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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - The reason why you pay for Xbox Live - An attempted Explanation

ChronotriggerJM on 13 November 2008
Infamous said:
The fact is, I'd rather pay for quality and everything that comes with it. $8/monthly is nothing for a superior service.

One must quote "superior" for the cost.

If you have 3 runners, a, b, and c. And well runner A is damn good and wins races, while runners b and c both suck and ... well... suck... it comes down to which one sucks less >_>; and well personally I don't think you should pay for suck, unless were putting this in completely different context :D

 



From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.

Around the Network
theprof00 on 13 November 2008

To me, it comes down to a moral issue.
MS has these servers already, they have had the structure available and have it paid for.
The fact is, if MS actually made profit on xbox and 360, live would not have to cost anything. The cost is there to recoup losses and actually make profit, which is still yet to be nearly worth the investment.



JaggedSac on 13 November 2008

There are free methods of playing the 360 games online. You just need a pc on the same network and run the program. Of course you can only play with other people that have the program. It is basically creating a long distance LAN party.

Other than that, pay for it, or don't, no one will notice your choice, because there will always be slubs out there like me who are willing to pay for it. Horde mode is calling me after work today.



Delusional on 13 November 2008

I've always hated the idea of subscription for gameplay and said I would never pay for it. But when I got my 360, all my friends had it so I grabbed a 13 month subscription off Amazon.com for $38.99. One of the BEST purchase I ever made. How I can play co-op with my friends and play custom games in Gears 2 and Cod4 with them is totally worth a meal each month. Although it's free for the PS3, it's been more than a year since I've owned it and I have never even played online gameplay on my PS3. Basically I feel like I'm paying for the online fun with friends.



Currently loving my Wii x2, Xbox 360 Pro & Xbox 360 Arcade, and Final Fantasy 7 Advent Children Limited "Cloud Black" 160GB PS3

GAMEFLY & GOOZEX FTW

 

 

 

 

Garnett on 13 November 2008

This is TOO Funny,every now n then they say that the PS3 is a better deal,and how its worth the 400 bucks,but 5$ for a MONTH of online gaming isnt?

I guess Xbox live is better like the PS3 is better than the 360 in hardware department,but be prepared to pay more.



*Remember when the world was supposed to end on May 21st, 2011? Well click here to see our short parody video of it [not]ending*

Around the Network
Sardauk on 13 November 2008
theprof00 said:
To me, it comes down to a moral issue.
MS has these servers already, they have had the structure available and have it paid for.
The fact is, if MS actually made profit on xbox and 360, live would not have to cost anything. The cost is there to recoup losses and actually make profit, which is still yet to be nearly worth the investment.

 

Business has nothing to do with morality those days (except if morality is a business)

I'm not sure that the shareholders would be happy to invest in a company that does that ...



 

Evan Wells (Uncharted 2): I think the differences that you see between any two games has much more to do with the developer than whether it’s on the Xbox or PS3.

NiKKoM on 13 November 2008
DTG said:

 

I'm sorry but manufacturers have no right milking people for profit. Sony makes a loss on their consoles and on their online to provide us with the best value and quality. The xbox and wii essentially charging us more than the costs to manufacture etc for the sake of profits shouldn't be tolerated. Why pay more for something than it actually costs?? Sony is the only honest VG company in this regard.

Welcome to the Real World!! Did you know that the food you buy is also sold with a profit? If you didn't knew you do now! xD

 



 

Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!) 

Godot on 13 November 2008

I own a 360 but it's my secondary console. Because of that, I don't feel like paying 50$ a year to play online games. I may understand that if you play a lot, you care to have online in XBLA games like UNO or Marble Blast but I don't care. I would much rather have free online for just a few games because I don't have much time to play games online.



How many cups of darkness have I drank over the years? Even I don't know...

 

Party Monster on 13 November 2008

Microsoft cannot affort it themselves you the consumer should pay for the privilege of playing your Xbox online.



theprof00 on 13 November 2008
Sardauk said:
theprof00 said:
To me, it comes down to a moral issue.
MS has these servers already, they have had the structure available and have it paid for.
The fact is, if MS actually made profit on xbox and 360, live would not have to cost anything. The cost is there to recoup losses and actually make profit, which is still yet to be nearly worth the investment.

 

Business has nothing to do with morality those days (except if morality is a business)

I'm not sure that the shareholders would be happy to invest in a company that does that ...

I agree, but I mean, there are better ways to do things than by charging money. That is what is wrong with companies nowadays, they don't think outside the box.

Like I said before, Blizzard didn't charge for their servers and it resulted in some of the biggest and best selling titles at a time when people were either charging for online or had just very bad online.