"Confirmation bias - a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses." This is a very real thing with news, TV and the like.

I think Microsoft provides a great service through Gold. But it's not right that they have included basic online with the package.

I didn't make you read any of it. So stop bending over and taking it from Microsoft. Let them know as their customers that you want what should be free to remain as free and what shouldn't be free should in fact require your money.

Unless I am playing a highly engaging single player game that requires my full attention (only game that fit this category for me this year was Deus Ex HR) I prefer to talk to my friends when playing a game. Who cares if we are not playing the same game, we can talk to each other without setting up a conference call or something with our phones every time we want to chat. It is just a nice feature that makes the mostly solitary experience of playing a video game a far more sociable and fun experience. I don't have the luxury of having a bunch of friends who never have work/other commitments to take up their time so party chat is one of the few times I can catch up with them. A bunch of people I know use it just for this one purpose, and it is also a great way to keep in touch with people who are out of state.

That is just one perk of the party system. It is also a great tool for achievment boosters who are trying to get groups of people organized for a session. 

Lastly, you may not want to talk to someone playing Final Fantasy 13, but I bet they desparetly want to talk to someone ... I know I did since I had an abysmal time with that game start to finish and it was nice to have friends there for moral support : )

The comparison is there. He said millions support Live so it's okay to keep it the way it is. Millions of people supported slavery AT THE TIME. I know very well that slavery and online services are two different things. But it does provide a counter argument that just because a number of people do support a service is not enough justification. I just used an extreme example to make my point. I want to see exactly why Microsoft needs to have online gaming as a PREMIUM service. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Microsoft can keep everything, literally everything else on GOLD. Just let me play games I've paid for online and give me basic friendlists and text functionality. That is not asking for a lot. Sevengen was basically saying, look at all these guys who back me up, so that means I'm right too and we are happy. I may have said that comparing two different services is wrong, but my analogy with slavery was not comparing services. One is cheap labor while the other is online functionalities. I was comparing the REASONING behind the services. Fees for online gaming are fine since we think so. Cheap black labor is fine because we think so. It doesn't work that way.

It's not whether you're right or not about the argument, it's the fact that you critisize one example for being stupid then go off and make an even stupider comparison, thus making you seem like a giant hypocrite.

Your posts are making my head hurt, you seem to have been brainwashed or something. "look at the guys who back me up", then look at 20-something million gold subscribers, and look how many give less shit about what you want and pay anyway.

And  you seem to pointedly ignore posts that actually justify the online capabilities, gold makes sure that the publishers don't burden the cost of brandwith and provide matchmaking for games, although it makes no sense customer having to pay for it, it's there to justify the cost of hosting and make it easier for the developers. At ridiculously low prices per year in some cases - in some even lower than half the original RRP, only the cheapest of cheapskates would be bitching about the cost, of course it'd be nice not to pay, but then again, I am not cheap enough to actually complain about paying for a service I preffer much more. Although I haven't played PSN in about a year now, when I did, it was wild and unpredictable on non exclusive games, the games seemed dead, no one had headsets, no cross-game chat capabilities, and nevermind my experience being around the time when MW2 has been hacked to shit.

Your argument is interesting, you're probably one of those people who was willing to fork out $600 for a new PS3, yet complain about paying for live. Sheep we are indeed(!).

Look, I have nothing against you. So don't resort to attacking me directly when I have done nothing wrong. By definition, a stupid comparison would be an incorrect one. It would indeed be "stupid" if I said, look Live is just like slavery! That's not what I said at all. My analogy was on why millions of people supporting something is not enough justification. But Sevengen's original post said Netflix = library rentals. Go ahead and read it again. That is an incorrect analogy so I pointed it out.

Anyways, both sides have legitimate reasons and I hope you agree with that. You even admitted it's too bad that they are putting the cost on us and you're just willing to deal with it. That's fine but let's not forget our own rights in the process. If we went along with these big businesses and forgot our own rights, SOPA would've been a reality. Also, you'll have companies like Square Enix, which I don't know if you have heard already, have decided to make DLC CONCLUSIONS for FF XIII-2. Like wtf? I already paid $80 for my collector's edition. Now I don't get to know how the story concludes unless I pay an additional fee? Sure, it might only be like $5 or something. Much like how you pay 60 freaking dollars for a game and then a little more for just accessing the online part. The cost is not the problem. It's that these companies are trying to make profit the wrong way. I'm not AGAINST companies making profit. Charging for a launch PS3 at $600? That was again trying to make profit incorrectly. FYI I did not get a PS3 until it went down to $399. Asking for what I already paid for (the game) is not being a cheapskate. If these developers can't cover the costs of their own games, maybe they should not include a multiplayer component. Seriously, every developer these days is starting to think they need multiplayer on their game in order to be successful. Another thing that has changed with this generation. This generation has seen so many changes it's hard to ignore, so please understand. It's this stupid economy. I'm going to blame the recession.