@magnific0

people just get really touchy about live fees.

ive paid since 06 and i feel ripped off, not ashamed to say it. doesnt mean i hate live at all, but why am i paying 50 bucks again?

This is like saying that McDonalds should serve free food because you're already paying for gas to drive there.

I was just asking a question.

You will never see me saying that early PS3 adopters were suckers for paying the initial 600 € for their console.

actually its more like if you could buy the food at mcdonalds and eat it alone, but if you wanted to sit with friends and eat, youd pay an extra fee.

thats what its more like.

i love ms, but i won't defend a money grab.

It's not a money grab. 

They pay an entire team of programmers, designers, and artists to work on Xbox Live.  Every feature that it has, every new addition that you see, every little moving part had to be built.  It all didn't just appear out of thin air.  Bill Gates didn't just pull a fully featured Xbox Live out of his arse one sleepless night.

It has cost Microsoft a lot of time and money to build the service to the level it is today so I have no problem with Microsoft turning around and expecting users to pay for it.  Microsoft isn't a charity, it's a business.  They want to make money.

Now going back to your example.  My example was entirely different from yours as I was contrasting the ISP/Live Service, not PS3/360 online services so your statement of "It's more like" is just garbage that says you didn't understand the point of the analogy in the first place.  Let's make a fastfood analogy that fits the 360 and PS3  though.

McDonalds offers a free side of fries with every burger while Arby's requires the customer to pay extra for its signature curly fries.  Both are still fries but they're a little different.  There are some people who like the skinny fast-food style fries McDonalds has and there are some that like the spicy curly fries Arby's has. 

That's a slightly better analogy.

^^^

im not saying ps3 versus 360, but all online systems even handhelds

they all have moving parts and work put into them

they don't charge.

my analogy wasn't garbage either it was true to what it is. its not fries vs fries, unless one is free and one is 50 a year.

if you could see the cost breakdown of it all for all the companies you might see that it is a money grab.

when it hit it was worth it, it wasn't until paying for year 2 and 3 that i started thinking 'why cant i just buy a new game instead of this thing once a year'

No a more fitting analogy would be:

I already bought my TV, why should I have to pay for electricity to run it.

not really as in this case there are free alternatives that are nearly identical.

you can love ms without loving paying 50 bucks a year for live. and trotting out analogy after analogy that justify your game expenses.

we talk about fanboys, but true fanboys defend their favorites even when they get scammed.

i could see guys paying 2 bucks a month for halo matchmaking and defending it because its halo.

Greater suckers than those who pay for content on Home for the PS3?

Reality of the 360 is, due to Live, I get a LOT more downloadable demos.

My point has always been that if you feel the extra features and content is worth it then more power to you, but I have yet to be convinced as to why online MP can't be included in the silver membership.
This is the real main point to me when compared with Wii and PS3. If all the other features are what make it better then that is what you should pay for.