All of the ridiculous bantering about LIVE is just that...bantering. Â Bottom line is this:
Â
Theres been some debate about whether or not Microsoft MSFT +0.08% will try to compete with Sony on a more direct level by going after one of their competitors best features: free online play. PSN has always been free while Xbox Live Gold is a dramatically more pricier option at $60 a year. Might Microsoft do away with that fee for their next-gen console, the mysterious Durango?
After seeing numbers like this, I cant see there being any possible way.
Microsoft says that Xbox Live subscriptionsare up 18% over last year, reaching a grand total of 46M, out of 77M Xboxes sold.
Theres simply no way on earth that Microsoft would ever consider forfeiting 46 million subscriptions (though some are free, limited access Silver variants), even if it would put them on equal footing with one of the PS3s selling points. This is also on top of the cut they take from everything sold on Xbox Live, and the ads they sell which are plastered all over the dashboard.
It can be argued that there is far more money in Xbox Live subscriptions than there is even in console sales. For example, I got my Xbox 360 seven years ago. I believe five of those years were at $50 a year for Xbox Live, while the others were $60. thats $370 Ive spent on the service alone, while I probably only paid $300 for the console itself. Of course Microsoft had to send me two replacements because of the red ring of death, which probably cost them a pretty pennybut thats a separate issue altogether.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/04/20/always-on-microsoft-xbox-live-subscriptions-up-to-46m-will-never-be-free/
Obviously this upsets certain people but I don't grasp as to why. Â If your beloved console has free online why create threads seeming angry about this? Â 46 million people certainly don't care.Â
Log in to comment