Why Do People Keep Bringing Up The Cost of Xbox Live?

Having to pay for energy is a totally different matter. Everyone has to pay that. The only platform that have fees for the online play is the 360. It's free on PC (the platform with the most online players), 2 PS systems... even the Wii has free online play!

SambaLele

Paying is paying. You are paying for playing. Listen my stance on this isn't that XBL is worth the $50. It should be free. Just putting that there as I'm not trying to confuse you. But for the people that are putting out XBL out there like it some how makes it this oh so great expensive thing comparedto the PS3 they are wrong as the data shows.

Lemmings grasping for straws bringing up the PS3 power consumption :lol:. P2P online should always be free, no matter who you ask.Zoso-8

Online play is free on the PS3, the Wii, the PC, the PSP, the PS2, you name it, but on the 360 you have to pay that's why people bring it upCouth_

[QUOTE="SambaLele"]

Having to pay for energy is a totally different matter. Everyone has to pay that. The only platform that have fees for the online play is the 360. It's free on PC (the platform with the most online players), 2 PS systems... even the Wii has free online play!

Blackbond

Paying is paying. You are paying for playing. Listen my stance on this isn't that XBL is worth the $50. It should be free. Just putting that there as I'm not trying to confuse you. But for the people that are putting out XBL out there like it some how makes it this oh so great expensive thing comparedto the PS3 they are wrong as the data shows.

I get your point. But the issue here is another one: people would bring up the cost of LIVE even if it was of less than a buck. $50 a year is cheap. No one can deny that. But no matter how much it costs, they're charging for something that is free everywhere else. Worst, they are charging for you to use your connection, which you already pay for. Simply because it's P2P gameplay. That is not a service. A service would be all the other things LIVE offers, or dedicated servers, etc. But many of the other services they offer are free for the silver members, and dedicated servers are literally non-existent.

If electrycity was free for all the country, yet one State had to pay for it, they would voice their revolt insistently, that's for sure. Paying is paying, but generalizing like that leads you nowhere, especially if there is paying, and there is paying for something everyone else don't. Do you get now my point?

[QUOTE="SambaLele"]

Having to pay for energy is a totally different matter. Everyone has to pay that. The only platform that have fees for the online play is the 360. It's free on PC (the platform with the most online players), 2 PS systems... even the Wii has free online play!

Blackbond

Paying is paying. You are paying for playing. Listen my stance on this isn't that XBL is worth the $50. It should be free. Just putting that there as I'm not trying to confuse you. But for the people that are putting out XBL out there like it some how makes it this oh so great expensive thing compared to the PS3 they are wrong as the data shows.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="SambaLele"]

Having to pay for energy is a totally different matter. Everyone has to pay that. The only platform that have fees for the online play is the 360. It's free on PC (the platform with the most online players), 2 PS systems... even the Wii has free online play!

asylumni

Paying is paying. You are paying for playing. Listen my stance on this isn't that XBL is worth the $50. It should be free. Just putting that there as I'm not trying to confuse you. But for the people that are putting out XBL out there like it some how makes it this oh so great expensive thing compared to the PS3 they are wrong as the data shows.

Explain how the data doesn't show it. Myself and Dreams have all the data, the links, the information and the details. If there is anything specific you want then please let me know and I will provide it for you as all the neccesary information is in my blog.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"][QUOTE="SambaLele"]

Having to pay for energy is a totally different matter. Everyone has to pay that. The only platform that have fees for the online play is the 360. It's free on PC (the platform with the most online players), 2 PS systems... even the Wii has free online play!

SambaLele

Paying is paying. You are paying for playing. Listen my stance on this isn't that XBL is worth the $50. It should be free. Just putting that there as I'm not trying to confuse you. But for the people that are putting out XBL out there like it some how makes it this oh so great expensive thing comparedto the PS3 they are wrong as the data shows.

I get your point. But the issue here is another one: people would bring up the cost of LIVE even if it was of less than a buck. $50 a year is cheap. No one can deny that. But no matter how much it costs, they're charging for something that is free everywhere else. Worst, they are charging for you to use your connection, which you already pay for. Simply because it's P2P gameplay. That is not a service. A service would be all the other things LIVE offers, or dedicated servers, etc. But many of the other services they offer are free for the silver members, and dedicated servers are literally non-existent.

If electrycity was free for all the country, yet one State had to pay for it, they would voice their revolt insistently, that's for sure. Paying is paying, but generalizing like that leads you nowhere, especially if there is paying, and there is paying for something everyone else don't. Do you get now my point?

A perfectly understandable and agreeable point. One shouldn't have to pay for what should be free. Especially when superior ways of doing it are free on other platforms. The only point I make is that against those who stack up this fee and claim it makes the 360 more expensive then the PS3. Nobody should have to pay to play. Hell this is why I don't play MMO's

I mean it is 60 bucks a year. So thats why. Its not a huge deal but its still a dealacsguitar

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

Somehow I know you wouldn't leave it alone so here we go

PS3 = $400 (and I wont even count refurbished models that are for sale)

Ok, now add in any accessory you would like to the PS3 system HDMI$9 (I'll even use the more expensive one), Rumble$55(I'll even use Best buy), Headset$27 (you can find others cheaper I'm sure, I use my PS2 one ;) )

Total = $491

still with me? that's some sticker shock ain't it? lets look over here at the 360 shall we?

360 arcade = $200

The refurbished HHD your pushing = $30

now here is where the magic comes in...

XBLG = $50/ year

Total for first year = $280

Total for second year = $330

Total for third year = $380

Total for fourth year = $430

Total for fifth year = $480

Total for sixth yea = $530 (oh oh better get a new x-box soon)

Total for Seventh year = $580 (wait, didn't this all start at $200?)

and god forbid it goes eight years... because now your over the PS3 launch price

*takes a bow*

*waves goodbye*

-fin-

Blackbond

:lol:

What party of $57 a year > $50 a year don't you get? You obviously read no point that I previously had made.

Formula

$20 from Walmart

360 = $250 + $50X translates to $200 360 + $20 Battery Charger + $30 20GB HDD + $50 worth of live over X years

PS3 = $400 + $57X translates to $400 for PS3 + $57 more worth of energy cost then compared to 360 over X years

Still much cheaper on the 360's end man and with the PS3's upkeep being $7 more each year on average. I'm going to look more specifically but I'd take a gander that chargering some measly walmart energizer batteries consumes less power then Sony's Lithium Battery in its PS3 controllers. Not only that but the data doesn't even reflect the new Energy efficent Jasper units. So I gave you bias data in your favor.

I don't need throw in headsets, Dual Shock 3's or HDMI cables or anything else either.

Thank you for ignoring every piece of info I posted in light of just posting your own which got quickly disproved.

Using that chart you provided (not that I agree with it because of those reasons I gave earlier)

If you played 3 full months (around 6 hours a day), the totals would be

PS3 = $66.90

360 = $55.79

a difference of $11.11

not $57

If you played half a year strait (12 hours a day) the difference would be $28.26

not $57

If you played 3/4 of the year (18 hours a day) the difference would be $40.81

not.... you guessed it $57

You Sir.. have been mathematically owned.

I love encores ;)

because cows ran out of real reasons to argue back in 2005?3picuri3

[QUOTE="Couth_"]Online play is free on the PS3, the Wii, the PC, the PSP, the PS2, you name it, but on the 360 you have to pay that's why people bring it updark-warmachine

Well if you play a game like WoW thats $13 a month times 12 months in a year thats $156 dollars compared to Xbox live which is 50 a year on top of internet fees.

I use WoW cause it's so popular and fans don't have a problem forking that out to play on-line;)

Why Do People Keep Bringing Up The Cost of Xbox Live?

Because people feel the need to complain.

I prefer my PS3 to my 360 and Wii.

I would rather not pay $50 a year for live

But i pay it, and i move on

[QUOTE="dark-warmachine"][QUOTE="Couth_"]Online play is free on the PS3, the Wii, the PC, the PSP, the PS2, you name it, but on the 360 you have to pay that's why people bring it upjasonheyman

Well if you play a game like WoW thats $13 a month times 12 months in a year thats $156 dollars compared to Xbox live which is 50 a year on top of internet fees.

I use WoW cause it's so popular and fans don't have a problem forking that out to play on-line;)

100% of WoW is dedicated host server ;)

(I don't play WoW and not a advocate of the price)

[QUOTE="dark-warmachine"][QUOTE="Couth_"]Online play is free on the PS3, the Wii, the PC, the PSP, the PS2, you name it, but on the 360 you have to pay that's why people bring it upjasonheyman

Well if you play a game like WoW thats $13 a month times 12 months in a year thats $156 dollars compared to Xbox live which is 50 a year on top of internet fees.

I use WoW cause it's so popular and fans don't have a problem forking that out to play on-line;)

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"]Because apparently $5 a month is a lot of money. I wonder how the people complaining that $5 is too much can manage to pay bills, if they're even old enough to have them :?Skittles_McGee

Using that chart you provided (not that I agree with it because of those reasons I gave earlier)

If you played 3 full months (around 6 hours a day), the totals would be

PS3 = $66.90

360 = $55.79

a difference of $11.11

not $57

If you played half a year strait (12 hours a day) the difference would be $28.26

not $57

If you played 3/4 of the year (18 hours a day) the difference would be $40.81

not.... you guessed it $57

You Sir.. have been mathematically owned.

I love encores ;)

FragTycoon

And what reasons were those? I gave links to three different sources all coming down to similar conclusions man.

I'm wondering where your math is coming from. Could you explain or provide in the way that you came to this conclusion? And how have I guessed $57? This is not my conclusion this is the conclusion of those that provided the data. So unless you know something that these people don't know (which is why I'm asking you to show how you came to these conclusions) why should I believe you over multiple sources?

No one is forcing you to pay for it. It's a service and if you don't want to pay for it, just use Xbox Live Silver and Xbox Connect. There you go: free online so stop complaining.

So we can iplease stop tacking on the cost of Xbox Live to the "real" cost of a 360?

Baird-06

No we can't, why because with a silver account you can't play anyone online (that means no Mulitplayer), while with other systems you can play Mulitplayer for free! While to do this with the 360 it costs $50 a year in the US meaning it has to be included! Otherwise when comparing the 360 and PS3 we can't use the PS3's price tag being higher as a reason why the 360 is better because according to you price doesn't matter any more.

No, that was not my point. The point is that that car you are talking about for $5000 is made to look cheaper if you say all it costs you is $20 a month. XBL is not cheap. The cost for one year at full price is 1/6th the cost of a new Xbox 360 Pro and 1/4th the cost of an Xbox 360 Arcade. Zhengi

Yes another car analogy. Because when have these ever worked in SW? For whatever side.

Because apparently $5 a month is a lot of money. I wonder how the people complaining that $5 is too much can manage to pay bills, if they're even old enough to have them :?Skittles_McGee

[QUOTE="Zhengi"] No, that was not my point. The point is that that car you are talking about for $5000 is made to look cheaper if you say all it costs you is $20 a month. XBL is not cheap. The cost for one year at full price is 1/6th the cost of a new Xbox 360 Pro and 1/4th the cost of an Xbox 360 Arcade. Blackbond

Yes another car analogy. Because when have these ever worked in SW? For whatever side.

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

[QUOTE="Zhengi"] No, that was not my point. The point is that that car you are talking about for $5000 is made to look cheaper if you say all it costs you is $20 a month. XBL is not cheap. The cost for one year at full price is 1/6th the cost of a new Xbox 360 Pro and 1/4th the cost of an Xbox 360 Arcade. Zhengi

Yes another car analogy. Because when have these ever worked in SW? For whatever side.

[QUOTE="acsguitar"]I mean it is 60 bucks a year. So thats why. Its not a huge deal but its still a dealPrinceofSarcasm

[QUOTE="jasonheyman"]

[QUOTE="dark-warmachine"]Let me quote this for emphasis.FragTycoon

Well if you play a game like WoW thats $13 a month times 12 months in a year thats $156 dollars compared to Xbox live which is 50 a year on top of internet fees.

I use WoW cause it's so popular and fans don't have a problem forking that out to play on-line;)

100% of WoW is dedicated host server ;)

(I don't play WoW and not a advocate of the price)

Dedicated host or not it's still more expensive then XBL ever could be and millions play that game

Wait is it just me or are you people realing arguing about this again! Live has well over 17 million members, at least half of them pay for the gold membership those people knew before thy bought an 360 and still know, so if you own a PS3 why is it your problem? Ok you get it for free good for you, but don't try too make people think your way because you wouldn't pay. O and for those of you who said PSN and LIVE is the samething, then explain too me this. Why are people willing too pay for a service you say is inferior? Makes you think doesn't it, how about we drop this discussion its getting old, people who don't want too pay didn't, and those who don't mind payed for it. Just get over it.theMarshell

Just felt like joining in with the wrestling gifs :) But yeah, the cost of XBL adds up even if you buy it on sale for $30.Zhengi

Well the Canadian Destroyer is my favorite TNA move. But I do love "The Moved That Rocked the World!"

[QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"]Because apparently $5 a month is a lot of money. I wonder how the people complaining that $5 is too much can manage to pay bills, if they're even old enough to have them :?def_mode

And when my card gets charged for online gaming that's not a bill? Are you series?

[QUOTE="FragTycoon"][QUOTE="jasonheyman"]

Well if you play a game like WoW thats $13 a month times 12 months in a year thats $156 dollars compared to Xbox live which is 50 a year on top of internet fees.

I use WoW cause it's so popular and fans don't have a problem forking that out to play on-line;)

jasonheyman

100% of WoW is dedicated host server ;)

(I don't play WoW and not a advocate of the price)

Dedicated host or not it's still more expensive then XBL ever could be and millions play that game

But it's not a platform service. It's a game. So, if WoW was to be ever released for the 360, you would have to pay both fees. You see why it's wrong to charge that LIVE fee? They are charging you the right to use your own internet connection for online play. That's just it, since they don't give back any service for that money. They don't offer servers for devs to host their games, and the services they do offer and have maintenation costs are offered for free for silver members. Yes, you're just paying to use your P2P man, the same one the silver member use to access the the server to get a DLC, but you get charged for it because you're using it for gaming.

Meh. I don't like the fact that you have to pay for Xbox Live every year if you want to play online but it doesn't bother me. The_Game21x

Agreed, it doesn't affect me to the point where I'm gonna give up on the system or anything, but it is a bit of a nuisance. Payment isn't that high, really.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]

Just felt like joining in with the wrestling gifs :)

But yeah, the cost of XBL adds up even if you buy it on sale for $30.Blackbond

Well the Canadian Destroyer is my favorite TNA move. But I do love "The Moved That Rocked the World!"

That is a very cool move.

I really like this one: Brain Bustaaaaaaaaah!

[QUOTE="def_mode"][QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"]Because apparently $5 a month is a lot of money. I wonder how the people complaining that $5 is too much can manage to pay bills, if they're even old enough to have them :?Blackbond

And when my card gets charged for online gaming that's not a bill? Are you series?

[QUOTE="def_mode"] its online gaming for goodness sake, comparing it to mortgages, car bills, bank accounts etc is just not right. And not all have credit cards. yes $5 is nothing, its cheap but the fact still stands up, u r getting charged for something suppose to be free. Mortgage, Phone billes etc arent free. think about it.SpruceCaboose

but i heard there is such thing as free online play

[QUOTE="jasonheyman"][QUOTE="FragTycoon"]

100% of WoW is dedicated host server ;)

(I don't play WoW and not a advocate of the price)

SambaLele

Dedicated host or not it's still more expensive then XBL ever could be and millions play that game

But it's not a platform service. It's a game. So, if WoW was to be ever released for the 360, you would have to pay both fees. You see why it's wrong to charge that LIVE fee? They are charging you the right to use your own internet connection for online play. That's just it, since they don't give back any service for that money. They don't offer servers for devs to host their games, and the services they do offer and have maintenation costs are offered for free for silver members. Yes, you're just paying to use your P2P man, the same one the silver member use to access the the server to get a DLC, but you get charged for it because you're using it for gaming.

Like FFXI

and blackbond, take a look at that chart you posted again,

then look at it again because apparently you didn't come to a rational conclusion.

[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="def_mode"] its online gaming for goodness sake, comparing it to mortgages, car bills, bank accounts etc is just not right. And not all have credit cards. yes $5 is nothing, its cheap but the fact still stands up, u r getting charged for something suppose to be free. Mortgage, Phone billes etc arent free. think about it.def_mode

but i heard there is such thing as free online play

Explain how the data doesn't show it. Myself and Dreams have all the data, the links, the information and the details. If there is anything specific you want then please let me know and I will provide it for you as all the neccesary information is in my blog.

Blackbond

OK, here's what you have provided.

It is your contention that the PS 3 costs $57 (on average or exact, it doesn't matter) more in electricity to run for every year for every owner as opposed to the 360. This is false.

This chart assumes an average cost of 15 cents/kWh (kilowatt-hour). Many people pay less than this. The average in the US for consumers was close to 12 cents/kWh. Any reduction in actual costs would also reduce the cost difference by a similar percentage. This may seem to be a small change, but it adds up.

This chart also ignores the difference between different models of each system. What if someone bought a launch 360 but waited until now to buy a PS 3? They could be paying more in electricity for the 360! But those are just isolated incedents and don't give all overall perspective (still voids your claim, however).

So let's look at how they cam up with their cost. Since you're using a difference of $57, I'm assuming you are looking at the "on, playing a game" columns. The 360 gets charged with 26.00 kWh of energy on a weekly basis. 26 kWh = 26000 Watt*hours . There is 168 hours in a week. 26000Wh/168h=154.76190476... or about 155 watts for how much electricity the 360 is using while playing a game. Using the same calculations, the PS 3 is set at about 198 Watts while playing a game. The problem is, this asumes the person is playing a game every hour, and in the case of the yearly figure, every hour of every day for the whole year. Nobody plays this much. Even an average of 8 hours a day is a lot - 2920 hours/year (the average time spend at a full time 40 hour/week job only amounts to 2000 hours). This would cut the difference to $19/year. 4 hours/day makes it $9.50/year and 2 hours/day makes it $4.75/year. According to the Entertainment & Leisure Software Publishers Association, the average gamer plays 12.6 hours/week which would make the difference $4.275/year. According to NPD, console gamers play an average of 8.2 hours a week, making the difference a mere $2.7821.../year.

How much were those batteries, again?

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]

Explain how the data doesn't show it. Myself and Dreams have all the data, the links, the information and the details. If there is anything specific you want then please let me know and I will provide it for you as all the neccesary information is in my blog.

asylumni

OK, here's what you have provided.

It is your contention that the PS 3 costs $57 (on average or exact, it doesn't matter) more in electricity to run for every year for every owner as opposed to the 360. This is false.

This chart assumes an average cost of 15 cents/kWh (kilowatt-hour). Many people pay less than this. The average in the US for consumers was close to 12 cents/kWh. Any reduction in actual costs would also reduce the cost difference by a similar percentage. This may seem to be a small change, but it adds up.

This chart also ignores the difference between different models of each system. What if someone bought a launch 360 but waited until now to buy a PS 3? They could be paying more in electricity for the 360! But those are just isolated incedents and don't give all overall perspective (still voids your claim, however).

So let's look at how they cam up with their cost. Since you're using a difference of $57, I'm assuming you are looking at the "on, playing a game" columns. The 360 gets charged with 26.00 kWh of energy on a weekly basis. 26 kWh = 26000 Watt*hours . There is 168 hours in a week. 26000Wh/168h=154.76190476... or about 155 watts for how much electricity the 360 is using while playing a game. Using the same calculations, the PS 3 is set at about 198 Watts while playing a game. The problem is, this asumes the person is playing a game every hour, and in the case of the yearly figure, every hour of every day for the whole year. Nobody plays this much. Even an average of 8 hours a day is a lot - 2920 hours/year (the average time spend at a full time 40 hour/week job only amounts to 2000 hours). This would cut the difference to $19/year. 4 hours/day makes it $9.50/year and 2 hours/day makes it $4.75/year. According to the Entertainment & Leisure Software Publishers Association, the average gamer plays 12.6 hours/week which would make the difference $4.275/year. According to NPD, console gamers play an average of 8.2 hours a week, making the difference a mere $2.7821.../year.

How much were those batteries, again?

thanks, I didn't want to go through all of that AGAIN!

I mean it is 60 bucks a year. So thats why. Its not a huge deal but its still a dealacsguitar

Because after paying for a system, gae and internet connection, i don't feel that I should hvae to pay an additional fee to play the game online.

Go ahead and charge for the extra bells and whistles. But basic online play should be free, just as it is on every other platform.

Paying for MP is annoying, no doubt. Promoting the PS3 as a premier blu ray player and not supplying the HD cables needed to see it in HD is annoying and down right stupid. My brother's blu ray player may not play games, but at least it came with an HDMI cable.cainetao11

Link

Link

Link

Link

and yes, they should have had a cable with it... maybe they are trying to push that $100 cable :lol:

[QUOTE="nitekids2004"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]

You see I have no problem complaining about it. I can see why a PC gamer or a Wii gamer can complain about it. But what I can't see is how a PS3 gamer can complain about it on merits of price compared to the PS3 and here is why.

http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=106346&catId=100245&tid=100008&p=5&title=Computers%27+energy+costs

Your PS3 uses a lot more energy then an Xbox 360. If you didn't know the energy difference is $57 between the two. Which is also $7 more then the difference of a yearly subscription of LIVE.

So I see no relevant point in PS3 owners complaining about XBL fees. Its not like they are the ones really using live anyways. Do I think XBL should be free. Hell yeah. But for those who make it as if the price of XBL is the backbreaking difference between PS3 and 360 when the PS3 consumes so much more in energy cost is beyond me.

Money is money.

Blackbond

1. Electricity is a variable cost, Live is a fixed cost.
2. Different areas have different Price/Consumption.

Hence why its an average and that average is over the fixed cost of something that not even all owners use. Keep in mind I didn't even have to go into a DS3, HDMI cables, a Headset or anything else.

Sweet Avatar though.

Thanks :D

Can you clarify a bit more about the 15C/kwh? I'm not good at electronic stuff. It would really help if you were able to calculate the electricity consumption (in $)/hour of the PS3 vs. 360.

[QUOTE="cainetao11"]Paying for MP is annoying, no doubt. Promoting the PS3 as a premier blu ray player and not supplying the HD cables needed to see it in HD is annoying and down right stupid. My brother's blu ray player may not play games, but at least it came with an HDMI cable.FragTycoon

Link

Link

Link

Link

and yes, they should have had a cable with it... maybe they are trying to push that $100 cable :lol:

i don't pay for Gold, but i'm considering paying for it....

:D

i still think it's a rip-off, but let's just accept the fact that a number of people are lured to how awesome XBL experience is.

14 cents a day for a worthwhile online experience is really nothing to complain about, imo..

Can you clarify a bit more about the 15C/kwh? I'm not good at electronic stuff. It would really help if you were able to calculate the electricity consumption (in $)/hour of the PS3 vs. 360.

nitekids2004

The price for kWh is how much it costs to run an appliance that uses 1000 Watts of electricity (for example - a window air conditioner or an electric heater) for one hour. That chart assumes the 360 uses about 155 Watts and the PS 3 uses about 198 Watts. To find cost per hour, multiply price (15 cents) by kWatts (.155 and .198 ) and hours (1). This gives a cost of 2.325 cents/hour for the 360 and 2.97 cents/hour for the PS 3 (a difference of 0.645 cents/hour).