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

Forums - Microsoft - Why Xbox Live is Worth the Price

Final-Fan on 03 September 2009
heruamon said:
Final-Fan said:
^ I don't understand how you can defend a system that FORCES developers to charge us money for things that should be free, that they WANT to give us for free. It's madness.

I think the issue is that M$ built XBL from the ground-up...and if developers want to utitilize the service, they have to pay a fee...let say a developer wants to shoot off some DLC...are they will to pay M$ to use their XBL service to get the content to users?  probably not, since they would then be PAYING you to play their stuff...M$'s position is that for the most part, XBL isn't a free service, and if the consumer wants to use it, they must pay to do so...Computers totally outnumber console games, but yet and still...pc games sales are far less...because of what...

This objection makes more sense, because bandwidth isn't free ... but I think that the fact that Gold users all pay MS monthly ought to cover enough for hosting a little free DLC, as long as developers don't get too crazy about it. 

Anyway, if Valve (or whoever) can offer it for free on the PC, how much of a financial burden can it really be? 

As for the bolded part, I'm not sure what the relevance is of computers outnumbering consoles but console games outselling PC versions ... and I don't know what the last phrase is even supposed to mean. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Around the Network
Zizzla_Rachet on 03 September 2009
vlad321 said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:
^ok..MS is forcing game devs to make money.....I am With that! Get Money! And keep it Gator...

If MS wants developers to get more money why doesnt it just give it to the and forces us to do so? Who the fuck are they to tell devs how to handle their games? That's EXACTLY my point as to why LIVE is one  of the shitties services out there (not in terms of quality of course, but still VERY shitty). MS can stick LIVE up their ass for all I care.

 

P.S. I'm a studet who is centeringon AI and i mght end up being a game AI developer. I'm taking donations, can you send me some of your money?

Send you some of my money?...You would have to provide a service I deem worth paying....like XBL Gold



 



Zizzla_Rachet on 03 September 2009
JaggedSac said:
I agree that MS should not make developers charge customers for content. And the thing is, MS doesn't force all devs to do this. Burnout 3 is an example. Crackdown also had some free DLC. One of the Halo 3 packs was free after a while.

Even the gears maps were free after a while...People need to stop living in this fantasy world were companies don't mind bleeding money to say they are on top of their competitors...



 



Zizzla_Rachet on 03 September 2009
Final-Fan said:
themanwithnoname said:
Final-Fan said:
^ I don't understand how you can defend a system that FORCES developers to charge us money for things that should be free, that they WANT to give us for free. It's madness.

It's called the world of business, and if you think it SHOULD be free just because you and other people seem to think anything Valve adds to an IP should be in the form a free download doesn't mean that you're right.

I'm talking about stuff that IS free on the PC version, and that would be free on XBL except MS stepped in and said "no, there's gonna be a fee on this stuff".  Your objection about "that's business" does not make sense in this context unless I am completely wrong on what others have said, or they are completely wrong on the reality. 

You missed his point by about 7.5 miles...PC sales are so low comapared to Consoles....There is no audience hardcore enough o want to pay for new content...plain and simple...Want proof.?....Go Download Quake III Arena Demo...and Tell me Dallas/NY *No Ghost* Server is not up....I dare you...



 



Final-Fan on 03 September 2009
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Final-Fan said:
themanwithnoname said:
Final-Fan said:
^ I don't understand how you can defend a system that FORCES developers to charge us money for things that should be free, that they WANT to give us for free. It's madness.

It's called the world of business, and if you think it SHOULD be free just because you and other people seem to think anything Valve adds to an IP should be in the form a free download doesn't mean that you're right.

I'm talking about stuff that IS free on the PC version, and that would be free on XBL except MS stepped in and said "no, there's gonna be a fee on this stuff".  Your objection about "that's business" does not make sense in this context unless I am completely wrong on what others have said, or they are completely wrong on the reality. 

You missed his point by about 7.5 miles...PC sales are so low comapared to Consoles....There is no audience hardcore enough o want to pay for new content...plain and simple...Want proof.?....Go Download Quake III Arena Demo...and Tell me Dallas/NY *No Ghost* Server is not up....I dare you...

Speaking of missing the point, I think you quoted the wrong post. 

Anyway, are you really saying that PC gamers aren't hardcore compared to 360 gamers?  I can think of a couple people that would be interested in hearing that claim...



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Around the Network
Cheebee on 03 September 2009

Meh, I'll never pay to take my console online.



Nintendo Network ID: Cheebee   3DS Code: 2320 - 6113 - 9046

 

sonicshuffle on 03 September 2009

So worth it.



 

 [IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/2lxwas9.gif[/IMG]

vlad321 on 03 September 2009
JaggedSac said:
I agree that MS should not make developers charge customers for content. And the thing is, MS doesn't force all devs to do this. Burnout 3 is an example. Crackdown also had some free DLC. One of the Halo 3 packs was free after a while.

 

That's what makes it more interesting. They don't charge for a lot of their own content (i know i know, gears of war etc, but it's true in some cases) yet they make others (like Valve) charge for their content. How does that not seem fucked up to anyone else?

As for bandwidth usage, has no one realized that you already pay for the bandwidth? That's your ISP handling YOUR bandwidth, MS just stuck their LIVE service in there so they can use an excuse to charge you fo THEIR bandwidth too. Has no one wondered how GameSpy and Heat.net (which was later bought by gamespy) work just fine, and support so many multiplayer games, without making you pay for them?

 

@Zizzla

Did you honestly call PC gamers less hardcore than Xbox gamers? PLease, don't even start. COnsole gamers don't know a good game if it hit them in the face and claim such "ezmode" games such as Halo to be hardcore. The reason they can't play on the PC is because they can't even bother to make a few settings about their games so they have to settle for a half-assed substitute, which is what the 360 is, a half-assed PC with half-assed games and half-assed "harcore" players.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

JaggedSac on 03 September 2009
vlad321 said:
JaggedSac said:
I agree that MS should not make developers charge customers for content. And the thing is, MS doesn't force all devs to do this. Burnout 3 is an example. Crackdown also had some free DLC. One of the Halo 3 packs was free after a while.

 

That's what makes it more interesting. They don't charge for a lot of their own content (i know i know, gears of war etc, but it's true in some cases) yet they make others (like Valve) charge for their content. How does that not seem fucked up to anyone else?

As for bandwidth usage, has no one realized that you already pay for the bandwidth? That's your ISP handling YOUR bandwidth, MS just stuck their LIVE service in there so they can use an excuse to charge you fo THEIR bandwidth too. Has no one wondered how GameSpy and Heat.net (which was later bought by gamespy) work just fine, and support so many multiplayer games, without making you pay for them?

 

@Zizzla

Did you honestly call PC gamers less hardcore than Xbox gamers? PLease, don't even start. COnsole gamers don't know a good game if it hit them in the face and claim such "ezmode" games such as Halo to be hardcore. The reason they can't play on the PC is because they can't even bother to make a few settings about their games so they have to settle for a half-assed substitute, which is what the 360 is, a half-assed PC with half-assed games and half-assed "harcore" players.

That is a different beast.  They rely mostly on private servers provided by the consumers for their games.  The only thing that they really provide is a master server that has a list of all available servers for all games.  Live servers actually have to handle the matchmaking requests for all games that utilize matchmaking.  Which is much more involved than providing a simple server list.  Take Quake Live as an example of a similar situation.  They are now having to offer a premium membership in order to not eat server costs.  This is due to the fact that all of the servers for the game are provided by id and the fact that their ad based model is not working well for them.  They are not getting any game purchase fees so there is nothing directly paying for the server costs.  This is very similar to Live in the fact that there is no direct compensation for their servers from game sales.  This is why they charge for Live.  You could say that DD sales would pay for that, and they could, but MS obviously does not want the profits from DD to pay for their server upkeep.  I do not mind paying because I tend to enjoy the whole matchmaking/ranking services that they offer through Live.

As for your pc gaming statements.  You are completely absurd in your attempts to describe something as hardcore.  I grew up playing Doom, Quake(hell, I played the orginal TF mod), Quake 2(BoTS mod, $10 bucks to anybody who knows what that is), Tribes, UT, etc.  The gameplay is just different.  Sure the input offers more precise aiming.  But the only thing that means is that developers must make character movement faster because it is so damn easy to shoot people.  I have already had discussions with you on this, and you obviously have a close minded approach to any of your ideals.  I garauntee you without a shadow of a fucking doubt, that if you played a Halo 3 MLG player, you would get your ass pwned.  Heck, I even remember Mendicate Bias challenging you to a match of Halo on PC, and he loves both pc gaming and console gaming, much like myself.  Whatever happened with that?

You have a screwed up mindset.  Hell, you think you have the right to play any game ever released for free and then you might offer your support to the developer as charity.  That is retarded.  Especially considering you want to become a game developer yourself.  The sweetest irony would be if a game you developed flopped due to massive piracy and you get canned.  It would be the sweetest justice ever.



shio on 04 September 2009
Lord Flashheart said:
*cough*FFXI*cough*
Now who talking bullshit.

I'm not comparing the games but the business practice.
If charging to play online is bad then why is it ok to keep charging monthly to play online with no offline?

You can try and justify it but the fact is you're still being charged just for online multiplayer and there are free alternatives out there.
This is basically the biggest argument AGAINST live.
Ones ok and ones not?

If its ok due to the community then the community on live is superior to PSN so that should be justification enough right?

Ah but now its "types" of games not the actual games themselves.

You don't even understand the concept of MMO Gaming, do you?!

If Blizzard didn't put subscriptions on World of Warcraft they would be losing BILLIONS OF DOLLARS!!! For less than $15 a month you get:

- Updates every week (Microsoft only allows 1 free update per game)
- New content every month (amount of content that Microsoft would force you to pay $20 for it every month)
- Game masters on every server that help you on anything you need.
- All those servers and bandwidth that allow the game to be MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER!!! And when I say massive, I mean MASSIVE (not the kind of massive that F2P are)

 

Zizzla_Rachet said:
CodeJerry said:
Simply $59.99 a year for the life of your console which should be 10 years will end up costing you $599 not to mention all the map packs that you are forced to download or you won't be able to play online if you don't get them.

Xbox live is not worth the money. It would be worth the money if they included all map packs free like on a PC.

Force to download MapPacks?...where did you get that Spin from....it's quite new...And you won't be able to play online if you don't...I don't have any Hola 3 Map packs...and I get a match every time...and the difference betewwen PC and Console's are that PC developers don't have a way to Steam content to people....

Huh?! Any decent developer can make their games auto-search for games, or have a button that allows the players the option to auto-search for updates.

And funny what you said, because Steam (Valve's service) is a great way to make all that patching logistics irrelevant, and Steam has patched dozens of times more games than Xbox Live ever did.

 

heruamon said:
Final-Fan said:
^ I don't understand how you can defend a system that FORCES developers to charge us money for things that should be free, that they WANT to give us for free. It's madness.

I think the issue is that M$ built XBL from the ground-up...and if developers want to utitilize the service, they have to pay a fee...let say a developer wants to shoot off some DLC...are they will to pay M$ to use their XBL service to get the content to users?  probably not, since they would then be PAYING you to play their stuff...M$'s position is that for the most part, XBL isn't a free service, and if the consumer wants to use it, they must pay to do so...Computers totally outnumber console games, but yet and still...pc games sales are far less...because of what...

Your last comment makes no sense. Give me proof that PC games are sold "far less" than console games.

Zizzla_Rachet said:
Final-Fan said:
themanwithnoname said:
Final-Fan said:
^ I don't understand how you can defend a system that FORCES developers to charge us money for things that should be free, that they WANT to give us for free. It's madness.

It's called the world of business, and if you think it SHOULD be free just because you and other people seem to think anything Valve adds to an IP should be in the form a free download doesn't mean that you're right.

I'm talking about stuff that IS free on the PC version, and that would be free on XBL except MS stepped in and said "no, there's gonna be a fee on this stuff".  Your objection about "that's business" does not make sense in this context unless I am completely wrong on what others have said, or they are completely wrong on the reality. 

You missed his point by about 7.5 miles...PC sales are so low comapared to Consoles....There is no audience hardcore enough o want to pay for new content...plain and simple...Want proof.?....Go Download Quake III Arena Demo...and Tell me Dallas/NY *No Ghost* Server is not up....I dare you...

HAHAAHAHA, Where's actual proof that PC games are sold badly? If PC games had such weak sales, then why are there far more PC Game Developers than Console Developers?



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg