dsgrue... you haven't been poor at explaining what you've been asking, you simply changed what you're asking after people have backed you into a corner with better reasoning and facts.
Here.. this is what you originally said:

"Shelling out your hard-earned cash for Halo 4 doesn't get you everything; you also need to pony up for a Gold subscription if you want access to the lion's share of content you paid for. The much-heralded multiplayer mode is completely closed off, as is playing through the campaign online with friends"

now. you've changed that and your current bit is this:

"If people want to pay for the *match-making service* (Trueskill/whathaveyou) and the additional features, that's fine. That's a good reason.
My argument is why isn't this *service* separate from the multiplayer bare bones P2P/Dedicated type match-making? This is what I disagree with, not the features of the service itself. (So many people are confused by this, maybe I have been poor at explaining what I'm asking?)"

So now you're saying that if people want to pay for the matchmaking service, that's fine. Well let me point out your little contradiction, that's exactly what Live Gold is... a matchmaking service.
Nice to see you've come around.
How you gonna get outta this one huh?

I see what you are asking now.

I would simply say the reason it can't be separated is because Microsoft chose to include these services with every Xbox Live enabled game. They made the decision to better their service overall and as a result, it requires more expense. In order to separate it out, they'd have to drastically change their system to support 2 different playing methods and then each developer would also have to provide for 2 different systems. It would be a mess.

Sony chose not to include some of these things to keep the cost down to end users, but it raises costs for developers and can lead to a sometimes less fluent experience in online gaming.

If all you really want is a bare bones P2P/Dedicated multiplayer game with none of the other features and services, you can use things out there such as Xbox Connect which basically turns LAN functionality into an online P2P/Dedicated functionality.

http://www.xbconnect.com/

Yay!!

Yes they would need just a basic system and their premium system if they had chosen that route (and honestly, I bet most people would have just ponied up for the premium system anyway).

Yes, I agree about fluency. 

I think TiVo is a good example of how XBL works for 360. It makes more sense to me now. (initial cost + subscription otherwise you can't use the product) - except 360 still allows for single player, can't relate that to TiVo. lol

As of this post, GT5 has just about double the sales of Forza 4 and Horizon combined.

I'd like to ask a question, is the gold membership only payable yearly? Is it not possible to for pay for 1 month and then not pay at all?

That it? Damn.....mighty have fallen.

Yep, Forza Horizon probably not even gonna do 1/2 of what 4 did :(

This thread needs CPR. Because it's totally awesome.

I pay for live for the match making as i dont like server list or random selection and prefer to play against people of an equal skill. The fee also helps to deter creating new acounts to beat on people thatare as good as you or new to the game.

I will never understand the concept that you are exploiting someone for charging for a service. To me both Nintendo and Sony foolishly fell for the zynga model and now they are scrambling to to right the ship. Sony has done well to bring in a subscription service to their model and if they are smart they will push that to the forefront this next generation.

Paying for a service is not wrong, it's part of a strong economic model that allows a business to strengthen the service over time. However not paying for a service leads to poor business practices including but not limited to fraud, poor quality, customer resentment, and general disconnect.

Live isn't just the standard it is the only service among the three.