Elder Scrolls Online, free-to-play games still require Xbox Live Gold

One of Microsoft's big announcements today was the restructuring of Xbox Live Gold; the company will now allow Xbox 360 and Xbox One owners to use entertainment apps like Netflix and HBO Go without requiring a paid Xbox Live subscription. As Microsoft's Phil Spencer clarified to Joystiq today, the latest in a series of "Xbox One-80s" doesn't apply to free-to-play and subscription-based online games.

[AngelicIceDiamond]

Yep to be expect and something I'm completely fine with. Its just that paying extra for Netflix is something I never understood.

[Stick89]

Honest question, how are you ok with having to pay to play the "Free" to play games or even worse, one that has a separate subscription like ESO? As far as I'm aware they use their own services and not Microsofts.

[AngelicIceDiamond]

If something is "F2P" on Xbox then I have no second thoughts I just download and play because its simply under the gold subscription.

I'm a constant gold member so I don't think anything of it I just renew my subscription when the time comes.

But here's why F2P is under gold still.

According to Spencer, Microsoft "hasn't changed its policy" on MMOs and free-to-play games. Spencer added that some games include "engineering constraints, policy constraints and partner constraints in each one of these scenarios."

http://www.polygon.com/2014...

[mikeslemonade]

Thanks to XBL gold it is now okay to pay to play online. Way to go xbox defense force.. Now I have a $100 needless bill every year to play ps plus and gold.

[Stick89]

@Mikeslemonade I won't lie I was pissed about PS+ being required as well. But aslong as the game is using Sony's (or Microsoft's for Live) services and I'm making use of the IGC and the steep discounts on stuff I'd already buy, I can justify it.

[RiPPn]

@mikeslemonade: just watch for deals on the services, Gold is often available for $35 and PS+ for around $30. Now that both companies are giving games away, the cost of 1 retail game is going to be an incredible value. With PS+ I've already got over $100 in games and the 2 games coming on Xbox One are worth $25 and that's just the first month. Also this isn't even including the free games you get on the other platforms.

I do understand that some don't care about the free games and this is essentially thrown away money just so they can play cod but then again those people likely don't own both machines either.

[LogicStomper]

@Mikeslemonade

"Thanks to XBL gold it is now okay to pay to play online. Way to go xbox defense force.. Now I have a $100 needless bill every year to play ps plus and gold."

Sony didn't have to follow suit, they chose to. It wasn't Microsoft's decision to charge PS+ users, it was Sony's. So don't go blaming Microsoft for a decision Sony made.

[XiSasukeUchiha]

Damn I thought they get rid of this requirement how sad I suppose:(

[rivencleft]

I agree. If they chose to release the game as 'Free to Play' it should truly be free to play, Sony has already said that you will be allowed to play Elder Scrolls Online without a Plus Subscription, as long as you're making your subscription dues to ESO. Now that's what I think both companies should do, I understand servers and server maintenance costs money, but most people will still buy Xbox Live Gold and PS Plus anyway, especially with the games they want to play online, i.e. COD, Battlefield, so you're already making the money, why not let F2P games be F2P? They've already done it with other subscription based services, NetFlix, Hulu, etc. So I don't think I'd ever pay for gold just to have to pay a subscription fee to ESO as well, they're in turn double charging you for the same thing.

[Bonkerz]

No problem with this at all. If you are playing games than you have an XBL gold subscription anyway. Now for the people that were using it for the entertainment stuff, i agree its nice they took that away.

[falviousuk]

Grabs the popcorn and beer and waits for the horde to arrive to further attack MS as they have done in almost every other thread on here.

*waits*

[MysticStrummer]

*grabs higher resolution popcorn and beer and waits for you to defend the removal of butter from your popcorn, which was previously claimed to be integral to the experience*

; )

[gameslayer2411]

Dude your commment made me choke on my BBQ sandwhich!!

[mkis007]

I love this comment haha.

[Flutterby]

Only words I can muster for that reply us ............OUCH! Lol

[rivencleft]

Thank you for that sir, your comment made me laugh aloud at work.

[falviousuk]

Yes. But is your beer being poured at 30fps or 60fps

[OC_MurphysLaw]

It matters little...if you are looking to play on online game on consoles you 99% of the time have PS+ or XBLG now a day.

[Obamanationn]

u dont need PS+ to play ESO , and most f2p games

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Do you have PS+?

[Flutterby]

Having ps+ is nothing to do with it , it's the fact that he doesn't need it to still play those games Is what matters.

[rivencleft]

That's exactly what I was trying to say earlier, Sony has already stated you wont need a Plus Membership to play ESO, as long as you are paying your monthly fees to ESO, and you never had to pay to watch Netflix, Hulu, etc. on PS3 or PS4, neither did you have to pay to play online on PS3, which was great, I have been a PS Plus Member since day 1, like June 10, 2010 but I became a Plus member BY CHOICE, not because they said either you pay it or you can't use all the features you already paid for on the console *cough* Microsoft. So that was the biggest turn-off of Xbox Live Gold to me, that they pretty much strong armed you into buying it or else you couldn't use all the features you should have gotten free by buying their damn system, and the same goes for the PS4, I own one and was already a PS Plus subscriber so I didn't have to sign up, but when they said you needed it to play online I thought it was bullcrap for new members, but at least since the beginning Sony offered stuff other than just playing online with a Plus membership, free games, avatars, themes, etc. whereas for a long-while there Microsoft was just pay to play, pay to watch, pay to pretty much do anything the PS3 was giving for free, which is definitely why I think the PS3 prospered in it's higher price platform.

[MrSwankSinatra]

Sorry but that still doesn't justify the fact that you have to pay two separate subscriptions. Sony doesn't force you to do it so why should microsoft?

[OC_MurphysLaw]

ESO shouldn't be charging $60 upfront and then $15 a month but they do...

Its their policy, I am not defending that its right, just that I would venture whether its required or not matters little since the vast majority who would play this game on those systems are already subscribers to their services.

[KonsoruMasuta]

Okay, think about it this way. A primarily single player gamer sees a free to play MMO he would like to play. No subscription fee, no initial cost, it's all okay. He downloads the game, tries to play - what's this? Microsoft wants to charge him to play something that's free? Why? He doesn't even need a sub because he usually plays single player games!

People need to get this, "Oh, if you game, you obviously already have a subscription" bs out of their heads. It's false.

Stop defending this.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

I am not defending it, I am merely saying I personally believe it matters little in the grand scheme of things.

[azure1990]

I understand the game fees. But the netflix and shit I never understood

[KonsoruMasuta]

The pay wall for free to play or subscription based games doesn't make any sense either.

Why do people have to pay Microsoft to play a free game? Why do people have to pay Microsoft to play something they are already paying monthly for.

[MasterCornholio]

What I dont understand why FTP games on the PS4 are FTP while those games on Xbox One require a subscription. My bro doesn't have plus but that doesn't stop him from playing DC Universe.

[DefenderOfDoom2]

I guess 1 step at a time for MICROSOFT. I still think it is crazy that you have to pay to play online for XBOXTHREE60. But i do think this policy will change in near future

[metalmatters]

see I just cant understand how this can be OK. If its free to play its free to play period, with xbox theres always a catch

[LiQuiZoN]

I just canceled my PS+ subscription (Don't own xbox of any sorts) because I've been spending all my time on Steam. Mainly playing DOTA2.

Steam + DOTA2 are both free and yet I've spent about 70$ on DOTA2 in-game purchases because I enjoy it so much. Paying to play is no necessary at all.

Thank the XBOTs for being influenced by Microsoft marketing where you PAY MORE and GET LESS. Just like every single Microsoft Product ever conceived.

[LogicStomper]

Well if you had XBLG instead of PS+ and you had just ended your subscription, you would still be able to play the Games with Gold games.

So you do pay more, but in your case, you also get more.

[LiQuiZoN]

Not sure you made a lick of sense.

Are you talking about the "Leased/Free" games you get with PS+ or XBLG? Either way, they are not justification to pay 5$ a month to maintain a server.

If steam can do it for FREE<--- and have superior functionality then I KNOW Sony and Microsoft could easily do it. Do not question that.

I cannot justify paying MORE and playing INFERIOR console games. To someone who has both a PC and PS4, it makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.

[LogicStomper]

"Are you talking about the "Leased/Free" games you get with PS+ or XBLG? Either way, they are not justification to pay 5$ a month to maintain a server. "

Yeah I am talking about the leased/free games you get with the associated services. Such ignorance to imply this is the only reason people pay $5 a month.

"If steam can do it for FREE<--- and have superior functionality then I KNOW Sony and Microsoft could easily do it. Do not question that. "

If you don't question things, how do you distinguish between fact and sheer ignorance?

Let's get this straight. Sony, Microsoft and Steam are all services that are trying to make money. How do they make money? Well you have to first devise a plan. Now do you really think that all three of the companies have the same strategy for making money?

Sony and Microsoft are going off subscription based models to ensure they make cash from the get-go.

Steam has taken a free subscription model, and relies on large numbers of sales to make money.

So just because company X does one thing, doesn't mean company Y should do the same.

"I cannot justify paying MORE and playing INFERIOR console games. To someone who has both a PC and PS4, it makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever."

I hope you have the mental capacity to understand the idea I'm about to present to you. Just to make the point hit hard, I'll make it relevant specifically to you.

Why do you play Dota when it's inferior to Crysis 3? It looks horrendous. Dota's graphics suck compared to majority of the games out there. So the question is, why do you play inferior games? Same with Battle Royal All-stars, why play such horrendous look games? As a matter of fact, why do you even own a PS4 when it's a card-board box compared to PC?

How about you go answering those questions and then maybe you'll realise why people play console games.

[LiQuiZoN]

I hope I don't come off as a PC elitist, because I am certainly not. I am however frustrated with the fact that Microsoft fans have become "enablers" for Sony to follow the same anti-consumer policies. Once Xbox360 did well it was a matter of time before Sony followed suit and charged for online gaming.

Point is simple. Do not endorse paying MORE and getting LESS. It is not only anti-consumer, it is in opposition to sound logic.

:DOTA:
If you haven't got into DOTA, then I seriously think you should give it a go. It is bar-none the best competitive multiplayer experience I have ever had. I'm 30. Gaming since ColecoVision. DOTA is by far the best all around.

"I hope you have the mental capacity..."
These sort of comments annoy me. Nothing to prove here.

[Flutterby]

I agree with you liquizon but.........you say you are 30 so you where probably born in 1984, the colecovision released in 1982 why would you be playing such an old console by the time you where old enough to actually play games in any way at all? I mean I am 33 now and I wouldn't have wanted to play something that old when I was old enough to play games properly to enjoy them. There was way better stuff out by the time you would have been a good age to enjoy gaming. Did you just randomly pick the oldest machine you could think of.

[Skate-AK]

One step forward one step back.