220°

Would you be willing to pay even more for online play?

Gamer Syndrome: Now the above statement seems rhetorical, because as gamers, the prospect of having another layer of monetized gaming is out of the question.

Read Full Story >>
gamersyndrome.com
5044d ago Replies(2)
BuIIetproofish_5044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

$50/year for a console is the most I will pay. I wouldn't be too bothered if Sony started charging the same. I will not pay for an individual game.

Joule5044d ago

Hell no i'm not paying extra.

Chubear5044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

See, this is the BS that the 360 fanbase want as standard for the industry. They support paying for online in the hopes others start to charge for P2P online too so they can justify their stupidity for paying $250 this gen just to play their games online every year.

Disgusting the crap that is allowed to go on in the industry just to appease one fanbase.

I can clearly state, if Sony or PC games start charging for online I WILL NOT PAY A RED CENT. I'm a single player gamer first anyways but no way would I pay full price for a game if it had MP, only to pay another fee to access the content I already paid for on disc.

That's stupidity.

It's because of the 360 base that this is even a discussion. Argh, setting the gaming industry backwards, ticks me off to no end.

mrcash5044d ago

It has nothing to do with the fanbase, it's been a standard since the fisrt xbox. The reason peple don't have a problem paying for the service, is because they believe it's worth it.

Biggest5044d ago

Not true. What was the first console released in this current generation? Many people bought it because it was first. What happens when you have something that you want to use, but have to pay first and have no alternatives? You pay. What happens when all your friends have what you have and they're paying? You pay. What happens, regardless of how you feel about it, when you buy a multiplayer game and want to actually play it on the 360? You pay. There are many people that aren't taking full advantage of the "service" offered. They pay because they have to.

mrcash5044d ago

While the 360 may have been the first console out,but people were already paying for the online service on the original xbox. Which needless to say had significantly less features. People don't have to pay its an option considering there is another console with free online play. Look I don't like the fee, I mean who does? The reality is that it is a great service if you and a few people out there don't use all of the features provided, then that's also another conscious decision they are making just like paying. If it wasn't for the xbox we would probably still be stuck with the ps2 online interface which was lacking in every department.

badz1495044d ago

and paying for MMO is stupid! so, paying more to play a game I bought already online? HELL NO! the day Sony also charge for online play is the day I stop playing online on console!

jadenkorri5044d ago

is as far it goes. Personally anyone paying to play online is a idiot. When the xbox first launched with xbox live membership and having to pay to play online, the internet swarmed with anger and statement it would fail, well guess MS is laughing in your face and now sony and nintendo are on their way to getting their piece. Now activison is next in line. Can you imagine paying not only for xbox live, but to pay so much to play MW2, and how bout BC2, and halo, etc. If activision starts charging for MW2, it will be the fastest return I'll ever do, and I hope the fanbase does the same. If we all say no, it wont happen for future games. This issue is all about future gaming and we have to draw the line here and now, otherwise, every game that releases, not only are you paying for the game, you have to pay per month/year for just online of that game.

mrcash5044d ago

I don't think anyone would be willing to pay ontop of live to play a game, well not including mmos. I don't care what game it is i'm sorry it wont happen.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 5044d ago
nickjkl5044d ago

orly 100 dollars a month for internet is the most ill pay i need to be able to download and playonline without affecting anything

FanboysWillHateMe5044d ago

Whether they be monthly or yearly. I pay a ton more a month for PG&E, Comcast, Netflix, Gamefly, and my Chase credit card. When I look at all those bills (especially Chase haha), the estimated monthly cost of Live is nothing. Good for all of you people that have a PS3 and are content with that. However, I do have a 360 and most (actually, all) of my friends are on that service, so I pay. It's not like I enjoy paying 50 bucks, but I don't think it's that big of a deal, considering that you can get it for 40 bucks, which amounts to about $3.33 a month. I don't know where to get that deal, but even at 50 a year it's what a dollar more per month?

And honestly for me, the Xbox interface is a lot more convenient than the PS3 interface. It's just a lot easier to add friends and send messages and invite people and whatnot. If I had a choice I wouldn't pay it, but c'mon, we have more PS3 fanboys complaining about the Live fees than actual Live users haha. That's just my 2 cents though.

jadenkorri5044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

im fine with people wasting their money on xbox live, personally I wouldn't complain as it wouldn't effect me, but its going to, thankfully psn premium is free online for now, but Robert Kotick is thinking of charging online for 1 game, if they start, just like Sony and Nintendo who are following suit to xbox live with PSN premium, and whatever nintendo's is gonna be called, so imagine, every fps/multiplayer game you have/we have started charging for online play, your 50 dollars a month just went higher. Is that something you can still justify paying for.

Oh please, the interface again, its the same as psn, its the opposite when navigating. And a shot at adding friends, well i just lol on that one as i think over the thought.

FanboysWillHateMe5044d ago

We pay for almost everything we use and consume. And if I am wasting my money on this, than I've wasted a ton more on other unnecessary things, such as subway sandwiches and mexican food when I have a ton of food at home. And nope, I find the 360 interface to be a lot more faster and convenient than the PS3's.

"And a shot at adding friends, well i just lol on that one as i think over the thought. "

Ok?

ThanatosDMC5044d ago

A sucker is born everyday after all.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5044d ago
NothingToGainButLove5044d ago

I'm not paying anything except for my internet costs. That's final. Period.

Imperator5044d ago

No, the only reason I pay for XBL Gold is becuase I have to unless I don't want to play the multiplayer part (aka 50% of most 360 games) of games I already payed for. It's a rip-off but MS really gives you no choice. Either pay or you can't play the full game.

jadenkorri5044d ago

xbox live gold gets so many members, cause you have too. psn prem does not include online play, but I suspect one day it will, if not then I'm wrong, great, this issue i would not mind being wrong on, but I know for fact the next PS will charge for online.

mrcash5044d ago

I pay 40 a year, and nope I would not pay more.

tinybigman5044d ago

NO

I don't pay for Live, I sure as hell wouldn't pay for this.

Raz5044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

Will I pay for online play? I'll let Tracy Morgan answer for me...

evilmonkey5015044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

Pay more for what exactly? what service is offered that I should pay extra for? Is it those non-existing dedicated servers? What exactly do you plan on offering, Bobby, that I should shell out for? Sony allows me to play for free, on their network in which you have little to no say. Matchmaking servers using peer to peer is not in anyway whatsoever chargeable for. You offer me nothing additional and want me to pay you more for it? Go f%&k yourselves. I will never pay anyone to play my games on my internet through my peer to peer connections that you basically did nothing except design lobbies for. Microsoft live is a ripoff too. Seriously? pay you to use my internet? Pay you for the BUILT IN feature of playing others , over MY INTERNET? PAY YOU EVERY MONTH? Go f*&k yourself Microsoft. You will never fool me again. I will never buy a 6th xbox either! I don't care if you put a 300 year warranty on it.I'm sick and tired of you dicking me and millions of others. As for you Activision, go ahead...shoot yourselves in the face, because that's what you'll be doing. I already buy all your Call of Duty (s) used. You don't pay the dev...I don't pay you, publisher. Fix your image and start playing nice and just maybe you wont HAVE to charge to play your games online, because everyone will start saying NICE things about you instead.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 5044d ago
MariaHelFutura5044d ago ShowReplies(2)
Gr815044d ago

Already pay Cablevision for Internet Access. I will not pay twice for that.

I understand economic times are very rough right now, but pleasing and accomodating the consumer should still be at the forefront of any business.

Pachter talking that bull shit about Activision charging consumers to play CoD online is ridiculous. You already bought the game, now you have to pay to unlock features already on the disc? Some people are such sheep, if they go along with these sort of practices.

Umbrella Corp5044d ago

I stopped gaming on live because money is tight,why pay for live when I own a PS3 and I can game online for free.I would love to pay for Playstation Plus but i need more games,you guys think Playstion Plus is worth the price tag if I subscribe today?I was already going to gamestop for the sale so....

deadreckoning6665044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

If you usually buy alot of things from the PSN store, then yes, it is worth the money. If not, then you shouldn't buy it.

@sidar- Yea, that is pretty fishy. Live is virtually a neccesity if you own a 360. Why would you stop paying for that in order to pay for an optional service that doesn't provide any extra features for online play?

"Ive gotten close to 35 bucks of stuff free already in 1 month and this is stuff i wanted to buy lol!"

Thats the thg. Not everyone is like you. Personally, the only thing PSN Plus offers that I'm remotely interested in is Wipeout HD. And regarding your comment that PSN Plus offers more value than Live, that is SUBJECTIVE. Live STILL has plenty of core online gaming features that PSN doesn't have yet and for many people, this ALONE makes Live a better service that PSN Plus.

PSN Plus is pretty much one big sale that you have to spend a lot of money to take advantage of. I can't speak for anyone else, but all I want from PSN is to play online. I don't care about themes, minis, PSOne Classics, or PSN games.

ChickeyCantor5044d ago (Edited 5044d ago )

Ok, Not sure if im getting this...but
You stopped paying for live...because money is tight...but you dont mind paying for Plus.

I dont know but your story just sound fishy...

@below
I get that, but when money is tight its tight =P.

O and nothing beats "Love" hahah. ( your typo at the end)

SuperStrokey11235044d ago

It depends, PS+ gives you far greater value than live does. You get tonnes of free stuff with PS+, very little with live and you still get to play online.

Im not saying hes not trolling but for people like myself thats a no brainer as the value of PS+ is awesome. Ive gotten close to 35 bucks of stuff free already in 1 month and this is stuff i wanted to buy lol!

I just wish the had cross game chat, only think i miss on PSN compared to love.

BeOneWithTheGun5044d ago

You get a lot more than just online play with Plus. Not saying I am right but I think that is what he was asking. Indeed, if you do buy stuff from the Store, then Plus is worth it. I bought the 3 month subscription and with the mini's and WipeoutHD it already paid for itself.

Whackedorange5044d ago

Since online gaming on the Playstation is free i dont think that PS+ is worth it, sure you get 1 free game every month and extra discounts in the store but that is only valid as long as you are a subscriber to service.

I pay $25 each year to be playing online game on XBL but i only do that cause there is no other option if you wanna play your xbl games online.

Show all comments (91)
60°

The Games Industry Continues To Wonder What Is The Point Of Its Own Existence

While many gaming layoffs are cruel, Tango Gameworks being culled after Hi-Fi Rush doesn't even make sense.

Read Full Story >>
thegamer.com
Psychonaut853h ago

Good read. I think the point is important. Cuz the message it sends is, make a bad game? Well shut you down. Make a good game? We still might shut you down. How the fuck are you supposed to feel any sense of job security under those conditions. The level of core incompetence at play in the upper levels of this industry is staggering. This is common sense shit. You can’t chase trends on a 2 year cycle when games take fucking 6-8 years to make. Just let artists fucking art for gods sake. They don’t understand the basic principle that they’re all haggling for the same slice of fucking pie and the market will not bear it. Find a different fucking pie.

460°

Report Claims Xbox Is Planning More Cuts Following Studio Closures

"The sudden closure of several video-game studios at Microsoft Corp.’s Xbox division was the result of a widespread cost-cutting initiative that still isn’t finished.

This week, Xbox began offering voluntary severance agreements to producers, quality assurance testers and other staff at ZeniMax, which it purchased in 2020 for $7.5 billion, according to people familiar with the company’s plans. Others across the Xbox organization have been told that more cuts are on the way.

Speaking about the closures more broadly, Booty said that the company’s studios had been spread too thin — like “peanut butter on bread” — and that leaders across the division had felt understaffed. They decided to close these studios to free up resources elsewhere, he said.

Game Pass has not seen the massive growth that Xbox boss Phil Spencer may have been hoping for."

Read Full Story >>
purexbox.com
just_looken20h ago

Sense it seems very few remember that human's were around before 2020 the next studio to close will be bethesda based no doubt on the history of.

Fallout 76
Elder scrolls online
elder scrolls blades mobile
fallout mobile
The vr versions of old games

Then you got starfield pissing out cash nothing to cover it.

I doubt tod's team or any sub team is making m$ cash they are no doubt on the chopping block for job cuts

If you can remember before 2020 even fallout 76 was made with over 4 studios.

purple1017h ago(Edited 7h ago)

pretty sure starfield coming to playstation 2024, nx gamer deep diving on the creation engine update in a recent blog, he seems to think, there is a lot of stuff developed to use on starfield for its Playstation release,

who will buy it though, ?? I think M$ has lost all good will now, after the Activision debacle, and now all these studios closing, people dont want to support them even if the game is half decent

Abear216h ago

Bethesda is the only studio to release anything noteworthy on Xbox. Take Bethesda out and they have nothing this Gen. Hifi Rush and Starfield are probably their two biggest hits.

Cacabunga3h ago

They are counting on bethesda and activision on consoles and PC.
I really hope there would be a massive boycott movement against just the next release. I’m sure they will reconsider.

They see employees as trash, i will never give them a dime.

-Foxtrot21h ago

"Speaking about the closures more broadly, Booty said that the company’s studios had been spread too thin — like “peanut butter on bread” — and that leaders across the division had felt understaffed. They decided to close these studios to free up resources elsewhere, he said"

So what you're saying is...you bought all these studios and you guys can't run them.

Jesus.

Inverno21h ago

Spread thin after firing over 2000 employees a few months prior. So basically they created the problem and their solution was to just fire more people. Absolute geniuses over at Xbox, of course can we even believe this to be the reason for the closures?

FinalFantasyFanatic4h ago

I was just thinking this, they just fired all those people and now stated they are spreading their staff thinly, this just reeks of incompetence.

just_looken20h agoShowReplies(2)
Profchaos20h ago

Leaders can't run them hire more management create new roles don't shutter entire studios cause you can't figure out how to run them.

Unless the reality is this whole consolidation thing was really an excuse for IP harvesting

anast9h ago

He's lying. They are doing it for the shareholders.

17h ago
kayoss3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

The crazy part is that if Xbox goes under, all these great studios will also go under. They've bought up all these studios and instead of letting the studio manage themselves, they fire 2000 across and now they're complaining that they're understaff. Sounds like xbox bit off more than chew. Just like all the promises that they've made but cant keep.

JEECE53m ago(Edited 50m ago)

Well, what do you mean by "if Xbox goes under"? Because MS itself isn't going under. So if they decided Xbox was no longer worth it, it's not like they would just eat all those losses. Sure, for individual developers where there are substantial costs in terms of the people working at the studio and minimal money to be made selling related IP (i.e. Arkane Austin probably costs a lot in resources but MS couldn't have made much selling the studio because Redfall is worthless and they probably want to keep the Prey IP), they may just close them, but if they were getting out of gaming completely, they could sell the IP and related studios elsewhere. Like we may mock Bethesda Games Studios on here, but their biggest IP (Elder Scrolls and Fallout) are very valuable. Similarly, I know Halo has seen much better days, but you are kidding yourself if you don't think that IP is worth a lot.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 53m ago
Eonjay21h ago

Reports are suggesting that Game Pass will be getting a price hike soon and that Call of Duty may not be added to the day one offering. I honestly have a hard time believing this but it does beg the question why exactly did GP fail? I think the answer is that it just didn't get the growth that it anticipated. Jim was right but I wish he wasn't because at the end of the day, its gamers, devs and other front-line workers who have to absorb the blow for Spencer and team's miscalculations.

21h ago
NotoriousWhiz20h ago

And out of the ashes something even better than Xbox will be born.

Eonjay20h ago

Honestly as long as is not a situation where the industry has to contract in order focus wealth on a few people who are already trillionaires..

Barlos15h ago(Edited 15h ago)

It's already here and it was born before Xbox was even a thing. It's called PlayStation.

Tacoboto19h ago

I think 2022 killed the Series X.

2021 was a good year for Xbox though and maybe the best in a long long time, hardware and software and as a publisher. Halo Infinite launched to popularity, Forza Horizon 5 blew everyone away, Psychonauts 2 was so well received, Flight Simulator on console, Deathloop even on PS5 & PC.

But they followed that up with next to nothing. Then 2023 with Redfall, a disappointing Forza, Starfield, and 2024 leads with closures and layoffs. And some tweets reminding us Hellblade is days away.

The only disappointment with the PS5 is not enough Sony games. Xbox followed up no games with disappointing ones.

Einhander19725h ago

PlayStations history has been built around third and second party publishing. The vast majority of games that people recognize as PlayStation games were made like this.

Insomniac only because a PlayStation Owned studio a few years ago in response to Microsoft buying up studios, every game they made prior to that for PlayStation was as a third party making a games published by Sony.

PlayStation has had an incredible year using that business model.

We got Granblue Fantasy: Relink, Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, Helldiver 2, Rise of the Ronin, Stellar Blade, and Silent Hill is right around the corner.

Eonjay2h ago

I think Xbox S. Brand was already dying for some time. Your 2022 point is interesting but also remember that is a year after the lock down which hD created false demand.

Einhander19725h ago

"I honestly have a hard time believing this but it does beg the question why exactly did GP fail? I think the answer is that it just didn't get the growth that it anticipated."

What?!?

Game Pass failed because from day one it was maintained by subsidization. Game Pass was never profitable, I mean, sure you can say that was because it didn't get the growth they predicted, but their predictions of it having "billions" of subscribers were completely ridiculous, to the point where saying that it didn't have fast enough growth is as completely out of touch with reality as their predictions.

Eonjay2h ago

To clarify, what I am saying is that there is a scenario where GP would have worked and thats where they had a lot more subscribers. You see MS isn't dumb and they charted out how many subs they would need to make the system work. That's why Spencer testified that they would need 80 million subs by 2027 (which is crazy now in retrospect). Now we also understand why Satya Nadella's bonus a few years back was based on that unrealistically high Growth in GP subs. From the beginning they knew that the only way to make it work was with a large base of subs. This is because as you said simply subsidizing won't work forever.

Einhander19721h ago

"To clarify, what I am saying is that there is a scenario where GP would have worked and thats where they had a lot more subscribers."

Yea... but again they expected/wanted an obviously unobtainable number of subscribers. Do you think that taking the risk was a good idea if it was based on getting billions (even 80m) of users?

"You see MS isn't dumb"

Are you sure? Have you been reading the news?

"That's why Spencer testified that they would need 80 million subs by 2027"

This was a refined estimate for the courts, and probably more truthful maybe... but go back and look at the first few years of game pass Microsoft actually said they were going to reach billions of people. Yes that was marketing, but still what they presented to the public to sell the idea.

I actually don't want to argue with you, normally I find your comments agreeable, but this one just came off a little off base to me.

Tacoboto1h ago

"Game Pass failed because from day one it was maintained by subsidization"

I do agree with Eonjay here - *if* Microsoft got the subs they want, Game Pass could have worked. Microsoft assumed people would buy into a subscription service like they already do for TV and Movies and Music.

But that didn't work out, at all, with the catastrophic consequences that we're seeing today.

"Microsoft actually said they were going to reach billions of people"

Reach != Subscriber count. That's your own conflation. Reaching just means "being available in" and usable in, billions of people with the awareness and ability to access the service. There exists no quote saying they estimate "billions" of subscribers.

FinalFantasyFanatic4h ago

Maybe they need to put less games on there or just simply charge more from the beginning, I think they guttered their bottom line, they didn't make as much as they could have from selling games.

kayoss3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

GP fail because these studios poured in $100 of millions to makes these games only for it to given out free in GP. Even if Microsoft pay them to put in on GP, they are not making some of the profits they can potentially make. Especially not for AAA games. For studios making lower quality games, this may work but not for AAA. Look at Sony, their AAA games are award winners. Look at god of war ragnarok, they sold 5 million copies to date and needed to sell 3 million copies to break even. Thats a tough market to be in when your AAA game is not guarantee to break even let alone trying to make a sizeable profit.

JEECE46m ago

Ragnarok sold 15 million as of last November.
https://blog.playstation.co...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 46m ago
Scissorman21h ago

For all the armchair executives who were calling for Sony to release its big-budget AAA games on PS+, the same exact thing would have happened at PlayStation. Game Pass has killed Xbox. Congrats.

shinoff218321h ago

There's not many of of us clamoring for Sony to do this because most of us understand it would kill Playstation. I'm sure there's a few but I've not seen alot of it myself.

porkChop9h ago

"the same exact thing would have happened at PlayStation"

But the same thing *has* been happening at PS. They've closed, what, 3 or 4 studios so far this gen? Laid off plenty of staff, restructured studios, etc.

BehindTheRows8h ago(Edited 8h ago)

PlayStation isn’t struggling. Xbox is. That’s the difference.

Sony also didn’t buy out multiple publishers with LOTS of studios and leave them in a state of uncertainty.

So, he’s absolutely right that Sony not following Game Pass in its entirety was smart as this very thing could have happened. Name a team, like Tango, who wasn’t struggling (like Tango) that Sony closed. Every closure was because of a studio who wasn’t pulling their weight.

rlow15h ago

You’re right about that. People on here will turn a blind eye and downvote because it’s Sony. Jim Ryan flew to the London studio and spent the day with them. The very next day they were all fired.

Calling out MS and not Sony. No matter how the studios came to be. Won’t make a damn difference to those who lost their jobs. In the end it’s all the same.

FinalFantasyFanatic4h ago(Edited 4h ago)

This is why I have always advocated that Sony should not follow Microsoft's footsteps and adopt their model, Xbox couldn't afford to do it, Playstation certainly can't either.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4h ago
21h ago
Show all comments (99)
60°

The Nordic Game 2024 (NG24) Spring conference is to host more than 150 speakers

"While the 20 year anniversary edition of Nordic Game, NG24 Spring's homepage on 21-24 May in Malmö, Sweden, is getting closer, the organizers announced that more than 150 speakers are now lined up for the show." - Nordic Game.