addiction compared to the millions of alcoholics, and various drug users trying to get high a different way from something way more expensive.. . If life has come to complaining over 5 dollars  on a monthly subscription that can be cancelled anytime ( less $$ then what people waste on the luxury of eating out in a 'single' lunch )  its time to look in the mirror and ask a few questions .. Maybe ask what im doing wrong.. or what my budget is.. or why am i so discontent.. Id be rationalizing things:  A single gallon of car fuel cost as much ( or more in some contries ) then an entire month of XB Live Gold..



oniyide on 06 September 2011

@rf40928 "because most of us are ok paying for a service we feel has more content we're already used to" Im sorry but how im I wrong?? You said that MOST of you are content to PAY for a service. You dont pay for for Silver and you said MOST, so am i not to assume that you are talking about GOLD? MS said half of 360 users have a GOLD account. HALF, that means most 360 users are NOT content to pay.

Your entire 2nd paragraph is not based on fact. You can believe what you want, but you would be wrong. I have friends who pay for Live and others who dont. Not because they are cheap, its because they either have another system that provides them their basic online needs (PS3, PC maybe even Wii) for free and 2 they feel its wrong to charge something that they feel should be free. You keep bringing up demos and ESPN and all that crap. Im strictly talking about the gaming portion, which you even said yourself that MS could provide free with Siliver



rf40928 on 06 September 2011
oniyide said:
@rf40928 "because most of us are ok paying for a service we feel has more content we're already used to" Im sorry but how im I wrong?? You said that MOST of you are content to PAY for a service. You dont pay for for Silver and you said MOST, so am i not to assume that you are talking about GOLD? MS said half of 360 users have a GOLD account. HALF, that means most 360 users are NOT content to pay.

Your entire 2nd paragraph is not based on fact. You can believe what you want, but you would be wrong. I have friends who pay for Live and others who dont. Not because they are cheap, its because they either have another system that provides them their basic online needs (PS3, PC maybe even Wii) for free and 2 they feel its wrong to charge something that they feel should be free. You keep bringing up demos and ESPN and all that crap. Im strictly talking about the gaming portion, which you even said yourself that MS could provide free with Siliver

I said yes, most of us that pay for the service ( meaning most of those that pay for Gold ) are content to pay for it.. If around 15 million pay for Gold, and 1 MILLION people are discontent with that  - the majority of us are still content to pay.. but the ones who arent  will make the most noise.. STUDIES Show people that are discontent vocally COMPLAIN More then People that are HAPPY give vocal praise.. If someone is happy with something they will tell 2 people.. If someone is not happy they will tell 7 people..  Get it now ?? 

Also if I address 'your angle' of what I said ( although above I cleared up what I meant ) ..YOU ASSUME that because half of Xbox LIVE subscribers  dont subscribe to Gold ( but are merely Silver subscribers )  that it means ( to you ) that the majority of Silver users arent content to pay...Some arent, but what about the millions of people who play games that dont focus or require any online gaming at all ?  My brother hardly ever logs on PSN, but he is a subscriber.  Does this mean he is DISCONTENT to pay for PS Plus ?  It means he doesnt need PS Plus, but it doesnt mean he wouldnt like PS Plus or be CONTENT with it. 

Again - going on what you said - lets look at this - I told you above $1 BILLION was grossed on Xbox Live.. If you add up subscribers paying for GOLD it doesnt even get close to $1 billion  ..So where does all this extra revenue come from ?   XB (free) Silver users  account for MILLIONS of dollars in purchases from things like purchased or rented movies on Zune .. they spend more money on things like this ( a 1080p movie cost 12 dollars to buy ) and the fact they make all these other purchases online says -"they have the money, but not the need for online gaming" - they  possibly don't care about online gaming at all - milions of gamers out there really dont play a genre that requires or has online play .. ... ..ON BOTH PS3 & XB 360 most people playing online are playing COD -or another FPS - ( This is varifiable  FACT )... there are MILLIONS of people who dont play FPS's or do any online gaming..and for people like this there is little reason to pay for Gold...

Besides that what you're saying is OBVIOUS.  I had a PS3.. And again my brother owns all three consoles - he does online game, but not much.. for people like him he will sometimes let his Gold subscription expire because he doesnt use it .. So just because people dont pay for GOLD as you say - it doesnt mean they are discontent paying for it.. It can mean they dont need it or arent playing much right now.....

Its funny you even mention the Wii.. the functionality can barely even be compared to XB Live Silver - Why have a friends list on the Wii and play online when I cant talk to them while I play onine ? 



oniyide on 06 September 2011
rf40928 said:
oniyide said:
@rf40928 "because most of us are ok paying for a service we feel has more content we're already used to" Im sorry but how im I wrong?? You said that MOST of you are content to PAY for a service. You dont pay for for Silver and you said MOST, so am i not to assume that you are talking about GOLD? MS said half of 360 users have a GOLD account. HALF, that means most 360 users are NOT content to pay.

Your entire 2nd paragraph is not based on fact. You can believe what you want, but you would be wrong. I have friends who pay for Live and others who dont. Not because they are cheap, its because they either have another system that provides them their basic online needs (PS3, PC maybe even Wii) for free and 2 they feel its wrong to charge something that they feel should be free. You keep bringing up demos and ESPN and all that crap. Im strictly talking about the gaming portion, which you even said yourself that MS could provide free with Siliver

I said yes, most of us that pay for the service ( meaning most of those that pay for Gold ) are content to pay for it.. if 15 million pay for Gold, and 750,000 people are discontent - they will make the most noise.. STUDIES Show people that are discontent vocally COMPLAIN More then People that are HAPPY give vocal praise.. Get it now ?? 

Also if I address 'your angle' of what I said ( although above I cleared up what I meant ) ..YOU ASSUME that because half of Xbox owners dont subscribe to Gold ( but are merely Silver )  that it means (To you ) that the majority of Silver users arent content to pay...Some arent, but what about the millions of people who play games that dont focus or require any online gaming at all ?  My brother hardly ever logs on PSN, but he is a subscriber.  Does this mean he is DISCONTENT to pay for PS Plus ?  It means he he doesnt need PS Plus, but it doesnt mean he wouldnt like it. 

 I told you above $1 BILLION was grossed on Xbox Live.. If you add up subscribers paying for GOLD it doesnt even get close to $1 billion  ..So where does all this extra revenue come from ?   XB Silver users still account for MILLIONS of dollars from things like purchased or rented movies on Zune .. they spend more money on things like this ( a 1080p movie cost 12 dollars to buy ) and the fact they make all these other purchases online says they have the money, but not the need for online gaming... they  possibly don't care about online gaming at all - milion of gamers out there really dont..Not every game out there is a FPS... ..ON BOTH PS3 & XB 360 most people playing online are playing COD -or another FPS - ( This is varifiable  FACT )... there are MILLIONS of people who dont play FPS's or do any online gaming..and for people like this there is little reason to pay for Gold...

Besides that what you're saying is OBVIOUS.  I had a PS3.. And again my brother owns all three consoles - he does online game, but not much.. for people like him he will sometimes let his Gold subscription expire because he doesnt use it .. So just because people dont pay for GOLD as you say - it doesnt mean they are discontent paying for it.. It can mean they dont need it or arent playing much right now.....

Its funny you even mention the Wii.. the functionality can barely even be compared to XB Live Silver - Why have a friends list on the Wii and play online when I cant talk to them while I play onine ? 

ok that makes alot more sense

Im not assuming anyone is discontent, i didnt use that word, im simply suggesting that anyone not paying for the premium service simply does not feel its worth it, thats all.

i have Wii, you dont have to tell me how crappy their online is, im just ttating that it is their and it is free