Windows LIVE is free, now what about us?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Yes.x-2tha-z
What an absolute waste of a post. If you're not going to contribute, then DON'T post.
I think we'll be stuck with paying for XBL for good. Windows LIVE just wasn't doing good enough to really warrant a reason to charge for its service. And it was a major turn-off for anyone that wanted games for Windows LIVE. Now they're going to make more out of the actual software (games) because more people will buy them.
XBL is making plenty money and there's no reason to get rid of the cost.
we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
[QUOTE="x-2tha-z"]Yes.Quintinius
What an absolute waste of a post. If you're not going to contribute, then DON'T post.
I think we'll be stuck with paying for XBL for good. Windows LIVE just wasn't doing good enough to really warrant a reason to charge for its service. And it was a major turn-off for anyone that wanted games for Windows LIVE. Now they're going to make more out of the actual software (games) because more people will buy them.
XBL is making plenty money and there's no reason to get rid of the cost.
What an absolute waste of a post. If you aren't going to say anything worthwhile then don't post.
My advice to the TC would be if you don't want to pay then cancel your subscription. Xbox LIVE will probably never be free. No-one's forcing you to subscribe, though
we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
mfp16
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
Windows live was a flop because PC gamers know better than to pay for online when its mostly free anyway.
360 gamers are stuck with XBL as its a closed platform so everyone settles to pay for it if they want the most out of their machine.
why u think it be free? lol do u understand like 10m ppl paying for it. if u own mcirosoft and 10m ppl was payign u for online why would u make it free? u will always make it better then your oppenets and thats only thing u do to keep them coming
[QUOTE="Quintinius"][QUOTE="x-2tha-z"]Yes.x-2tha-z
What an absolute waste of a post. If you're not going to contribute, then DON'T post.
I think we'll be stuck with paying for XBL for good. Windows LIVE just wasn't doing good enough to really warrant a reason to charge for its service. And it was a major turn-off for anyone that wanted games for Windows LIVE. Now they're going to make more out of the actual software (games) because more people will buy them.
XBL is making plenty money and there's no reason to get rid of the cost.
What an absolute waste of a post. If you aren't going to say anything worthwhile then don't post.
you missed a key difference between your posts, his answered the question and added to the discussion. Yours did not.For added hilarity the TC's question wasn't yes/no.
[QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
vinni75
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
wtf 15 dollors for a month never had been like that is that what ps3 fanboys be saying? " dont buy 360 they charge 15 bucks a month" no buddy this anit WOW. wish blizzer get it thro there heads if they cvharce less they make more. ppl dont got no dang 15 bucks a month for video game when there online mmo that chgarge 5. all the ppl i know pay for online mmos that charge like 5 bucks would play wow if it was cheaper
and if 360 charge 15 bucks a month they only be geting that from rich ppl or spoiled kids and they be losing money
[QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
vinni75
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
50 bucks a year is equal to about 4+ bucks a month. if you pay for it in a monthly fee, it would be like around 10 dollars a month. Much better value to buy it by the yearly rate. Microsoft will not make Live free, they have a lot of equipment to keep up with. A floor of servers at their home office is one of the reasons. Even though the games are mostly peer to peer, for lack of a better term, The servers are there to handle ALL aspects of live from finding those peer to peer* networks, in game chat, gamer rankings, etc. Plus it's the only service that provides the developer with all code for the on-line features that we are used to. Simple plug and play code. I hope it never goes to free, because it is the only way Sony will be able to catch Microsoft with it's on-line services. You will find a lot of these features that we enjoy on Live will cease to exist.It's the principle of the thing. The XBL price used to make sense in the Xbox 1 era because they had dedicated servers for games, even long after many of those that were available for the online games for PS2 had dried up from inattention or the hosts having since switched them over to run newer games. Nowadays I don't see the point. There are no dedicated servers, it's all "match making", so your ability to play is dependent on the connection quality of everyone else much more directly than in a server/client relationship. if someone lags out or tries using the "put the modem to sleep and back" exploit with some networking hardware, then suddenly everyone else's connection behaves very, very fubar. And I've had some pretty hideously bad experiences on Xbox LIVE for all the hype that it had about being a good service. But I'd rather not get into that. Also, it's only $4/month in the states. Conversion rates **** it up for everyone else, including Canada. $4USD for a US XBL subscrip can end up being more like $10USD/month for it in the UK, or wherever countries tend to do some bass ackward currency conversions. And since letting it go, I've yet to have a reason to go back to being Gold. Silver does what I want, save play online. And all I met online where a bunch of ****ing **** that had nothing better to do than to ruin the game. Why should I pay my hard-earned money for that privilege? And that $50/year can equate to the difference of being able to get an awesome new game that much sooner, as opposed to later, or never... I was looking forward to Gears 2 on my 360, up until I saw how well Gears 1 ran on my computer. And now with Windows LIVE being free, and still allowing cross-platform play, I've less reason to play the online games on my 360 console.we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
mfp16
[QUOTE="mfp16"]Lots of textwe aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
codezer0
Video gaming is not a charity... it's a business. The workers at Xbox live don't come in to work everyday like a soup kitchen. Everyone has to eat. If they can't make money they aren't going to do it and the service disappers completely. The only reason PS3 is free is because it wanted some way to lure customers from the 360, it was a business move once again, it's not charity.
If you aren't comfortable paying for it that is certainely your choice... but we are talking about 5 million subscribers so the principal of the issue isn't going to sway alot of businessmen.
MS gaming division is just BARELY in the black and making money. If you want them to keep making the console pay your $4 and support them, if not then you have windows live. The choice is yours.
[QUOTE="mfp16"]It's the principle of the thing. The XBL price used to make sense in the Xbox 1 era because they had dedicated servers for games, even long after many of those that were available for the online games for PS2 had dried up from inattention or the hosts having since switched them over to run newer games. Nowadays I don't see the point. There are no dedicated servers, it's all "match making", so your ability to play is dependent on the connection quality of everyone else much more directly than in a server/client relationship. if someone lags out or tries using the "put the modem to sleep and back" exploit with some networking hardware, then suddenly everyone else's connection behaves very, very fubar. And I've had some pretty hideously bad experiences on Xbox LIVE for all the hype that it had about being a good service. But I'd rather not get into that. Also, it's only $4/month in the states. Conversion rates **** it up for everyone else, including Canada. $4USD for a US XBL subscrip can end up being more like $10USD/month for it in the UK, or wherever countries tend to do some bass ackward currency conversions. And since letting it go, I've yet to have a reason to go back to being Gold. Silver does what I want, save play online. And all I met online where a bunch of ****ing **** that had nothing better to do than to ruin the game. Why should I pay my hard-earned money for that privilege? And that $50/year can equate to the difference of being able to get an awesome new game that much sooner, as opposed to later, or never... I was looking forward to Gears 2 on my 360, up until I saw how well Gears 1 ran on my computer. And now with Windows LIVE being free, and still allowing cross-platform play, I've less reason to play the online games on my 360 console. If you don't like Xbox Live then don't play it. It's that simple. There is Much more to the service then you are giving it credit for. There is a solid floor of servers for Live at the xbox home headquarters. These are there for much more then market place. And there is yet to be a game that you can't play on the Live no matter how old it is, even if it's the original xbox games. Just depends on if there are any player's out there that want to play. And even then get a friend that has the game and play away. You pay the money to provide a service that is available for every game with the same feature, and for servers that provide in game chat, and gamer rankings etc. I would like to see a 360 handle all of this without slowing down massivly.we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
codezer0
Your other point about people screwing up the service by making thier connection sleep, and downing the game for others, get a different host. Most games if not all the ones I have played allow you to change hosts before a game starts. If you don't think this will happen on PSn, you're sadly mistaken. It's just Live has millions more people on-line, so you have a better chance at finding these retards. Gang up on them, and they will go away. 5 or 6 on 1, will make them go away quick.
I would imagine the main reason Windows LIVE is free now is because of severa lack of interest. PC gamers didn't have to pay for online multiplayer, obviously, so I really doubt that many cared for achievements. It wasn't making enough money so they scrapped it. Xbox LIVE, however, is completely different. People have to pay the subscription if they really want online multiplayer and they have no choice, and since most people do, there is a whole load of money being made.
Totally different situations, just the same company involved.
[QUOTE="codezer0"][QUOTE="mfp16"]Lots of textwe aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
mfp16
trolling
:roll: I've little tolerance for people who tl;dr everything. Learn to read, and reply accordingly; then you may earn your respect like the others.[QUOTE="mfp16"][QUOTE="codezer0"][QUOTE="mfp16"]Lots of textwe aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
codezer0
trolling
:roll: I've little tolerance for people who tl;dr everything. Learn to read, and reply accordingly; then you may earn your respect like the others.I did read it... what is your problem.. I reduced your text into a few words so it wasn't a big wall of text in nested quotes...
I have plenty of respect, I get compliments on my posts via PM very frequently and many people track my posts. So please sir, explain to me how to get this respect that you speak of...perhaps whining about $4 a month in the forums will help my cause?
P.S. - The name of the offense you think I have commited is "disruptive posting" not "trolling"
[QUOTE="vinni75"][QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
loftus42
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
50 bucks a year is equal to about 4+ bucks a month. if you pay for it in a monthly fee, it would be like around 10 dollars a month. Much better value to buy it by the yearly rate. Microsoft will not make Live free, they have a lot of equipment to keep up with. A floor of servers at their home office is one of the reasons. Even though the games are mostly peer to peer, for lack of a better term, The servers are there to handle ALL aspects of live from finding those peer to peer* networks, in game chat, gamer rankings, etc. Plus it's the only service that provides the developer with all code for the on-line features that we are used to. Simple plug and play code. I hope it never goes to free, because it is the only way Sony will be able to catch Microsoft with it's on-line services. You will find a lot of these features that we enjoy on Live will cease to exist.Live would have always been the same service regardless...
1) It's about the players first... if people had said no were not paying, they'd would have made it free and still made it what it is, most of it was all there anyway in the first place. But it's about getting the gamers above all else.
2) People say okay it's not that bad, and MS set that price because they hoped that would be peoples reaction. 10 million users later @ $4 a month. I don't think they could have predicted that kind of success. They have to upgrade and spend more but compared to the money rolling in, all upkeep etc is minimal.
3) Now that it worked the will do more, they can do more than they ever thought because of all the extra dough.. they have #1.. they have the players and their money. So you can dish out for exclusives and exclusive DLC (and charge further yet) to all keep and get more players. You can also add more into the service etc. But they would have never taken anything away.
Ultimately it was a gamble that paid off big time and there's good and bad, but overall it can only improve now. (the only way the service would have ever become worse was if no one played, and then who'd care.)
[QUOTE="x-2tha-z"][QUOTE="Quintinius"][QUOTE="x-2tha-z"]Yes.mfp16
What an absolute waste of a post. If you're not going to contribute, then DON'T post.
I think we'll be stuck with paying for XBL for good. Windows LIVE just wasn't doing good enough to really warrant a reason to charge for its service. And it was a major turn-off for anyone that wanted games for Windows LIVE. Now they're going to make more out of the actual software (games) because more people will buy them.
XBL is making plenty money and there's no reason to get rid of the cost.
What an absolute waste of a post. If you aren't going to say anything worthwhile then don't post.
you missed a key difference between your posts, his answered the question and added to the discussion. Yours did not.For added hilarity the TC's question wasn't yes/no.
My first post was never intended to answer his question. No-one here can say when XBL will be free. All the TC wanted to do was generate a load of moaning about having to pay for LIVE. I don't care that I have to pay for it.
[QUOTE="loftus42"][QUOTE="vinni75"][QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
BongMonkey
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
50 bucks a year is equal to about 4+ bucks a month. if you pay for it in a monthly fee, it would be like around 10 dollars a month. Much better value to buy it by the yearly rate. Microsoft will not make Live free, they have a lot of equipment to keep up with. A floor of servers at their home office is one of the reasons. Even though the games are mostly peer to peer, for lack of a better term, The servers are there to handle ALL aspects of live from finding those peer to peer* networks, in game chat, gamer rankings, etc. Plus it's the only service that provides the developer with all code for the on-line features that we are used to. Simple plug and play code. I hope it never goes to free, because it is the only way Sony will be able to catch Microsoft with it's on-line services. You will find a lot of these features that we enjoy on Live will cease to exist.Live would have always been the same service regardless...
1) It's about the players first... if people had said no were not paying, they'd would have made it free and still made it what it is, most of it was all there anyway in the first place. But it's about getting the gamers above all else.
2) People say okay it's not that bad, and MS set that price because they hoped that would be peoples reaction. 10 million users later @ $4 a month. I don't think they could have predicted that kind of success. They have to upgrade and spend more but compared to the money rolling in, all upkeep etc is minimal.
3) Now that it worked the will do more, they can do more than they ever thought because of all the extra dough.. they have #1.. they have the players and their money. So you can dish out for exclusives and exclusive DLC (and charge further yet) to all keep and get more players. You can also add more into the service etc. But they would have never taken anything away.
Ultimately it was a gamble that paid off big time and there's good and bad, but overall it can only improve now. (the only way the service would have ever become worse was if no one played, and then who'd care.)
If people would have not payed the money in the first place, a lot of the services you see now would not be here. Downloadable movies from netflix, the enhance ments to Live, and others. Sure some of the things, like integrated services that Live began with would still be here, because they were here from the beggining. But the Live numbers would not and the contracts with netflix, etc. would not.Server upkeep is minimal? really? a floor full of servers is expensive, and the upkeep is also expensive. From the salary of those doing the backups, updates, repairing failed equipment, etc. to those who code the updates for live, to keeping your games running no matter how unpopular they are. This plus more things i have no idea about cost money. Sony finds ways of doing this also, but at a cost. Microsoft is doing it and are able to do more, since the money is coming in at a higher rate.
If they hadn't charged those things would not be here, and Live would be a whole different experience. No they would not take anything away, but if they stopped charging the additions would come at a slower rate, and Sony would catch up a lot sooner. And , by the way I would care, if the Live bombed.
[QUOTE="BongMonkey"][QUOTE="loftus42"][QUOTE="vinni75"][QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
loftus42
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
50 bucks a year is equal to about 4+ bucks a month. if you pay for it in a monthly fee, it would be like around 10 dollars a month. Much better value to buy it by the yearly rate. Microsoft will not make Live free, they have a lot of equipment to keep up with. A floor of servers at their home office is one of the reasons. Even though the games are mostly peer to peer, for lack of a better term, The servers are there to handle ALL aspects of live from finding those peer to peer* networks, in game chat, gamer rankings, etc. Plus it's the only service that provides the developer with all code for the on-line features that we are used to. Simple plug and play code. I hope it never goes to free, because it is the only way Sony will be able to catch Microsoft with it's on-line services. You will find a lot of these features that we enjoy on Live will cease to exist.Live would have always been the same service regardless...
1) It's about the players first... if people had said no were not paying, they'd would have made it free and still made it what it is, most of it was all there anyway in the first place. But it's about getting the gamers above all else.
2) People say okay it's not that bad, and MS set that price because they hoped that would be peoples reaction. 10 million users later @ $4 a month. I don't think they could have predicted that kind of success. They have to upgrade and spend more but compared to the money rolling in, all upkeep etc is minimal.
3) Now that it worked the will do more, they can do more than they ever thought because of all the extra dough.. they have #1.. they have the players and their money. So you can dish out for exclusives and exclusive DLC (and charge further yet) to all keep and get more players. You can also add more into the service etc. But they would have never taken anything away.
Ultimately it was a gamble that paid off big time and there's good and bad, but overall it can only improve now. (the only way the service would have ever become worse was if no one played, and then who'd care.)
If people would have not payed the money in the first place, a lot of the services you see now would not be here. Downloadable movies from netflix, the enhance ments to Live, and others. Sure some of the things, like integrated services that Live began with would still be here, because they were here from the beggining. But the Live numbers would not and the contracts with netflix, etc. would not.Server upkeep is minimal? really? a floor full of servers is expensive, and the upkeep is also expensive. From the salary of those doing the backups, updates, repairing failed equipment, etc. to those who code the updates for live, to keeping your games running no matter how unpopular they are. This plus more things i have no idea about cost money. Sony finds ways of doing this also, but at a cost. Microsoft is doing it and are able to do more, since the money is coming in at a higher rate.
If they hadn't charged those things would not be here, and Live would be a whole different experience. No they would not take anything away, but if they stopped charging the additions would come at a slower rate, and Sony would catch up a lot sooner. And , by the way I would care, if the Live bombed.
It's all sort of a catch 22 or vicious circle?... sort of. Alot of the additions etc are to access the growing consumer base and sell more product make more money etc. The people are there now and if they pay, even better. But if they were struggling for customers and people didn't pay then they'd find ways to get the people. ie not charging.
Yes server upkeep etc in minimal compared to the dough that is rolling in... do you think it costs anywhere near $40 million a month to upkeep live?
You say you care now, the point was in past tense. Of course it's different now, live didn't bomb. It's all good, but I don't think live is what it is because of our $4 a month. Like i said it's about number one, if you have no consumer you can't sell product. But the extra dollars rolling in does have an affect... you can push prices lower on the console, dlc etc and bring in more consumers that will also end up paying for it all anyway because well you have to have live etc.
I know it might seem strange but I don't mind paying for live but I do mind paying to play mmo's like FFXI or Phantasy Star. The monthly fee is the only reason I never got into them.cronew1
Fun fact, those MMOs you don't want to pay for actually host servers with the money you give them, MS does not, they used to, and that was great because I could go on Live even when I was traveling in countries that had crap connections and I would play without too much hassle and lag, now it's a whole different thing and thus I don't find it worth the money, I enjoy my free PSN.
[QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
vinni75
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
I don't think it was ever $15 a month lol no one would be on live then lolWindows live was a flop because PC gamers know better than to pay for online when its mostly free anyway.
360 gamers are stuck with XBL as its a closed platform so everyone settles to pay for it if they want the most out of their machine.
hongkingkong
Exactly.
best answer here
What microsoft should do is in the fall update add a web browser to the gold membership and make multiplayer silver or make the web browser free so we can play flash games or java games.
Also I see people online with silver gamertags playing multiplayer.
360loser
About the silver gamertags in multiplayer:
That's because they just added XBL GOLD to their account and it just hasn't showed up yet.
It happens to me to, just like when you change your gamerpicture it doesn't show up to other people for a little while.
[QUOTE="vinni75"][QUOTE="mfp16"]we aren't... at least not for a long long long time... it's making millions and the vast majority of players are happy to pay due to the quality of the serivce. It comes down to like $4 a month, is that really that expensive?
If that is out of your price range you should look into cheaper hobbies... gaming is very expensive.
k2theswiss
$4 a month for gold? wasnt it like 15$ a month? lol sorry i dont have xbl i will get it soon tho
wtf 15 dollors for a month never had been like that is that what ps3 fanboys be saying? " dont buy 360 they charge 15 bucks a month" no buddy this anit WOW. wish blizzer get it thro there heads if they cvharce less they make more. ppl dont got no dang 15 bucks a month for video game when there online mmo that chgarge 5. all the ppl i know pay for online mmos that charge like 5 bucks would play wow if it was cheaper
and if 360 charge 15 bucks a month they only be geting that from rich ppl or spoiled kids and they be losing money
Oh my god spell-check,
Now to actually contribute, the first couple of years the 360 was not making money, (Not M$ as a whole obviously) I'm thinking with live's current success and more people paying for live than not, I don't think it's going anywhere soon. It's the ultimate win-win for their business right now, they're making money hand over fist and there's a very small demographic complaining about the price.
It's all sort of a catch 22 or vicious circle?... sort of. Alot of the additions etc are to access the growing consumer base and sell more product make more money etc. The people are there now and if they pay, even better. But if they were struggling for customers and people didn't pay then they'd find ways to get the people. ie not charging.I have a hard time believing that a five story office building full of employees and hardware is minimal. You would be surprised at how fast the money goes when you have a couple hundred employees and upper management, besides the amount of hardware needed to keep a service like Live going. The server floor alone is filled with rows of server blades that aren't cheap. Maybe they are not using the whole 40 million a month, but minimal would not be the correct word used.Yes server upkeep etc in minimal compared to the dough that is rolling in... do you think it costs anywhere near $40 million a month to upkeep live?
You say you care now, the point was in past tense. Of course it's different now, live didn't bomb. It's all good, but I don't think live is what it is because of our $4 a month. Like i said it's about number one, if you have no consumer you can't sell product. But the extra dollars rolling in does have an affect... you can push prices lower on the console, dlc etc and bring in more consumers that will also end up paying for it all anyway because well you have to have live etc.
BongMonkey
I also don't think Live would be what it is today without the charge. Yes they would find ways to attract customers, but would the experience be what it is today without the 50 bucks a year? That is the debate. Yes the customer base is number 1. Without it Live would not cease to exist, but with Live in a less advanced state because of less dollars for development cost and developers salarys, and hardware to do the developement on, and the servers to run Live on, the Live experience would be less advanced because you can only charge so much for DLC, and Add content would run rampent.
I was speaking as past tense when I said I would have cared if Live had bombed. If the live experience is any where what PSn is like I doubt very seriously 10 million would be on live right now, even if it were free. When games went below a certain amount of players, you could see them being yanked. Instead, as long as you have a friend those games will always be there for you to enjoy. This is just one small example, but IMO a lot would change if not for the monthly fee.
Hope I'm not coming off too strong. You do make good points, and it's nice seeing someone with a well formed opinion. No matter how wrong it is, LOL, Just kidding. I agree with some of your points, Just not the ones that neither of us can prove, Because Live is what it is today. Any thing else is just pure speculation.
also if they decided to give it free all of the people who already have xbl would be angry that they have payed for what other people get free. i know i would want a refund from ms if they started giving it free.R_MAHIL
Oh, I love people like you. So when a game you bought gets cheaper after a few months, do you want your money back, too? Thanks for the laugh.
If you can't afford 4bucks a month you should probably go kill yourself. Silentwarrior27
Yes, that makes a whole lot of sense. Would you pay $4 a month to use uh... lets say your Xbox controller just because you can afford it? Just because you can pay for something doesn't mean that you should. I would like to sell you a used car though.
I would imagine the main reason Windows LIVE is free now is because of severa lack of interest. PC gamers didn't have to pay for online multiplayer, obviously, so I really doubt that many cared for achievements. It wasn't making enough money so they scrapped it. Xbox LIVE, however, is completely different. People have to pay the subscription if they really want online multiplayer and they have no choice, and since most people do, there is a whole load of money being made.
Totally different situations, just the same company involved.
Caddy06_88
Exactly. Very well put.
PC gamers have been used to playing online for free, which is why Windows LIVE failed miserably.
In contrast xbox and xbox 360 gamers are used to paying to play online.
MS want to charge everyone to play online, but realise they can only get away with it on consoles. Until PSN improves to the point where it offers a better service than Live, and remain free, we won't see MS cut the cost of Live.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment