Why does the 360 charge for online?

So they can earn more money? Plus some of the revenue will go into improving the online portion.

Make money. They have to spend more to refund the E-74 errors, so Live fees will help offset some of those costs.

So they can earn more money? Plus some of the revenue will go into improving the online portion.

lundy86_4

Then why are there no dedicated servers for games???

Greed and the fact that MS are earning a lot of money from it.Floppy_Jim

Greed and the fact that MS are earning a lot of money from it.Floppy_Jim

I wouldn't call it greed because a large company needs lots of money to operate.

It is a good business choice.

They have to host their content, like when you download something from xbox live you download from Microsoft's servers, not a third parties. This makes sense because it will be faster and there won't be any 404/403 errors. However this costs a lot of money, and Microsoft also saw this as a way to make money at the same time. So Basically they could slash the price, but they have no reason to do that. JigglyWiggly_

Because there are gullible consumers out there who think paying for it makes it better. While in reality, it offers nothing all the other free services don't.

Or I guess, Microsoft charges... It's really annoying. It's like the number one reason I won't buy a 360. Otherwise I'd get one, since my friend has one, so we could play Left 4 Dead together. It's a whole lot easier than both of us getting PCs, if it weren't for the fact that I'm basically paying for Left 4 Dead once a year just to play it online. Seriously, it's stupid - why isn't gaming online free on the 360?TheElfChild

Because they can.

If you don't like it, then don't buy it. Simple enough concept.

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free. Nothing is free. It is all paid for in the end. It is just a matter of exactly who is paying and how they are paying. Ultimately, every nickel for every thing is paid for by you and me...the average consumer.

[QUOTE="TheElfChild"]Or I guess, Microsoft charges... It's really annoying. It's like the number one reason I won't buy a 360. Otherwise I'd get one, since my friend has one, so we could play Left 4 Dead together. It's a whole lot easier than both of us getting PCs, if it weren't for the fact that I'm basically paying for Left 4 Dead once a year just to play it online. Seriously, it's stupid - why isn't gaming online free on the 360?SUD123456

Because they can.

If you don't like it, then don't buy it. Simple enough concept.

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free. Nothing is free. It is all paid for in the end. It is just a matter of exactly who is paying and how they are paying. Ultimately, every nickel for every thing is paid for by you and me...the average consumer.

It's free money ... Do you not like money?

Better question would be, why do Sony NOT charge for it? 'Cause it's not upto XBOX Live standards ... yet.

they want to make more money. sometimes the game lag like hell. they know that people will pay for it. $50 a year isn't that bad at all.iam2green

Because there are gullible consumers out there who think paying for it makes it better. While in reality, it offers nothing all the other free services don't.

foxhound_fox

Utterly incorrect. It offers the one thing that is most important: the ability to connect your 360 to others geographically dispersed and play games with them. I am not aware that I can connect my 360 to Steam. And I am not aware that I can connect my 360 to PSN. If I am wrong, pls correct me.

Utterly incorrect. It offers the one thing that is most important: the ability to connect your 360 to others geographically dispersed and play games with them. I am not aware that I can connect my 360 to Steam. And I am not aware that I can connect my 360 to PSN. If I am wrong, pls correct me.SUD123456

Or I guess, Microsoft charges... It's really annoying. It's like the number one reason I won't buy a 360. Otherwise I'd get one, since my friend has one, so we could play Left 4 Dead together. It's a whole lot easier than both of us getting PCs, if it weren't for the fact that I'm basically paying for Left 4 Dead once a year just to play it online. Seriously, it's stupid - why isn't gaming online free on the 360?TheElfChild

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

[QUOTE="TheElfChild"]Or I guess, Microsoft charges... It's really annoying. It's like the number one reason I won't buy a 360. Otherwise I'd get one, since my friend has one, so we could play Left 4 Dead together. It's a whole lot easier than both of us getting PCs, if it weren't for the fact that I'm basically paying for Left 4 Dead once a year just to play it online. Seriously, it's stupid - why isn't gaming online free on the 360?TheElfChild

Because they can.

If you don't like it, then don't buy it. Simple enough concept.

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free. Nothing is free. It is all paid for in the end. It is just a matter of exactly who is paying and how they are paying. Ultimately, every nickel for every thing is paid for by you and me...the average consumer.

Why do people pay $100 or more for designer jeans? or running shoes? or anything, when there are cheaper alternatives?

The first person/group that found a way to charge a premium for any good or service made a mint. Why should online gaming be different? Either the market will accept it, or it won't.

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free.

SUD123456

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free.

TheGreatOutdoor

Do you infact have all the hax to do this?

because people are gullible and don't mind getting ripped a new one

because its business and business wont last unless you have fees to pay for the operation

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]Utterly incorrect. It offers the one thing that is most important: the ability to connect your 360 to others geographically dispersed and play games with them. I am not aware that I can connect my 360 to Steam. And I am not aware that I can connect my 360 to PSN. If I am wrong, pls correct me.foxhound_fox

Go back and read your initial post over and it should become clear. While in reality, the only way to play your 360against others is through XBL Gold.

Thus, XBL is inseparable from the 360 itself for those who want to play MP. This is the genius of MS' approach to pricing. As long as the 360 itself sells, so too will a portion of owners pay for XBL. This also explains why Silver is 'free'. Silver isn't free. All the advantages of Silver are in fact paid for by the Gold members. Thus the Gold members subsidize the Silver members. Which draws more flies to the honey.

But it would be wrong to call the majority of 360 XBL buyers gullible. They pay because they have too. Because that decision is not a standalone decision, but was made at the time of the 360 purchase...consciously or not.

In any case, the actual pricing of any product or service is never justified by its costs. Why should premium beers cost more? Why should designer jeans cost more? There is never a justifaction for any price...other than people are willing to pay it.

And this is the genius of MS' approach to XBL and their pricing strategy vis-a-vis Gold vs Silver. If Sony had someone with a clue on pricing they wouldn't be in the mess they are in now :)

Live costs money because maintaining an online service costs money. and what devs pay for with PSN, that cost is passed on to the consumer with LIVE. What this means is devs can choose what they WANT to do, not what they can AFFORD to do. This also allows MS to focus finances elsewhere since they dont have to make room in budgets for LIVE. Im not saying i agree with the price, but 50 bucks a YEAR is nothing really, if you cant afford that, then you really shouldnt be gaming :Pnavyguy21

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free.

TheGreatOutdoor

No. You are just a poor reader. I suggest you go back and read that line and the one after it together. Then come back and ask a legit question if you still don't understand.

Because MS likes money, just like every other company out there...

Greed.

because lemmings needs to pay microsoft employees kids college funds.

Go back and read your initial post over and it should become clear. While in reality, the only way to play your 360against others is through XBL Gold.

Thus, XBL is inseparable from the 360 itself for those who want to play MP. This is the genius of MS' approach to pricing. As long as the 360 itself sells, so too will a portion of owners pay for XBL. This also explains why Silver is 'free'. Silver isn't free. All the advantages of Silver are in fact paid for by the Gold members. Thus the Gold members subsidize the Silver members. Which draws more flies to the honey.

But it would be wrong to call the majority of 360 XBL buyers gullible. They pay because they have too. Because that decision is not a standalone decision, but was made at the time of the 360 purchase...consciously or not.

In any case, the actual pricing of any product or service is never justified by its costs. Why should premium beers cost more? Why should designer jeans cost more? There is never a justifaction for any price...other than people are willing to pay it.

And this is the genius of MS' approach to XBL and their pricing strategy vis-a-vis Gold vs Silver. If Sony had someone with a clue on pricing they wouldn't be in the mess they are in now :)

SUD123456

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]Live costs money because maintaining an online service costs money. and what devs pay for with PSN, that cost is passed on to the consumer with LIVE. What this means is devs can choose what they WANT to do, not what they can AFFORD to do. This also allows MS to focus finances elsewhere since they dont have to make room in budgets for LIVE. Im not saying i agree with the price, but 50 bucks a YEAR is nothing really, if you cant afford that, then you really shouldnt be gaming :PTheElfChild

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]Live costs money because maintaining an online service costs money. and what devs pay for with PSN, that cost is passed on to the consumer with LIVE. What this means is devs can choose what they WANT to do, not what they can AFFORD to do. This also allows MS to focus finances elsewhere since they dont have to make room in budgets for LIVE. Im not saying i agree with the price, but 50 bucks a YEAR is nothing really, if you cant afford that, then you really shouldnt be gaming :PTheElfChild

You are correct. But you have to weigh that one game against MP for all the games you own.

Alsoit is also an opportunity cost for the manufacturer as well. One of the reasons that the 360 is as cheap as it is now is because MS has a healthy revenue stream from XBL. Thus, it could lower the 360 price and still remain profitable. XBL Gold members are effectively subsidizing the sales rate of the 360 for new owners. Similarly, XBL Gold members are providing the cash with which MS acquires new games. Arguably, XBL are paying a relatively modest amount to have a better game library. Whether you think it is worth it is your own personal decision. Apparently quite a few millions are willing to part with their money no matter how they justify it...or whether they even attempt to justify it.

Similarly, the PS3 is as costly as it is in part because Sony doesn't have a large enough online revenue stream. Thus, PS3 console purchasers are subsidizing PSN whether they want or care about PSN at all. Just like I paid extra for Wifi when I neither needed or wanted Wifi for my PS3. Just like Sony closed down some development teams and cancelled some games...using those resources to build Home. All PS3 owners are paying for PSN, just indirectly.

In the end, nothing is free. It is just who pays and how they pay that differs.

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]Go back and read your initial post over and it should become clear. While in reality, the only way to play your 360against others is through XBL Gold.

Thus, XBL is inseparable from the 360 itself for those who want to play MP. This is the genius of MS' approach to pricing. As long as the 360 itself sells, so too will a portion of owners pay for XBL. This also explains why Silver is 'free'. Silver isn't free. All the advantages of Silver are in fact paid for by the Gold members. Thus the Gold members subsidize the Silver members. Which draws more flies to the honey.

But it would be wrong to call the majority of 360 XBL buyers gullible. They pay because they have too. Because that decision is not a standalone decision, but was made at the time of the 360 purchase...consciously or not.

In any case, the actual pricing of any product or service is never justified by its costs. Why should premium beers cost more? Why should designer jeans cost more? There is never a justifaction for any price...other than people are willing to pay it.

And this is the genius of MS' approach to XBL and their pricing strategy vis-a-vis Gold vs Silver. If Sony had someone with a clue on pricing they wouldn't be in the mess they are in now :)

foxhound_fox

Fair enough. I stand corrected on the xbconnect aspect. Thanks for the link.

However, it doesn't change the main point....there isn't a (popular) alternative. It doesn't matterwhy people pay for Gold...just that they do. Why do people pay for anything? In the case of XBL, the primary reasonis becausethey have to if they want to play MP (notwithstanding your new info/link).

As for Silver it is not free. I know that concept is counter-intuitive. The features of Silver exist BECAUSE Gold members pay. Silver is as good as it is because someone else pays the freight. If there were no Gold members then either Silver would not be as good, or the 360 would not be as cheap, or the 360 library would not be as good. There are some direct costs there, and there are some opportunity costs there as well.

Just like the price of 'free' PSN is that PS3 still needs a price drop, PS3 buyers all pay for something that some might not want (like Wifi, like subsidizing PSN) and Sony closed some studios and cancelled some games and used those resources for Home, whether you want Home or not.

Nothing is free.

[QUOTE="TheGreatOutdoor"]

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free.

SUD123456

No. You are just a poor reader. I suggest you go back and read that line and the one after it together. Then come back and ask a legit question if you still don't understand.

[QUOTE="TheGreatOutdoor"]

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

But FYI...nothing is free. PC multiplayer gaming is not free. PSN is not free.

soiheardyoulike

Do you infact have all the hax to do this?

MS charges for Live because they can.

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

[QUOTE="TheGreatOutdoor"]Funny, because multiplayer on my PC is free and when I had my PS3, the PSN was also free for me. I guess I must be a rare case huh. :roll:

TheGreatOutdoor

No. You are just a poor reader. I suggest you go back and read that line and the one after it together. Then come back and ask a legit question if you still don't understand.

You owned a PS3. You bought a PS3. The 'cost' of PSN was included in your purchase price. It was also included in what game library was actually available to you. Just like you paid for Wifi, even if you think it was free. Just because you don't pay directly and separately for something doesn't mean it is free.

Typically in N America manyrestaurants will give you buns, or chips and salsa, or whatever for 'free'. It isn't free. The costs are buried in the costs of all meals. This is an indirect cost and unavoidable.

Typically in Europe restaurants will charge you for the same buns etc. This is a direct cost but is avoidable.

Often Americans will go to Europe, accept the bread/buns at a restaurant and then feel ripped off. OMG, they charged me extra for the buns!!!! The horror. In reality there was no difference in cost because they were paying for them in the US too...but the cost was buried in the cost of the meal.

It is simply two different ways to price. The only difference is that one is avoidable and clear, while the other is unavoidable and hidden.

The concept is not difficult.

[QUOTE="TheGreatOutdoor"]

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

No. You are just a poor reader. I suggest you go back and read that line and the one after it together. Then come back and ask a legit question if you still don't understand.

SUD123456

You owned a PS3. You bought a PS3. The 'cost' of PSN was included in your purchase price. It was also included in what game library was actually available to you. Just like you paid for Wifi, even if you think it was free. Just because you don't pay directly and separately for something doesn't mean it is free.

Typically in N America manyrestaurants will give you buns, or chips and salsa, or whatever for 'free'. It isn't free. The costs are buried in the costs of all meals. This is an indirect cost and unavoidable.

Typically in Europe restaurants will charge you for the same buns etc. This is a direct cost but is avoidable.

Often Americans will go to Europe, accept the bread/buns at a restaurant and then feel ripped off. OMG, they charged me extra for the buns!!!! The horror. In reality there was no difference in cost because they were paying for them in the US too...but the cost was buried in the cost of the meal.

It is simply two different ways to price. The only difference is that one is avoidable and clear, while the other is unavoidable and hidden.

The concept is not difficult.

Why ask why ? :o

Some pay 250 for a Wii ? Some pay 400 for a PS3 ?

My guess is ... because they think it's worth it.

No Problem right ?

Because if not Live, you'd pay that same amount in some other way.

Because it uses dedicated servers on 1st party games. Oh nvm was thinking of the free PSN! Silly me.Englandfc1966

nice 1 beat me to it. paying for 360 feels very unfair since i find the psn just as good if not better since its FREEEEEEEEEEEEEE