Why bash live for it's price...?

Look at it this way, it's not the only payed subscription out there, and it's not bad either. It is a great piece of what pushed the Xbox and Xbox 360 market and allowed Microsoft to beat Sony (a worldwide regognizable brand) in one generation of sales. It's not over yet but...Xbox Live is the best offer at the moment in the 3 consoles.

Not only does an Xbox Live member get access to demos, cool free arcade gams every now and then and exclusive content...but it is by far to smoothest service out of the three. If it was not for the great gaming Microsoft provided via Xbox Live, sony and Nintendo would not have had such a big overhaul in the online department.

WoW accounts can cost up to 250$ A YEAR!!! A year! Yeah...while Xbox Live live costs 50$...(went down to 40$ today),with Live you can play ALL online games with your subscription and not only do you get a serive with features such as Party Systems, Standardized Matchmaking, Video/Voice Chat, Picture Trading, Cross game chat, Full Featured Friends List, Comparable and unique achievements...(a feature which Sony copied after saying it was useless), and dozens more...but its all seamless and fun.

You pay for what you get, and you get a whole lot with Xbox Live. Playstation may slowly be catching up but it won't get close to the standard set by people who pay for something great.

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Thessassin

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Thessassin

Because there are only 2 worthwhile games on the PC for its consumers...while Xbox has 100's with online capabilities. Also, most people who own Xbox Live, own an xbox in the first place.

Because I can go on PSN for free with no lag. Of course, no one on my team talks and sometimes I get SOOOO bored.

So yeah, XBOX live is worth every penny. I don't see why people bash it. With the exception of Killzone 2, xbox live runs circles over some PSN features...or lack of

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Cybiotik

Because there are only 2 worthwhile games on the PC for its consumers...while Xbox has 100's with online capabilities. Also, most people who own Xbox Live, own an xbox in the first place.

No, just no.

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Cybiotik

Because there are only 2 worthwhile games on the PC for its consumers...while Xbox has 100's with online capabilities. Also, most people who own Xbox Live, own an xbox in the first place.

Two worthwhile games? It has a lot more than the 360, hundreds more... so your ignorance is showing... however the $50/$40 a year really doesn't bother me

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Avian005

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

crazy-player

Because there are only 2 worthwhile games on the PC for its consumers...while Xbox has 100's with online capabilities. Also, most people who own Xbox Live, own an xbox in the first place.

No, just no.

I meant the Live Enabled games...not all PC games, its an XBox Live discussion...lol tsk tsk

[QUOTE="Avian005"]

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Thessassin

It's to do with running the games through a dedicated server... Microsoft likes to charge for everything

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

[QUOTE="Avian005"]Because they didn't want to? Is this a trick question? Or is it just stupid? I wonder which one...

lundy86_4

It's to do with running the games through a dedicated server... Microsoft likes to charge for everything

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]well i thought it was so good? Ill tell you why they didnt want to, PC gamers get more for free, they knew it wasnt worth it, If M$ can make live free for PC why not 360? Its BS that 360 gamers are the only ones to pay for online gaming, and TBH its not really leaps and bounds over PSN like fanboys would have you believe. they are just looking for a way to justify paying for XBL.

Thessassin

It's to do with running the games through a dedicated server... Microsoft likes to charge for everything

Hmmm I thought so... I could be confused... However my point about Microsoft liking money still stands lol

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

drnick7

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

because theirs no reason for the tax. it dosen't even have dedicated servers like it says. The only reason why people pay for it is because the majority got suckered into it.

They bash about the price because that is all they can bash it for. Otherwise it is superior in almost everyway. Which really bugs some of them.

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

Cybiotik

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

Cybiotik

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

Cybiotik

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

What the hell are you talking about? I never said WoW was a good deal (I don't even play the game myself), but at least they have something of justifiable reason to be charging their customers yearly. MS is not maintaining dedicated servers for online play. End of story. As a poster above put it, they're charging users to host games on their own systems.

The problem is that everyone expects everything free. What if Sony were to start charging next generation? Most people would just take it up the *** and smile politely because its Sony. All I am saying is that the serive they provide has not only revolutionized Console online gaming but Sony would have not even been here.

because theirs no reason for the tax. it dosen't even have dedicated servers like it says. The only reason why people pay for it is because the majority got suckered into it.

JangoWuzHere

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

drnick7

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

What the hell are you talking about? I never said WoW was a good deal (I don't even play the game myself), but at least they have something of justifiable reason to be charging their customers yearly. MS is not maintaining dedicated servers for online play. End of story. As a poster above put it, they're charging users to host games on their own systems.

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

The problem is that everyone expectseverything free. What if Sony were to start charging next generation? Most people would just take it up the *** and smile politely because its Sony. All I am saying is that the serive they provide has not only revolutionized Console online gaming but Sony would have not even been here.

Cybiotik

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

Cybiotik

What the hell are you talking about? I never said WoW was a good deal (I don't even play the game myself), but at least they have something of justifiable reason to be charging their customers yearly. MS is not maintaining dedicated servers for online play. End of story. As a poster above put it, they're charging users to host games on their own systems.

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

The problem is that everyone expectseverything free. What if Sony were to start charging next generation? Most people would just take it up the *** and smile politely because its Sony. All I am saying is that the serive they provide has not only revolutionized Console online gaming but Sony would have not even been here.

Thessassin

Yeah but like I said...you only have 2-3 Live Enabled games for the service that are worthwhile to play so why charge them when an Xbox Live account allows to pay 100's of games as opposed to a few. For the slow people...Im not saying PC only has a few good games im saying the live anabled ones you had to pay for before. And again, I would rather pay for all my games to be played than pay 250$ for only one game.

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

Cybiotik

Because there are only 2 worthwhile games on the PC for its consumers...while Xbox has 100's with online capabilities. Also, most people who own Xbox Live, own an xbox in the first place.

no, its not becasue there were only 2 games that used it, its becasue PC gamers arnt stupid enough to start paying for something that they have for free, that should be free.

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

Cybiotik

Putting the argument about lag aside, doesn't it bother you that MS is charging you $50 a year for absoultely nothing? You bought a $300 console, and now you have to pay $50 every year to host online games on that same console (or to play online games hosted on somebody else's system)? Do you understand how absolutely ridiculous that is? Sony does not charge for P2P online gaming, Nintendo doesn't, and there certainly hasn't been a PC developer (to my knowledge) that has ever tried getting away with it. It's a disgusting business practice and MS should stop.

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

drnick7

Putting the argument about lag aside, doesn't it bother you that MS is charging you $50 a year for absoultely nothing? You bought a $300 console, and now you have to pay $50 every year to host online games on that same console (or to play online games hosted on somebody else's system)? Do you understand how absolutely ridiculous that is? Sony does not charge for P2P online gaming, Nintendo doesn't, and there certainly hasn't been a PC developer (to my knowledge) that has ever tried getting away with it. It's a disgusting business practice and MS should stop.

See but thats not the reason I pay for it (it would be great if it was free no doubt in my mind)...I pay for the features and exclsuive content...not P2P.

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

Cybiotik

Putting the argument about lag aside, doesn't it bother you that MS is charging you $50 a year for absoultely nothing? You bought a $300 console, and now you have to pay $50 every year to host online games on that same console (or to play online games hosted on somebody else's system)? Do you understand how absolutely ridiculous that is? Sony does not charge for P2P online gaming, Nintendo doesn't, and there certainly hasn't been a PC developer (to my knowledge) that has ever tried getting away with it. It's a disgusting business practice and MS should stop.

See but thats not the reason I pay for it (it would be great if it was free no doubt in my mind)...I pay for the features and exclsuive content...not P2P.

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

Cybiotik

Putting the argument about lag aside, doesn't it bother you that MS is charging you $50 a year for absoultely nothing? You bought a $300 console, and now you have to pay $50 every year to host online games on that same console (or to play online games hosted on somebody else's system)? Do you understand how absolutely ridiculous that is? Sony does not charge for P2P online gaming, Nintendo doesn't, and there certainly hasn't been a PC developer (to my knowledge) that has ever tried getting away with it. It's a disgusting business practice and MS should stop.

See but thats not the reason I pay for it (it would be great if it was free no doubt in my mind)...I pay for the features and exclsuive content...not P2P.

There are people like me that like to play online from time to time but not that often (like 5-10 hours a month.)

I don't see why I should pay $40+ for that. I'm not using the service that often. My only alterantive though is to not pay and have no live play at all.

I don't see why Live can't at least be a little bit free, if ot at all.

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

Cybiotik

What the hell are you talking about? I never said WoW was a good deal (I don't even play the game myself), but at least they have something of justifiable reason to be charging their customers yearly. MS is not maintaining dedicated servers for online play. End of story. As a poster above put it, they're charging users to host games on their own systems.

Yeah but the quality and lag are the same as the dedicated servers...the service is really tight broadband only, and its a rare occasion when a game lags. So why should I pay 4X's more just ebcause a dedicatd server that runs the same as my serivce is in place? Just for the sake of it? No...

[QUOTE="Cybiotik"]

[QUOTE="Thessassin"]

if its so good why didnt PC gamers jump at the chance to pay 40$ a year for it?

crazy-player

Because there are only 2 worthwhile games on the PC for its consumers...while Xbox has 100's with online capabilities. Also, most people who own Xbox Live, own an xbox in the first place.

No, just no.

Look at it this way, it's not the only payed subscription out there, and it's not bad either. It is a great piece of what pushed the Xbox and Xbox 360 market and allowed Microsoft to beat Sony (a worldwide regognizable brand) in one generation of sales. It's not over yet but...Xbox Live is the best offer at the moment in the 3 consoles.

Not only does an Xbox Live member get access to demos, cool free arcade gams every now and then and exclusive content...but it is by far to smoothest service out of the three. If it was not for the great gaming Microsoft provided via Xbox Live, sony and Nintendo would not have had such a big overhaul in the online department.

WoW accounts can cost up to 250$ A YEAR!!! A year! Yeah...while Xbox Live live costs 50$...(went down to 40$ today),with Live you can play ALL online games with your subscription and not only do you get a serive with features such as Party Systems, Standardized Matchmaking, Video/Voice Chat, Picture Trading, Cross game chat, Full Featured Friends List, Comparable and unique achievements...(a feature which Sony copied after saying it was useless), and dozens more...but its all seamless and fun.

You pay for what you get, and you get a whole lot with Xbox Live. Playstation may slowly be catching up but it won't get close to the standard set by people who pay for something great.

Cybiotik

1. The only console that charges you online.

2. XBL members isn't the only group of people that can get demos and exclusive content.

3. You've obviously don't have a PS3 so don't even try to compare how "smooth" 360 is, it doesn't even have dedicated servers.

I like how the PSN always gets worked into the discussion when the lemming run out of valid points.

Haters cry moar! Ok sure you bash the price, but the actual service is exceptional.

People (fanboys) will bash anything that they DONT have. Even if LIVE was free, they would still find something about it to bash. Just like people bash PS3 even though it has good games now. Its the way it is, and always will be. Its a sign of immaturity, and most of all, insecurity. Sad people just wont play what they have. Imagine if they took the time that they use to bash, and actually PLAYED what they are bashing, maybe they would shut up!! Or take that energy and do something constructive maybe?? navyguy21

But Sony does a crappier service for free.Master-Thief-09

The pennies a day spent on Live is worth it. I love the features it has, and the 360 exclusive games such as Halo 3. The layout of the entire dashboard and live service on the 360 is enough for me to spend money for it.

People (fanboys) will bash anything that they DONT have. Even if LIVE was free, they would still find something about it to bash. Just like people bash PS3 even though it has good games now. Its the way it is, and always will be. Its a sign of immaturity, and most of all, insecurity. Sad people just wont play what they have. Imagine if they took the time that they use to bash, and actually PLAYED what they are bashing, maybe they would shut up!! Or take that energy and do something constructive maybe?? navyguy21

Is this post supposed to make sense in the context of where you are posting it?

Also, the bolded part is one of the most idiotic things I have ever read.

But Sony does a crappier service for free.Master-Thief-09

And you would know because you play a....DS?

The pennies a day spent on Live is worth it. I love the features it has, and the 360 exclusive games such as Halo 3. The layout of the entire dashboard and live service on the 360 is enough for me to spend money for it.

treedoor

[QUOTE="drnick7"]

When you pay for your WoW account, you're paying to use the dedicated servers that Blizzard maintains. XBL is a strictly peer-to-peer service, except for the odd game in which a third-party dev will provide servers to play on. All of those features you mentioned are available free of charge on numerous PC programs, not to mention most of them are free with an XBL silver account anyway. Simply put, MS is charging $50 a year (I guess it's 40 now or something) for jack squat.

Cybiotik

So you rather pay 250$ a year...for the same quality as live...and only to play ONE game???

Why pay to play online when I can do it for free on the PS3?