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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox Live: No Longer the Gold Standard

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

Cant argue with that.

"Gold is an exploitive business practice that should disappear into the ether when the next generation arrives."

Or that.

If Microsoft made online gaming free, then Live would be perfect.



                            

Around the Network

I agree 100% with this article. This is why I still haven't purchased Halo 4 (even though the Halo series is one of my favorite franchises) and most likely will only rent it or borrow it from a friend so I can just go through the story quickly. I refuse to pay for a subscription service that offers me no personal benefits outside of being able to play online.

When Nintendo, Sony, and Valve allow me to play for free with my friends online, why the hell would I want Gold? (That's a rhetorical question, don't answer it)



don't bring your live to my + lol.

1 out of 74.8m people.



It is rather annoying when a journalist who bought a game full price and all its expansions full price...And then pay every month just to play it for more than 5 years (WoW) and do this even for other MMO's aswell then start to complain about MS GOLD.

Mention that to those journalist and they come with logic answers as 'You must be an MS fanboy'!.



 

kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?



Around the Network
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?

Say that to all those MMO players.



 

dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?

Just want to point out that it is $5 a month, not $10




       

kowenicki said:
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?


So sell the 360 and get a PS3 simple.   Problem solved.

No need to be so defensive. I'm not asking you to justify yourself for Gold. 

I'm asking why you think this infringement of your content is appropriate of MS.

You already paid for the online content as well as the internet, so why is MS allowed to lock out multiplayer?



I would pay for 5 more years...

... and for some reason that fact annoys some people.



dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
dsgrue3 said:
kowenicki said:
These articles are dull and lazy "journalism" - nothing new there in gaming I know.

Don't want to pay for it... then don't. Stop preaching. Its so boring. How many have we seen like this now?

My view: If they change the model then fine. If they don't.... then fine.

I don't care either way. The price is less than the price of one game ffs.

The price isn't the issue, the principle is. Did you read the article?

"charging significant money ($59.99/year, or $9.99/month) for features given away for free on competing platforms"

"Microsoft's ardent desire to force people to pay more money means that you might not get to experience the entire game that you just purchased."

"Cordoning off entire sections of a game from people who paid good money for that product is indefensible"

You're locked out of the multiplayer aspect of your game simply because MS feels like it. MS didn't make that game, why are they restricting something you pay for  (game + internet)?


So sell the 360 and get a PS3 simple.   Problem solved.

No need to be so defensive. I'm not asking you to justify yourself for Gold. 

I'm asking why you think this infringement of your content is appropriate of MS.

You already paid for the online content as well as the internet, so why is MS allowed to lock out multiplayer?

Why is it okay for MMO developpers to do it?  Why don't we see every week a thread from fanboys about how it is stupid to pay every month for WoW or any other MMO?