Why do people pay for Xbox Live?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

This is not at all a Live sucks, PSN is better thread, I actually think both services are very similar in what they do and how well they do it. Everything I'm about to say is completely factual.

My problem with Live is that Microsoft wants to have their cake and eat it too as Microsoft charges you for services they don't provide. The FREE Silver Live account offers services that actually cost Microsoft money and resources to provide. Running and maintaining the servers that store the games, demos, DLC, etc. for everyone to download is at least 90% of the expenses of the Live service. And, all that stuff is offered for FREE through Silver membership because Microsoft wants everyone to have access to their store so people can spend money in their store.

For Live Gold membership, Microsoft charges you for Netflix, online gaming, Facebook, last.fm, etc. So, in order for you to have the ability to watch Netflix, you have to pay Netflix, your ISP, and MICROSOFT!!! Microsoft is not incurring any costs of any kind when you watch stuff off Netflix, Netflix is streaming movies from their servers using their bandwidth to you over your bandwidth that you are paying for, Microsoft is not involved in any way. To prove, rather simply, for people who might not believe that, PS3 users can still use Netflix with PSN down.

Onto online gaming, which is another big slap in the face to Live customers from Microsoft. If you play any third party game (e.g. COD), Microsoft is not incurring any costs or bandwidth when you play COD online as you are not playing on Microsoft's servers (you are not even playing on a server as almost every console online game is player hosted) and the publisher of the game is running the game servers that just track stats and nothing else. For a game like COD, the developer puts probably about half its resources into the multiplayer aspect of the game so about half the money you payed for the game is for the multiplayer. On Live, you have to pay Microsoft to unlock game content (online multiplayer) that you already payed for when you bought the game. The only thing that would make sense is if for Microsoft to allow online multiplayer for 3rd party games for Silver accounts, but only allow Gold accounts to pay first party games online. However, Microsoft isn't going to do that because people would be like, "I can play COD or Bad Company for free, screw Halo and Gears" and those communities would be a lot smaller. Also, Microsoft doesn't even run any dedicated servers whereas Sony does run dedicated severs for a few games (MAG, Killzone, Warhawk, etc.).

The only service Microsoft is providing you for Gold membership is cross-game chat so you are basically paying $60 a year for cross-game chat and that is it.

This is why I will never pay for Live as I'm not going to pay someone for a service they aren't providing, it's that simple. If Sony pulled this, I'd turn into a PC gamer and use Steam, which also provides the same services Live Gold does for free.

I just use Silver, It's free and I don't have to deal with the usual clientèle on Xbox LIVE.

Look at PSN... Now look at XBL.

That is all.

/thread

Best of the 3:
Well, we pay to not have are information stolen >.>

<.<

>.>

That's not what Gold membership would have an effect on. Silver accounts buy stuff off the store with all their personal information and card info. So, Gold accounts get more security than Silver accounts?

Also, no PSN users really got affected by the theft. All you have to do is get a new card if you feel that info was compromised. Anyone can get your other info like name, address, etc. if they want to.

Microsoft uses the extra money to actually protect users' data.
image

Really?

You're going to ask that now????

To answer your question, because people will pay for it.

I do like the way live runs over PSN. It does seem to have fewer connectivity issues, not to mention it seems much more stable as a whole. Not to mention cross game chat... I swear, that's the biggest thing I miss when I'm playing on my PS3. If a mates playing one game and I'm playing another, Sometimes you just want to chat. Kinda silly not to have that really.

I don't particularly think it's worth the money we have to pay for it, but it is good. You certainly get more added features out of PSN+. But I'm not willing to pay for it seeing as I get all I need out of the free service.

Best of the 3:
Well, we pay to not have our information stolen >.>

<.<

>.>

DAMN YOU NINJA

Well I shouldn't speak for others but for me it's all about having them delete my profile so that I can't use any of my game saves OR XBL and I get to start all over. YEEEEEESSSSS!!

Sarcasm self check complete! Oh damn I can't play that either! RAAAAWWWWR!! Hey, I think I'll make that my new profile name....

well why dont you?
also flamebait

Dryaxx:
Look at PSN... Now look at XBL.

That is all.

/thread

I'm willing to bet that Live has actually had more downtime before this incident than PSN. It's not like Live can't be hacked and brought down.

Gotta say, this is a really weird time to be bringing this up. It's not exactly a high price, either.

Phoenixmgs:

Best of the 3:
Well, we pay to not have are information stolen >.>

<.<

>.>

That's not what Gold membership would have an effect on. Silver accounts buy stuff off the store with all there personal information and card info. So, Gold accounts get more security than Silver accounts?

Also, no PSN users really got affected by the theft. All you have to do is get a new card if you feel that info was compromised. Anyone can get your other info like name, address, etc. if they want to.

I know, it was more of a quick jab as PSN users.

To answer your question seriously, don't actually know, never really cared. But most of my friends played 360 so I followed them. Sure, a PS3's service would have been more practical but with no friends to play it with I'd get bored quick.

A better connection than on the ps3 and cross game chat, as well as the deal of the week and certain demos.

Phoenixmgs:
The only service Microsoft is providing you for Gold membership is cross-game chat so you are basically paying $60 a year for cross-game chat and that is it.

No, we're paying for all the things you listed, what you mean is we're paying $60 for the upkeep of a single service. Slight difference.

I get what you're saying, we shouldn't have to pay for all that stuff, but we do have to, and that's really all there is to it.

Overall, I pay for it because I have to, and I'm not that bothered by it. I can afford thirty something quid a year.

The only real perk, as far as I can tell, is cross game chat. I guess that's a big deal to some people though I personally could care less. Seems to be it's just being charged for because people will pay it. And that's really a good enough reason.

Best of the 3:
Well, we pay to not have our information stolen >.>

<.<

>.>

I love it when someone posts what I was thinking, in the very first post =)

Yeah; I paid it because I had to in order to play my games online; and as I much preferred the 360's library to the PS3's, I didn't have much choice in the matter. Like a lot of Microsoft pseudo-monopolies, its something you have to pay for but they have just enough loopholes to prevent you from winning an antitrust suit against it.

Phoenixmgs:

Dryaxx:
Look at PSN... Now look at XBL.

That is all.

/thread

I'm willing to bet that Live has actually had more downtime before this incident than PSN. It's not like Live can't be hacked and brought down.

The only times i can ever remember live being down is during maintenance during major updates.

Just look at the PlayStation Network and Live.That money goes places.

lordlillen:

Best of the 3:
Well, we pay to not have our information stolen >.>

<.<

>.>

old joke is old

But it is still right on the money.

You have to remember that Xbox live premièred with the original Xbox and that even the Xbox 360 was running live for 2 years before the PS3 couple that with the fact that a lot of features that PSN didn't have to begin with but does now where already present in Xbox live so a lot of people will have bought an Xbox then and why would change now seeing as they have a back catalogue of games an established Gamer tag and in my opinion a much more active and interesting community.

I pay so I can use online multiplayer.

sethzard:
A better connection than on the ps3 and cross game chat, as well as the deal of the week and certain demos.

I'm not sure if Live offers a higher download speed than PSN. My friend has a good cable connection and stuff he downloads of PSN downloads fast. I have a slow connection so stuff downloads slow regardless.

If you are talking about better connectivity during an online game, you are wrong. Almost every game is played peer-to-peer style where a player in the game acts as the server. Lag in online games is dependent on the player host (and the other players connections) along with the netcode of the game. PSN or Live has no say in the amount of lag you get in online games.

Kaze103:
Overall, I pay for it because I have to, and I'm not that bothered by it. I can afford thirty something quid a year.

Would you be bothered if you had to pay both the cable company and DSL company for Internet service when you just have cable? That's exactly what Microsoft is pulling. And, you don't have to pay for Live; PSN and Steam are free alternatives.

I would be very surprised if Sony don't charge for online play on the next gen console. They didn't this gen because they were late to market and the basic cost of the console was very expensive - they used free online as a marketing tool. We can already see them making steps in this direction with PSN+. Once this happens, and you can bet it will, PC will be the last refuge of free online (Nintendo's service is so lousy it doesn't bare mention).

I don't mind paying a reasonable subscription fee for a service I feel justifies it. What I am concerned about is EA, Activision or the other publishers trying to muscle in and individual games suddenly requiring additional fees on top of the basic subscription. They are definately pushing for that, and it will really drive the cost of gaming up if they get their way.

Thrust:
I pay so I can use online multiplayer.

But why are you paying Microsoft for a service they aren't providing you? It's like paying EA a monthly fee to play COD, why would you do that?

Because they charge for it.

But in all seriousness, Online is about 90% of my time gaming. PSN doesn't cost as much money, but when you think that a PS3 cost about 50 dollars more (from the last time I checked) and doesn't have the same amount of support and a faulty wireless adaptor, you are in essence paying about the same.

Because I like Left 4 Dead and Halo, among others, and I do not begrudge paying a top up fee of £40 a year to play those games online. Plus all my friends got Xboxes before I upgraded to the current gen, and no one has a PS3. Also, I don't like PC gaming. I know that is cutting me out of a lot of quality content straight off the bat, but that's a hit I'm willing to take.

I guess it just isn't that big of a deal to me.

/shrug

gamerguy473:
Microsoft uses the extra money to actually protect users' data.
image

this and,upgrade LIVE as often as the do,which is a lot since they add a new feature like every other week.

Frostlich1228:
microsoft really cares about xbox live users.they give us good protection,deleteing freind requests is easy as hell.sony really does not care about psn users at all.you guys got hacked because the manager of psn said that becaus it was free they dident have to give you protection.

Steam is free, are you saying Steam gives you no protection as well? Microsoft cares about getting free money for their customers. You might as well send me a $10/month and I "promise" to make COD even less laggy than it is now, it makes the same sense as paying Microsoft to play COD.

Chelsea O'shea:

gamerguy473:
Microsoft uses the extra money to actually protect users' data.
image

this and,upgrade LIVE as often as the do,which is a lot since they add a new feature like every other week.

A new feature that has nothing to do with what Microsoft is providing. If Microsoft just gave you a web browser, you could use Facebook, last.fm, and any other sites that offer free services.

Psycho Cat Industries:
Just look at the PlayStation Network and Live.That money goes places.

What about Steam?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked