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

sunK1D on 04 January 2013
VGKing said:
sunK1D said:
VGKing said:
Dark_Feanor said:
I just have to say that I pay for my internet home subscription 12x more than I have to pay for Live and so for my 3G conection.

So, stop being crying babies.

There are no rule that multiplay have to be free. It´s such a unimportant issue that not Sony neither Nintendo (even Valve or EA Origens) market their produte.

It's not that people can't pay the fee, its the principle of the thing. Basic online multiplayer is free on Wii U/PS3/PC. I'd say that is as close as it gets to there being a "rule" about it being free. I keep seeing articles/threads about this every single week and people will start to reconsider next-gen as they realize that these other platforms offer nearly identical services for free.

If people didn't stop buying X360's after the RRoD fiasco or buying Nintendo consoles after the GC fiasco or PS3's after the hacking epidemic. Surely they still stop buying X720's because of $50/y for Live. Makes sense...

As people become more informed and as next-gen starts a clean slate, more people will choose PS4 over XBox 720 in the early years. Not saying free PSN will be the only reason, there will be other factors. 
Gamertags and Achievements aren't as important to the majority. Only a select few super hardcore gamers care about that stuff.

We're part of this 10% minority that actually are vocal and participate in online discussions, etc. 90% of the people out there are just consumerist and they will buy whatever gets the upperhand in marketing. We all know Sony is really good at marketing right..?

Microsoft is appealing to a demographic that you're not part of. People seem to have a problem understanding this. Good news though, you have choices, buy a PS3 or maybe even the PS4 if Sony doesn't start charging for online too.



Around the Network
dsgrue3 on 04 January 2013
JayWood2010 said:
Nothing of relevance.


You haven't addressed my point. You keep addressing XBLG as a service. I'm asking you to address charging people to *unlock* their multiplayer aspect of their game they already paid for.

I have no issues with the service itself and all of the features offered. Charging me to use the multiplayer portion of my game that I paid for that you had nothing to do with is my dispute.



bananaking21 on 04 January 2013
ganoncrotch said:
kowenicki said:
ganoncrotch said:
bananaking21 said:
ganoncrotch said:
bananaking21 said:
sales2099 said:
How origional....sigh

All MS has to do is adopt a PS Plus approach.


technicially MS doesnt really have to do anything. a lot of people dont like paying for live and say they shouldnt have to, i agree with that. but its working for MS, so when thinking about it, if it aint broke, dont fix it


Indeed would be like saying that Nike has to stop charging a lot for their shoes or that Dr Dre Beats shouldn't be 300euros for a pair of headphones, if people are paying and still happy to have a few adverts in the bottom corner of the screen which generate an absolute ton of revenue for MS then why would they stop doing it?

it depends on what they want though. if they want more profits from xbox live, charge for it. if they want a chance at getting first place and outselling nintendo and sony, i think they need to make playing games atleast for free


I think MS's goal is the same as always has been, Make Money.


oh god...

Just like Sony and Ninty then and every other compnay on the planet.


yeah exactly, I just mean I don't think Microsoft are going to sacrifice the money they earn from adverts or Xboxlive gold to try and outsell the ps2 or to win a generation which is almost over, while those things are important to some people on the Internet, realistically MS wont shoot themselves in the foot to win internet arguments. They print money from xbl so they don't need to be the number 1 seller, each console in a home generates more money even just sitting there.

i ment next gen not this gen. also having the most consoles sold does have its benifits when it comes to making money, first all more consoles sold = more money of course :P second it means more software sold and peripheral's. more revenue from online content such as DLC and full game purchases. plus more console sales equal more brand awarness and popularity which is really helpfull in the long run. of course they will lose the yearly revenue from xbox live. as i said it depends on how MS want to make the money and how much market share they want they want, after all market share is important for many reasons, non related to internet wars made by fanboys of course. 

also i once read an article about bill gates and i remember him saying something like when ever MS enter an indusrty that MS's approach is to dominate the market, much like they do with windows and windows office. i cant link you to that article because i read it years ago. dont qoute me on this because i could be wrong though



VGKing on 04 January 2013
sunK1D said:

We're part of this 10% minority that actually are vocal and participate in online discussions, etc. 90% of the people out there are just consumerist and they will buy whatever gets the upperhand in marketing. We all know Sony is really good at marketing right..?

Microsoft is appealing to a demographic that you're not part of. People seem to have a problem understanding this. Good news though, you have choices, buy a PS3 or maybe even the PS4 if Sony doesn't start charging for online too.

You're right, I'm not part of their current Kinect target audience. But what does that have to do with Xbox Live fees? 

Seriously though, the kind of person who plays Call of Duty on 360 is the same kind of person who does so on PS3. This is the same "demographic" and I am part of it...

Sony doesn't have to be good at marketing since most people alrady know that PS3 offers free online and 360 doesn't. Like I said this will be a bigger factor coming into next-gen.



Jaywood2010 on 04 January 2013
dsgrue3 said:
JayWood2010 said:
Nothing of relevance.


You haven't addressed my point. You keep addressing XBLG as a service. I'm asking you to address charging people to *unlock* their multiplayer aspect of their game they already paid for.

I have no issues with the service itself and all of the features offered. Charging me to use the multiplayer portion of my game that I paid for that you had nothing to do with is my dispute.

I SAID BECAUSE THE MULTIPLAYER FEATURES ARE SUPERIOR  TO OTHER SERVICES BUT I GUESS YOU CAN'T READ. STOP QUOTING ME AND IGNORING EVERYTHING I SAY BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE. GOODBYE




       

Around the Network
sunK1D on 04 January 2013
dsgrue3 said:
JayWood2010 said:
Nothing of relevance.


You haven't addressed my point. You keep addressing XBLG as a service. I'm asking you to address charging people to *unlock* their multiplayer aspect of their game they already paid for.

I have no issues with the service itself and all of the features offered. Charging me to use the multiplayer portion of my game that I paid for that you had nothing to do with is my dispute.

You're blaming MS for your own mistakes. You know Multiplayer on XBL is a paid service. The choice to buy that multiplayer game was yours and not Microsoft. The developers have nothing to do with this.



arcelonious on 04 January 2013

As long as there are enough people that support gold memberships, I think that it is inevitable that Microsoft will continue, due to the profit that it makes. It's ultimately up to the consumers to put their money where they think it should belong, and if you feel strongly about a premium imposed on online features, then don't support it.



VGKing on 04 January 2013
runqvist said:
As long as it makes money for MS, it should not go away. It is quite simple.

You could argue that Xbox Live GOLD is at a point where it actually drives consumers to the competition. Years ago when I had very little spending money it meantn those $60 meant the difference between playing online or buying a new game. So unless 14 years old are out there working jobs, I expect the free PSN to be a major selling point for PS4 just as it was for PS3.



dsgrue3 on 04 January 2013
JayWood2010 said:
dsgrue3 said:
JayWood2010 said:
Nothing of relevance.


You haven't addressed my point. You keep addressing XBLG as a service. I'm asking you to address charging people to *unlock* their multiplayer aspect of their game they already paid for.

I have no issues with the service itself and all of the features offered. Charging me to use the multiplayer portion of my game that I paid for that you had nothing to do with is my dispute.

I SAID BECAUSE THE MULTIPLAYER FEATURES ARE SUPERIOR  TO OTHER SERVICES BUT I GUESS YOU CAN'T READ. STOP QUOTING ME AND IGNORING EVERYTHING I SAY BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE. GOODBYE

This still fails to address my point. "Multiplayer features are superior" - features are separate from the online portion of the game. They may *enhance* the experience, and in that regard awesome charge people. But, the "online portion" of the game is the same, irrelevant to the platform. You enter a lobby and are placed in a game with others. 

Are you slow or something?

 

-this post was moderated by amp316



Jaywood2010 on 04 January 2013
dsgrue3 said:
JayWood2010 said:
dsgrue3 said:
JayWood2010 said:
Nothing of relevance.


You haven't addressed my point. You keep addressing XBLG as a service. I'm asking you to address charging people to *unlock* their multiplayer aspect of their game they already paid for.

I have no issues with the service itself and all of the features offered. Charging me to use the multiplayer portion of my game that I paid for that you had nothing to do with is my dispute.

I SAID BECAUSE THE MULTIPLAYER FEATURES ARE SUPERIOR  TO OTHER SERVICES BUT I GUESS YOU CAN'T READ. STOP QUOTING ME AND IGNORING EVERYTHING I SAY BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE. GOODBYE

This still fails to address my point. "Multiplayer features are superior" - features are separate from the online portion of the game. They may *enhance* the experience, and in that regard awesome charge people. But, the "online portion" of the game is the same, irrelevant to the platform. You enter a lobby and are placed in a game with others. 

Are you slow or something?

And as I said pages ago I will not argue.  and as I've did already I gave my reasons and you disagree , simple as that.  The reason I justify it is because online is better than others, but you ignore that.  By the way, thanks for trying to bait me, you've been reported.  Their is no reason to personally attack someone because you disagree with someone.