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

Forums - Gaming - Paying for online gaming, THE OUTRAGE!

cannonballZ said:
IDK why some people whine about it. At $60 a year that adds up to $5 a month. Thats peanuts. And if sony charged for online gaming, I'd pay. No whining or outrage.


I've been saying the same for years, but some people won't listen. They act like a few bucks a month will break the bank. Besides, anyone that pays full price for XBL Gold is doing it wrong.

If playing Halo 4 means giving MS the cost of a Happy Meal I'll do it. If Sony demanded the same I'd pay it. The sames goes for Nintendo. We're talking about pocket change and people throw fits like MS is stealing their nest egg.



Around the Network
kain_kusanagi said:
JoeTheBro said:

I act like this

In regards to this

Because this

Is free to play on this

And this

And this

-----------------------------------------------

I'm also this

About this

So your argument is invalid or something like that.


Lol, wow. You can play this

on these

 

 

 





I like what you did here. I don't even pay attention to the people who complain about Xbox Live having a fee.



kain_kusanagi said:
OdinHades said:
DarthVolod said:

It seems like everyone is ignoring a part of an Xbox Live Gold sub that Sony does not offer, cross game voice chat. Only Xbox offers this service.

The closest comparision I can think of is a Ventrilo server. A 10 slot server goes for about $2 to $3 per month. An Xbox live party can hold 8 players and, as someone pointed out earlier in this thread, you can get your Xbox live Gold sub for as low as $2 a month.

Whether or not you agree that $2 a month for cross game chat is worth it is irrelevant. I believe it is, and that is why I pay to keep it. Sony doesn't offer it, and neither does Nintendo.

As soon as a different company offers the same service for less we can talk.


Vita does it. For free.

But does it have Halo games?

Because I'm pretty sure the only way to play Halo 4 online is with XBL Gold. That's the price of admission. I wish it was free, but it's not and it costs less a month than a burger so I don't even notice it when I balance my check book.


Yeah, if you need Halo that bad, I guess you don't have a choice. But that doesn't mean it's a good thing to charge for online gaming. And as I said, the cost sums up. You're payin about 399 € for Hardware for a whole generation. Over the years, you're payin' about the same for Gold. If it's no big deal for you, that's perfectly fine. But there are some people who like to keep their money if they can. Especially when there's a competitor who's offering the exact same service for free. 

 

Sure, infrastructure costs money and stuff, but come on. Are you payin a fee to visit amazon? Youtube? Google? wth, there are even ads on XBox Live Gold. They don't need that money to stay profitable. They really really don't. 



唯一無二のRolStoppableに認められた、VGCの任天堂ファミリーの正式メンバーです。光栄に思います。

JoeTheBro said:

OK.

 

I act like this

In regards to this

Because this

Is free to play on this

And this

And this

-----------------------------------------------

I'm also this

About this

So your argument is invalid or something like that.




Around the Network
kain_kusanagi said:
JoeTheBro said:

OK.

 

I act like this

In regards to this

Because this

Is free to play on this

And this

And this

-----------------------------------------------

I'm also this

About this

So your argument is invalid or something like that.


Now give me dat Fizzy Lifting Drink.



OdinHades said:
kain_kusanagi said:
OdinHades said:
DarthVolod said:

It seems like everyone is ignoring a part of an Xbox Live Gold sub that Sony does not offer, cross game voice chat. Only Xbox offers this service.

The closest comparision I can think of is a Ventrilo server. A 10 slot server goes for about $2 to $3 per month. An Xbox live party can hold 8 players and, as someone pointed out earlier in this thread, you can get your Xbox live Gold sub for as low as $2 a month.

Whether or not you agree that $2 a month for cross game chat is worth it is irrelevant. I believe it is, and that is why I pay to keep it. Sony doesn't offer it, and neither does Nintendo.

As soon as a different company offers the same service for less we can talk.


Vita does it. For free.

But does it have Halo games?

Because I'm pretty sure the only way to play Halo 4 online is with XBL Gold. That's the price of admission. I wish it was free, but it's not and it costs less a month than a burger so I don't even notice it when I balance my check book.


Yeah, if you need Halo that bad, I guess you don't have a choice. But that doesn't mean it's a good thing to charge for online gaming. And as I said, the cost sums up. You're payin about 399 € for Hardware for a whole generation. Over the years, you're payin' about the same for Gold. If it's no big deal for you, that's perfectly fine. But there are some people who like to keep their money if they can. Especially when there's a competitor who's offering the exact same service for free. 

 

Sure, infrastructure costs money and stuff, but come on. Are you payin a fee to visit amazon? Youtube? Google? wth, there are even ads on XBox Live Gold. They don't need that money to stay profitable. They really really don't. 

This isn't about if I'd like it to be free or not. I wish everything I like was free. I wish I could have everything my heart desires without lifting a finger. That's not the point. I'm also not arguing that MS needs the money.

All I'm saying is that it's the price of admission and Halo and Gears and all the rest is worth it to lots of people. Sony is probably going to charge for onling gaming next gen and if they do I'll pay it and complain no more than I do for paying for HBO on top of my cable bill. The tiny fee for XBL Gold is so small that even after five years it still only adds up to about $175. Most people probably spend ten times that on coffee and they don't even keep track of it. I probably drop more per month in charity jars than MS charges for online. I don't care what MS charges because I want to play Halo 4. If it was free that would be great.

For some reason people find it offensive that others pay for something they claim not to want. All the while they don't care about all the other stuff that people pay for that they actually don't want. I don't get it and that's why I made this thread.



JoeTheBro said:
kain_kusanagi said:


Now give me dat Fizzy Lifting Drink.




kain_kusanagi said:
JoeTheBro said:

Now give me dat Fizzy Lifting Drink.


Alight I'll admit that one really made me laugh. I'm done derailing your thread.

 

For real break it down on a game by game basis. Assuming you buy 10 360 games a year and pay $60 for Live. That's $10 a game which is the same cost as an online pass. Would you like it if even new games needed an online pass? Probably not.



kain_kusanagi said:
Mummelmann said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Talal said:
It's about the principle really not the price. The competition does it for free. Back in the beginning of the gen I never complained about the online fee, it was a brilliant service and no one had anything like it, but now that the PSN is almost just as good it becomes annoying.


Books are free at the library, but people still buy them. TV is "free" over air, but people pay for cable.

Uhm, you think its free to broadcast TV signals and produce TV programs? I hope you're kidding now.

I didn't say that. Read it again.

Your book analogy doesn't work at all. Paying to play online would be like having to pay to be able to read the books you had just bought.

The cable argument is also flawed, cable offers completely different experiences than regular network TV or state channels, kind of like paying for an MMO.