Microsoft: multiple Gold-exclusive free-to-play games planned for Xbox 360
OXM UK: "Microsoft has several single and multiplayer free-to-play games in the works for Xbox 360, beginning with online brawler Happy Wars and Signal's intriguing action-RPG Ascend: New Gods."
(Microsoft, Xbox 360)
Well for console gamers there is always a catch. You see they are told they get something for free, yet it really isnt free. They need to pay for XBL charges to play those games. Its natural when you have a middle man who has his own interests of making money (aka Sony and MS).
Real F2P games are on the PC, 2 of which i play are:
TF2, Dota 2. Both of those are true examples of F2P. Yes the community and Valve do make money by selling in game items, maps. However its all cosmetic, its not like pay to win.
I think MS & Sony need to learn lessons from Valve. Yet i dont think its possible since both take any opportunity they can to milk the console crowd, MS more Sony a bit less.
F2P games on PC require that you also pay. You pay your internet service provider. Xbox live is not dissimilar to this. You still pay your ISP and then you pay for the portal into the Xbox live environment. This is extra, but not specifically for any one game, its the entire xbox live environment you are paying for. Then within the xbox live environment you can have pay games or F2P games.
If you do not like the xbox live environment then you can choose not to pay for it. So I am not sure why anyone gets too upset about it.
You cant say the games arent free because you pay for the Internet. Everyone already has Internet and it gets used for 100 different things. You dont get Internet solely for games. With that logic Dust 514 isnt free because you pay for the Internet.
At least they're offering something more for Gold that may actually be worth subscribing for. Paying for online play is just stupid, and I hope these are MS' steps to righting that wrong. But it won't be, because too many people are willing pay to play on XBL.
Why are so many of u on crack... seriously... PS3 you can choose to purchase plus which in return gives you games to help provide value for this annual fee. to me they have done this well and kept adding more and more value as time has passed. Like all platforms including PC they are looking for different ways to guarantee revenue to improve their product AND make money. (just like most companies that make products do)
x-box obviously realized they needed to add more value and chose to copy PS3 (or had the idea themselves who cares) and are giving games away again to help justify the reason to pay these costs. I still think they are worse for forcing you to pay something to play online but that's just IMO.
PC is no different but because it's a little less expensive to develop for and you don't have to pay anyone for the right to put an application on this system they have different ways to ask for your dollar and can promote their companies in different ways.
Everyone move on pay for the service if you see the value but don't try twist shit to seem like something its not.
I've played over 10 free full retail games I hadn't played before from Sony in 3 month for 15 euros. How exactly is that milking their consumers. How is it milking their consumers when they don't charge for online play and still don't have adverts covering the PS3.
Dude your meaning of milking consumers is totally different to mine.
TF2 is very much a Pay to win game. Certain items can only be bought and those items are usually the best. Granted it is not as bad as some games but whats really better? A Spy with a normal sapper or the sapper that you buy and cant be broken off a Sentry at all? Obviously the advantage goes to the spy who is using Sappers that cant be destroyed.
Saying a F2P game isn't free because you have to pay for internet (An ISP, not Gold) is like saying that free samples at a grocery store aren't free because you had to purchase clothing to enter the store.
Saying that F2P games ARE free despite Gold charges is like saying that paying someone for free samples is free.
Having a pre-condition for playing a game is common on all platforms.
Think about this:
* Do you not have to have a device to play the game on? * A TV? * Pay for electricity? * Internet service?
So in all respect, it ain't free to play for anyone on any platform!
However, it is free to play if you meet the requirements. Now is that so hard to understand or do we have to twist it in all sorts of weird ways to justify an agenda?
By FCO's definition, playing tag cannot be considered free, you still need to consume energy to expend it thus you'll need to pay for food in order to enjoy the benefits of a free game of tag.
Let's also consider playing sports in a park isn't free, you'll still need to buy a ball.
Nitpicking on the aspects of "free" is about as retarded as the concepts presented in this thread. We all know that they mean 'free' as in you don't have to pay anything extra if you already have access to the service.
Yes, there are many truly free to play games. However there are very few that are not pay to win.
Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2 from Valve are very good examples. All in game purchases are cosmetic or audio related. You get no advantage over someone else because you spent your money.
Didnt you say sony gives free games the other day? oh the irony Well you don't pay for the game to play it. LOL even without XBL's gold fee you still have to buy the console to play the free game, you have to pay your power bill, buy a TV, pay for internet.
Marked your comment as trolling.
That Ascend game was shown at E3? LOL I was thinking World Of Warcraft when I seen it at E3 based on It's gameplay mechanics and graphics.
Look we all know N4G's community is like 80% Sony fanboys. Is anyone actually going to be talking about the games? Ascend looks crazy- imagine helping your mates when you're at work and they need help on the game! Or the idea of appearing as a boss in someone else's game? That's genius.
yeah but when Sony gives you PS Plus, then that is truly free. You get "free" games as long as you are subscibed and pay the fee. That is not free, it is called renting.
PS+ is a whole different thing, you don't need PS+ to play online, and you don't need PS+ plus to play F2P games, all you need is an internet connection, now to those of you who are saying "Oh! but you have to pay for internet!" your logic...or your serious lack there of...is terrible, when speaking of whether or not something is truly free, you have to think of extra costs, you can't just turn on your xbox, connect to the internet and start playing these F2P games can you? no, you need Xbox Live Gold, so really if they aren't playable without Gold, you need Gold to play them, then that's an extra cost, and quite frankly I don't want to pay that extra fee, and in all reality, gamer's shouldn't, Online play and the ability to play F2P games should be readily available and shouldn't have to cost us anymore money.
IMO, it's the beginning of a new console model. The new Xbox will probably use a subscription model and offer f2p for many games. It helps get games into the hands of people they may have never tried. Also, it helps compete with today's new competition.
@Ramzadel it's not really too much extra though. Gold is only like $5 a month. If you can't afford $5 a month then you have bigger issues to worry about besides playing games.
The whole "If you can't afford it..." thing gets really old.
I could double my internet speed for $5 a month. I could get a better TV package for $5 more per month. I could get a Netflix subscription for $8.
Everybody knows you have to draw the line somewhere. $5 here and $5 there adds up. If I bought everything that was "not really too much extra" that I wanted, I'd be spending an extra $18 each month. $23 with XBL Gold.
"The whole "If you can't afford it..." thing gets really old."
What gets really old is PS3ers telling 360 players what they should and shouldn't purchase and what they should and shouldn't be mad at MS for.
Bottom line...MS is providing a service for a VERY low price and the demand for that service is there.
"Everybody knows you have to draw the line somewhere. $5 here and $5 there adds up. If I bought everything that was "not really too much extra" that I wanted, I'd be spending an extra $18 each month. $23 with XBL Gold."
That is simply your problem. Prioritize the costs in your life and make the choices. Me like most other xboxers can afford $5 a month on top of everything else. You clearly can't get that.
You may think its old to bring up the affordability of XBL, but the funniest thing happens every time something about XBL pops up...you guys turn it into a circle jirk about how XBL should be free...even if the post has nothing to do with it.
You know what else gets old? When fanboys like you take common sense as if it's some attack on your precious Xbox Live.
I wasn't telling you not to pay for it. I wasn't telling you it wasn't worth it. I was telling someone that everyone who chooses not to pay for Live isn't some dirt poor bum that shouldn't be playing video games in the first place, like he suggested.
You feeling the need to defend XBL against me, when all I'm doing is pointing out that Live isn't for everyone, has nothing to do with "bigger issues", and simply isn't worth it to some people says a lot about you. What does it say? You can't handle reality when it conflicts with your Xbox love.
I never said me not paying for Live is a problem. I have prioritized. Buying more games comes before paying for a feature that's free elsewhere. So does getting a better internet speed. So does a lot of things. I'm perfectly fine with the fact that I'm not paying money for something I can get for free from several other places. You actually seem to have more of a problem with it than I do.
It's funny watching you try to distract from my point as you ramble on about what "us guys" do, but the fact is, everything I said was fact. Not everyone who doesn't have Live has financial problems. But of course, you've gone into full-blown Xbox defense mode to put up a stink about me posting a little common sense in reply to someone that thinks everyone without Live has problems.
The only one that charges for online of the big three and PC (Minus an ever decreasing number of traditional MMOs) offers "free" games to its gold buyers.
And 360 fanboys are lining up to claim "hypocrisy" of playstation gamers over games offered with plus. As if PS3 doesn't offer separate games as F2P not attached to plus. Some people will never get basic logic past their thick skulls.
360 fans are not running around in PS3 articles trolling over the free games MSFT is giving them of has been for many months. Your comment doesn't make sense, you guys are in here attacking the very thing you been boasting about in a hypocrite manner.
First off, don't even dare pull out that troll nonsense. Because yeah, 360 fans are ALWAYS trolling PS3 news here.
If you want to literally ignore when 360 people do that, then that's your own call to ignorance.
And secondly, what do you mean "you guys"? I have all three of the current systems and my comments aren't "attacking" anyone (until this one calling YOU out anyway).
So maybe YOU need to made some sense. Either that or stop being blind.
What free games has Microsoft given? I see none, other than the XBL ones, which in comparison to PS+ are lacking, because for the same price you get all these big ass full games, and tons more. Not to mention legit F2P games like Dust coming up, DCUO, Kill zone MP, PS Home.
HammadTheOne MS gives away free games every year and you don't need Xbox Live to DL them. As for PSN+ stop paying for that subscription and see if you get to keep those games :)
no... that's what I thought. Like greenpowerz said "hypocrite"
@lodossrage "Because yeah, 360 fans are ALWAYS trolling PS3 news here." Uh... There are 5 Playstation trolls for every 1 Xbox troll. You really going to play that card on N4G?
It's a multiplayer game.....you would need xbl to play it anyways thus would already have xbl since you would need it for other multiplayer games. If you didn't already have xbl gold then even if the game was given to you free you still wouldn't be able to play it since you don't have xbl to play multiplayer games. I doubt xbla games would sway anyone who didn't already have a gold account would suddenly buy it for an xbla game.
I don't see where the oxymoron is.
Either way, I have xbl gold and I play a lot of multiplayer over it, happy wars will be a free game for me which I will play.
So similar to ps plus (except its prob a one time thing). Its a small bonus for gold members. If they made more stuff available i maybe would get xbl again. At least its a start though right?
Not suprised to see people pissed MS is doing something positive though. They could give away Halo 4 to every gold member and people would complain that they wanted the new Gears. If they gave Gears then they would want Forza.
People claim PS+ gives them free games even though they already have their $50 so I see no problem with XBL saying these games are free as you aren't paying for Gold to access these.
You are critiquing them for giving you more features yet praise the PS+ model? Come one now.
Which is why fanboys on BOTH sides need to shut up Because the anti argument to what you just said would be the fact that people from the other systems that didn't have PS Plus were saying it was a rip off because you didn't "keep" the games
Either way, this is a good sign. I havn't found the time or had any justification to renew my gold in a while, but this is still a good sign. Hopefully they aren't just planning on making F2P games, and will follow the PS+ model and offer free FULL games.
It's a win win situation in my eye. I was wondering when they would offer some of the cool perks that I get with being a PS+ member.
"I see no problem with XBL saying these games are free as you aren't paying for Gold to access these."
That's wrong. These games are free IF you have Gold. So you ARE paying for Gold to access them. Which makes it EXACTLY THE SAME as any free game you'd acquire through Plus.
That said, I'm glad Microsoft is doing this. If they make it a regular thing, it'd make Gold more worth it, though I still don't like the idea of having to pay to play online. But giving games to members is a good move.
So now you have no problem with MS saying the games are free? But when Sony was doing it with PS+ you and others were like "there not free! there not free!"
Now people are flipping the script and are like "well, sony always says it's free so it's ok and I see no problem with MS doing it now."
LMAO! Come on now!
In the end it is free (for both PS+ and Gold) as it is free with *membership*.
EDIT: @Below
It technically is F2P because you aren't paying for the game itself, but are paying for the Gold membership. Same applies to PS+ you aren't paying for the games itself, but for the PS+ membership.
It's like saying that F2P games for the PC aren't free because you have to pay for internet connection.
That had nothing to do with what I said though? Okay PS3 had HDMI and Wifi first but what does that have t do with XBL or did you feel the need to say that to justify why you have a PS3?
I have a ps3 cause I don't like Xbox never had never Will and we praise it because is an option to do ps+ not like xbl where u have to pay to play online and even download demos. My son had a 360 for a week and sold it at a pawn shop for 80.00
You mean like trophies and multiple console skus that we're not originally announced until after MS offered them? Then Sony for years confirming cross-chat was coming and then officially said it couldn't be done but that would have been another we didn't do first crap your spewing? Why does it matter who did what first?
The PSP had a home button months before the Xbox was even unveiled, yet Sony copied the idea from Microsoft? And Sony did the copying in the few days between when the 360 controller was first shown, and when the PS3 controller was first shown? Is there even any proof out there that the PS logo shown on the batarang controller, which looked exactly like a button, wasn't a button?
Out of that long list, you probably picked the worst example.
Copying a feature from a portable to a console isn't copying, but copying it from console to another console is?
Hilarious.
Fact is, whether it's a console or a portable doesn't make a bit of difference. The button does the exact same thing on both. By your backwards logic, trophies on Vita are a completely original concept that Sony thought up entirely on their own.
Just for the fun of it, let's assume that nonsense holds water...
You still didn't answer my question. Any proof that when it was unveiled for the PS3 just a few days after it was revealed for 360, that that button wasn't a button? Any proof that button wasn't there until MS revealed it on their controller?
You ASSUME Sony copied MS in the couple days between when the 360 controller and PS3 controller were unveiled. The reality of it is, you have no idea. And it's flat out stupid to assume that Sony got the idea from Microsoft, when they thought it up for their very own product years prior.
CPTN MITCHELL Are you kidding me??? All 3 of the console manufacturers copy from each others ideas and try to improve them. Whethers it's controllers, online services, user interfaces, perks, etc...
I'm so sick of the fanboys on this site playing that card. Seems Sony fans are the worst or at least most vocal on this site.
So you know. PSN Plus is Sony's way of countering XBL. By charging a subscription. Sony offers games and other content as an "incentive" to purchase a yearly subscription. Problem with that subscription is the moment you cancel it you lose all of the incentives you paid for. Which means that you are essentially "renting" the games.
"Problem with that subscription is the moment you cancel it you lose all of the incentives you paid for. Which means that you are essentially "renting" the games."
Its exactly the same. Xbl gold is essentially "renting" the right to play the online part of the game you already paid for, as soon as your gold runs out...no more cod bro teh Halos of war until you pay up.
PS+ is by far the better deal and completely OPTIONAL, MS knows they have to now start justifying their scam after sony has added so much value.
"not like xbl where u have to pay to play online and even download demos"
the last part of your statement proves you don't own nor have you ever own a 360. anyone knows you don't pay for demos AT ALL PERIOD and if you do list them so i can check since i have a 360 in my livingroom that doesn't have a gold account and see if they charge which they don't. but like you said your son sold his imaginary console.
you don't even need a gold menbership to download games including trial games which you play for free before you decide to buy them. something the ps3 including ps+ doesn't do.
if you don't like the 360 or paying for live i can respect that. but i call bullshit that you need a gold menebership for anything other than playing multi-player games and some of the services on there.
Edit: and why your on the subject of copting. sony copied the concept of paid for incentives for gametap which was on PC for years and still is to this day. gametap would allow you to play old arcade and console games from back in the day but limit some of the games unless you paid $9 a month and you could also download new and old games for free, but you need to pay to access all the good games.
so no sony's not original in their psn+ offering since they copied that from PC.
I gladly pay $100 a year for LIVE Xbox Live is an excellent service, worth every penny for those long nights of Halo,cod,forza,gears etc etc , and now FREE-TO PLAY? OMG nice move MICROSOFT!
Couldn't agree with you more. Not the $100 part though lol. Adding free to play games to an already great service leads to only bigger and better things. If this does turn into a PSN+ style of free games this is one of the additions to XBL in a long time. Now that there will be a web browser added in the fall on top of that and with the amount of money Microsoft pours into XBL there's no reason not to have XBL at this point. If your an Xbox owner anyway.
"So you would glady had your life savings over to MS?"
That's some of the worst spinning I have ever seen!
You already pay around £25/$40 a year (sub cards go for that at the moment here in the UK), may as well give them everything else! While you're at it, may as well give your car to your bank and first born to your ISP! /s
That is a difference I can see in the two old games I already have played and have no interest playing. With MS, it is new games. I may not like the games but at least it is something new to try.
But PS+ gives you full games to play, while at the moment we only have heard they are making games designed with the F2P model. There is definitely a difference, and hopefully this new program can evolve into what PS+ is offering.
Either way, I'll be renewing Gold when Halo 4 comes out, but depending on how this F2P model thingy works, I might consider buying more than 1 month at a time.
Ummm, PS has DCUO and that other free MMO game that you literally do not have to pay for. Yeah, PS + has free games too and this sounds similar, however I wonder what would happen if you cancelled gold.
Don't be disillusioned here Pimp. The ONLY reason MS is offering you anything additional is because Sony is doing this with PS+. If Sony was not doing this, MS would not have even considered this.
This is one example that shows why competition is good for the consumer.
@nodoze PS+ wasn't the first service to offer games for free with a membership with subcriptions. as i said before PC gamers was getting the same service for years with gametap. where you could also download free games just for signing up without paying anything but you was limited to certain old arcade/console games.
i do agree competition is good for gamers but PS+ isn't something original since it was already out on another platform.
Sure its called having a personal opinion which is a constitutional right that you dont seem to support.
I also believe that Playstation Plus is a better service in my own opinion.
LOL
By the way unlike the North Korean and Venezuelan dictator i respect the opinion of others even though i might not agree with them.
Edit: It amazes me how paranoid some people are by calling this site a web site run by Sony fanboys. All fanboys are horrible no matter if they are sheep, lemmings, cows or hermits they are all equally as bad. While i do think that its nice that Microsoft is offering you these games to play for free with gold in my opinion a free to play game shouldn't require a monthly subscription to play otherwise it isn't a F2P title. Best example of this on the PS3 is Dust 514 which doesn't require any type of subscription fee to play online which makes it a F2P game in my opinion.
There is nothing Microsoft can do aside from closing up shop that would please Sony fanboys. I'm not saying every Sony fan is to blame, but one look at the comments on this thread give a clear indication of what is wrong with this site in general.
Its free to play games, I'd look at it as a XBL+ as it were, free games for the price of Live.
I personally don't like "pay to win" games, I know its where we are headed, but that aspect is really just there to lure in non gamer's and families and casuals. That is why hardcore MMO fans absolutely hate free to play.
***"Its free to play games, I'd look at it as a XBL+ as it were, free games for the price of Live."***
No surprise you have this type of understanding now that Microsoft is doing it.
Edit @ below
LOL people ALWAYS come out in PS+ articles just point out that the games aren't really "free" all the time man. Now that it's happening in a MS related article it's all "of course the trolls come out because it's positive for MS."
***"the only stories that will get heat on this site that are Microsoft based are negative ones or ones where the trolls come out."***
So negative Sony article don't get heat? Negative Nintendo articles don't get heat? This site isn't as one sided as you MS apologists would like to believe.
I am a gamer, I pay for anything that I see as a value, which is why I'm a PS+ member as well as a Gold XBL member for over 7 years now.
The only thing I've found out by going to sites like this is that the people who only take one side in a console war will ALWAYS find an issue with what the other side is doing. No matter how minor the difference is, they will harp on it over and over and over again.
Half the comments in this section are by well known PS3 fanboys, I've said it before and I'll say it again, the only stories that will get heat on this site that are Microsoft based are negative ones or ones where the trolls come out. Post something about how Rare is dead and you'll see 400+ replies, post something on how Microsoft does something positive like offer free to play and the trolls come out.
As for me, I was stating it like this so that the PS3 fanboys on this thread could understand it, I know what I get for the price I pay for live and I gladly accept the meager fee, same for PS+ and the same for Nintendo's online should they decide to offer a premium service.
N4G fanboys are like all the different Republicans we have now - Tea Partiers, Occupiers, Birthers, Ron Paul's people. All of them want to be made out as a victim to the larger party. It's all BS.
You want game A for the xbox 360. Game A has a separate single player and online multiplayer campaign. You're like "sweet, I've been waiting for this game." You pay $60 for it. You want to play the online campaign right? Need Gold for that. So you pay the $60 (or whatever deal you find) to play the online as well. May only be the one time you paid $60, but the concept carries to every game. Thus you paid twice to play one game. And every single time you buy a game that has online you are paying twice for the full game. Because if you DON'T pay for Gold, you're getting half the content.
You can throw all the buzzwords about Live around all you want to, but in the end it comes down to the irrefutable fact that without paying for Live you are locked out of half the content of every game with any online component..
DragonKnight LMFAO. Are you a lawyer by chance? While yes I agree that you NEED XBL Gold to play "online" multiplayer. I don't feel locked out of anything.
I play as much offline as I do online. My kids and I don't need to go "online" to play multiplayer. In fact most of the time we play "offline".
Your concept has some truth to it. But it doesn't carry over to "every" game. You pay the "full" fee once a year and get access to IMHO a superior unified online gaming service in comparison to PSN or Steam. This is based on my own experience and that of my family.
Knowing your opinion already I know you are twisting this in line with your Pro Sony Anti Microsoft biased ways.
I just find it funny that Sony introduced a similar subscription based service and sugar coated it by offering "free" games that weren't selling any more along with themes and other perks and Sony fanboys think its the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's the same damn concept. Sell hardware and then milk the install base for additional money every year.
I wonder how well those "free" games will work once you cancel your subscription. I guess renting is ok in your book???
Sony, the Google/Samsung/BlockBuster/Net Flix/RedBox of the gaming industry.
U have a cheapass principle there there and also u should go back to school and take some basic math course or something. but seriously if people cant afford $4/month, I think u should worry about your financial issue than worry about games.
With that said, people do pay alot for the convenience like cell phone, tablet, etcc.. What xlive does is also about providing a convenient way to communicate with other gamers at a pretty affordable price. That what it does and it is pretty good at it.
@Pimpdaddy im not disagreeing that it is slightly better than psn. but slightly better doesnt equal 60$ a year to me buddy. all the 5 or so years ive had xbox i havnt paid once for gold. i just made new accounts for the 1 month trial, if i wanted to play a multiplayer game bad enough. sucks your only aloud to do that a few times per box though.
"I thought my 60 dollars was going to pay for a unified online gaming service." LMAO As if for playing online you didnt have to spend those 60 dollars. No matter how you try to spin it, without those 60 bucks youre not playing ANY game online. You pay once to take the disc home and if you want to access the online component of the game you bought you have to pay AGAIN. XBL to me is like a giant disc locked DLC. The content is in the disc but to access it you have to pay an aditional fee.
Just like i refuse to buy games with disc locked DLC i refuse to pay to access online component of games i bought so yeah a matter of principle specially when online gaming has always been free on any other gaming platform.
your paying 60$ to unlock the other halves of your games that you shouldnt have to pay, plain and simple, its free on every other platform. that 60$ could have went towards one extra game, or multiple used games, a new controller, etc.
the only way i can justify spending 60$ on xbox live is if they give me something of equal value, which they are finally doing so..with games.
"You're paying 60 dollars for a SUPERIOR online gaming service.
You're paying 50 dollars to RENT games that already stopped selling signficantly at retail.
Value is subjective.
People talk about Microsoft brain washing people to pay for XBL. But Sony just brain washed thier owners into paying for a rental service... "
Watch this, I'll do caps too!
You HAVE to pay 50$ to play online on Xbox. You CAN pay 50$ to get Exclusive content, early content, Cloud Storage, Auto Patching, and a large game library that if bought at retail would cost upwards of 100$ that you can enjoy while you're subscribed to the service.
So with the fact that one is necessary and the other is not cleared, the differences left between PSN and XBL are the name and XBL's Cross Game Chat. There is literally no technical advantage that justifies paying for one service over the other, other than Cross Game Chat. Is chatting worth 50$? Besides the fact that PSN's lack of this feature isn't a network issue but a hardware issue with the PS3.
They're both based on P2P connections! Neither Sony nor Microsoft are reinvesting Sub Fees into the network because everyones ISP's are doing the work. Why do you think PSN is still free? They're not losing money on it because the only thing they have to reinvest bandwidth in is the store, which sells content to pay for that!
I'm sorry, but the reality is, Microsoft is charging you twice for your internet. Stop paying XBL, lose the other half of ALL your games.(online) Stop paying PSN+ lose the bonus features and access games YOU DIDNT PURCHASE the + game library.
Final point. BOTH are companies, NOT friends. BOTH are out to make a dollar off of YOU. Whichever is your preference, just pay and PLAY.
actually you dont have to pay to play online a lot of games come with trials and every month live has free weekends on any game.
Gold also has cloud storage but thats not all that important. PS+ cost money and you dont have any say in what you do get. if you could get new games for it it would be a great service.
But I see no point in paying to rent games I dont want or already have. Dl take longer and also need to be installed.
"You're paying 60 dollars for a SUPERIOR online gaming service."
Not everyone. And even Microsoft knows that.
If Live's "superiority" was truly worth the money, the features that set it apart from PSN would sell themselves. Microsoft wouldn't need to block you from basic features like online play and being able to download a demo on day one just to get you to pay. Microsoft uses all those free PSN features to sell you that "superiority". The fact that Microsoft does that speaks volumes about their confidence in the appeal of the features that set it apart from PSN.
If you shop around you can get it even cheaper than that. Over the past couple of months I've seen TONS of 12 month subscription cards go for £25 here in the UK, which is just under $40.
Personally I still don't bother as I don't play any online games on my Xbox, but £25 is hardly worth moaning about especially now there will essentially be some free-ish games.
What I love is seeing people on here treating this news as if somehow it is bad news. Free original games being offered from a paid service is called value add... value add is a good thing people. Just like PSN+ giving free games or Steam Sales for incredibly cheap games... these services are trying to give value to their usage.
MS I am happy to see seems to have felt the heat from Sony's PSN+ offerings and are looking to something similar yet slightly different. Competition once again is helping to shape the console industry...its a good thing.
And for those crying "its not really free"...yes you are right. Just like PSN+, XBLA costs money... your reward for paying for the service will now include some free games ...just like PSN+ and it will be tied to your account status....just like PSN+.
"With the ongoing success of the model on PC, and the interest from both our consumers and our partners looking to explore this system on console"...they have just addressed the fact that PC already has this service for free and not paid.
Heck PS+ has had this service for a while, whilst offering better games (more each month)and free themes on top.
Funny, reading damn near 100% of the comments here and no one has even commented on the actual game that this article refers too.
Ascend looks really interesting, almost like Dark Souls with the whole online aspect of gameplay. And the fact that this has mobile capabilities furthers MS's objective of unifying their platforms.
Although I do agree these are not "free to play" in its essence since you need an XBLG membership to play them...it is nice to see them adding additional value to the current XBLG model.
Normally, the big issue of XBLG is being able to play online and the party chat system. Tossing in some "free" games does make it more appealing. Hopefully they toss in some good ones.
I don't see how tossing some bonus content to the current gold member base is a bad thing, which you would think it is given the number of negative comments on here.
So this is a bonus like ps plus on how you get access to this content if you have the additional service. Wherein a true f2p would be more like lol where there is no upfront cost to play. In others words for these to be true f2p games that would have to be available to xbl silver members.
Either way it good to see that there adding more game content to xbl members.
Happy wars looks fun, with f2p games I usually set a budget. Which would be around the same price that the game would have cost when it's not f2p. $15-20 or so.
I was thinking of that same model for when that ascend title comes out. I was prepared to pay standard arcade game pricing, so if its a fun game, I am open to paying that amount for content
Now - Join us on Filmwatch as we celebrate the release of Star Trek Into Darkness this month with a must-have collectible for Star Trek fans! | Promoted post
0°
10°
10°
10°
Ad 
10°
Real F2P games are on the PC, 2 of which i play are:
TF2, Dota 2. Both of those are true examples of F2P. Yes the community and Valve do make money by selling in game items, maps. However its all cosmetic, its not like pay to win.
I think MS & Sony need to learn lessons from Valve. Yet i dont think its possible since both take any opportunity they can to milk the console crowd, MS more Sony a bit less.
F2P games on PC require that you also pay. You pay your internet service provider. Xbox live is not dissimilar to this. You still pay your ISP and then you pay for the portal into the Xbox live environment. This is extra, but not specifically for any one game, its the entire xbox live environment you are paying for. Then within the xbox live environment you can have pay games or F2P games.
If you do not like the xbox live environment then you can choose not to pay for it. So I am not sure why anyone gets too upset about it.
PS3 you can choose to purchase plus which in return gives you games to help provide value for this annual fee. to me they have done this well and kept adding more and more value as time has passed. Like all platforms including PC they are looking for different ways to guarantee revenue to improve their product AND make money. (just like most companies that make products do)
x-box obviously realized they needed to add more value and chose to copy PS3 (or had the idea themselves who cares) and are giving games away again to help justify the reason to pay these costs. I still think they are worse for forcing you to pay something to play online but that's just IMO.
PC is no different but because it's a little less expensive to develop for and you don't have to pay anyone for the right to put an application on this system they have different ways to ask for your dollar and can promote their companies in different ways.
Everyone move on pay for the service if you see the value but don't try twist shit to seem like something its not.
Dude your meaning of milking consumers is totally different to mine.
Saying that F2P games ARE free despite Gold charges is like saying that paying someone for free samples is free.
Think about this:
* Do you not have to have a device to play the game on?
* A TV?
* Pay for electricity?
* Internet service?
So in all respect, it ain't free to play for anyone on any platform!
However, it is free to play if you meet the requirements. Now is that so hard to understand or do we have to twist it in all sorts of weird ways to justify an agenda?
Let's also consider playing sports in a park isn't free, you'll still need to buy a ball.
Nitpicking on the aspects of "free" is about as retarded as the concepts presented in this thread. We all know that they mean 'free' as in you don't have to pay anything extra if you already have access to the service.
Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2 from Valve are very good examples. All in game purchases are cosmetic or audio related. You get no advantage over someone else because you spent your money.
Well you don't pay for the game to play it. LOL even without XBL's gold fee you still have to buy the console to play the free game, you have to pay your power bill, buy a TV, pay for internet.
Marked your comment as trolling.
That Ascend game was shown at E3? LOL I was thinking World Of Warcraft when I seen it at E3 based on It's gameplay mechanics and graphics.
Can't wait to see how this model works out.
whatever, double standards as usual.
Because that would mean you have a double standard as well.
Free online is benefit of psn, not ps+ because u do pay for ps+
The whole "If you can't afford it..." thing gets really old.
I could double my internet speed for $5 a month. I could get a better TV package for $5 more per month. I could get a Netflix subscription for $8.
Everybody knows you have to draw the line somewhere. $5 here and $5 there adds up. If I bought everything that was "not really too much extra" that I wanted, I'd be spending an extra $18 each month. $23 with XBL Gold.
What gets really old is PS3ers telling 360 players what they should and shouldn't purchase and what they should and shouldn't be mad at MS for.
Bottom line...MS is providing a service for a VERY low price and the demand for that service is there.
"Everybody knows you have to draw the line somewhere. $5 here and $5 there adds up. If I bought everything that was "not really too much extra" that I wanted, I'd be spending an extra $18 each month. $23 with XBL Gold."
That is simply your problem. Prioritize the costs in your life and make the choices. Me like most other xboxers can afford $5 a month on top of everything else. You clearly can't get that.
You may think its old to bring up the affordability of XBL, but the funniest thing happens every time something about XBL pops up...you guys turn it into a circle jirk about how XBL should be free...even if the post has nothing to do with it.
You know what else gets old? When fanboys like you take common sense as if it's some attack on your precious Xbox Live.
I wasn't telling you not to pay for it. I wasn't telling you it wasn't worth it. I was telling someone that everyone who chooses not to pay for Live isn't some dirt poor bum that shouldn't be playing video games in the first place, like he suggested.
You feeling the need to defend XBL against me, when all I'm doing is pointing out that Live isn't for everyone, has nothing to do with "bigger issues", and simply isn't worth it to some people says a lot about you. What does it say? You can't handle reality when it conflicts with your Xbox love.
I never said me not paying for Live is a problem. I have prioritized. Buying more games comes before paying for a feature that's free elsewhere. So does getting a better internet speed. So does a lot of things. I'm perfectly fine with the fact that I'm not paying money for something I can get for free from several other places. You actually seem to have more of a problem with it than I do.
It's funny watching you try to distract from my point as you ramble on about what "us guys" do, but the fact is, everything I said was fact. Not everyone who doesn't have Live has financial problems. But of course, you've gone into full-blown Xbox defense mode to put up a stink about me posting a little common sense in reply to someone that thinks everyone without Live has problems.
Sorry reality bothers you.
The only one that charges for online of the big three and PC (Minus an ever decreasing number of traditional MMOs) offers "free" games to its gold buyers.
And 360 fanboys are lining up to claim "hypocrisy" of playstation gamers over games offered with plus. As if PS3 doesn't offer separate games as F2P not attached to plus. Some people will never get basic logic past their thick skulls.
Any time anyone mentions a charge for XBox Live, inevitably PS+ is mentioned.
It's like you people don't know the differences between the services, just they're on two different consoles and they cost money.
I didn't know oxymoron's could talk.
@lodossrage
360 fans are not running around in PS3 articles trolling over the free games MSFT is giving them of has been for many months. Your comment doesn't make sense, you guys are in here attacking the very thing you been boasting about in a hypocrite manner.
People suddenly need PS+ for DCUO, Freerealms, Dust 514, and a lot of PS Home games? ROFLMAO!!!
Wait a minute
First off, don't even dare pull out that troll nonsense. Because yeah, 360 fans are ALWAYS trolling PS3 news here.
If you want to literally ignore when 360 people do that, then that's your own call to ignorance.
And secondly, what do you mean "you guys"? I have all three of the current systems and my comments aren't "attacking" anyone (until this one calling YOU out anyway).
So maybe YOU need to made some sense. Either that or stop being blind.
no... that's what I thought. Like greenpowerz said "hypocrite"
@lodossrage "Because yeah, 360 fans are ALWAYS trolling PS3 news here." Uh... There are 5 Playstation trolls for every 1 Xbox troll. You really going to play that card on N4G?
But nice tr(y)oll.
I don't see where the oxymoron is.
Either way, I have xbl gold and I play a lot of multiplayer over it, happy wars will be a free game for me which I will play.
+bub for intelligence!
Otherwise the oxymoron is as big as the moon.
Not suprised to see people pissed MS is doing something positive though. They could give away Halo 4 to every gold member and people would complain that they wanted the new Gears. If they gave Gears then they would want Forza.
No matter how hard you try, you can't make everyone happy. And then there will be the ones that think they're entitled the world.
The best they can do is put a good foot forward.
XBL Gold makes you pay to play game that's already free.
Don't really see the similarity. Meanwhile F2P games on the PS3 don't cost gamers anything extra to play them.
You are critiquing them for giving you more features yet praise the PS+ model? Come one now.
Because the anti argument to what you just said would be the fact that people from the other systems that didn't have PS Plus were saying it was a rip off because you didn't "keep" the games
It's a win win situation in my eye. I was wondering when they would offer some of the cool perks that I get with being a PS+ member.
That's wrong. These games are free IF you have Gold. So you ARE paying for Gold to access them. Which makes it EXACTLY THE SAME as any free game you'd acquire through Plus.
That said, I'm glad Microsoft is doing this. If they make it a regular thing, it'd make Gold more worth it, though I still don't like the idea of having to pay to play online. But giving games to members is a good move.
So now you have no problem with MS saying the games are free? But when Sony was doing it with PS+ you and others were like "there not free! there not free!"
Now people are flipping the script and are like "well, sony always says it's free so it's ok and I see no problem with MS doing it now."
LMAO! Come on now!
In the end it is free (for both PS+ and Gold) as it is free with *membership*.
EDIT: @Below
It technically is F2P because you aren't paying for the game itself, but are paying for the Gold membership. Same applies to PS+ you aren't paying for the games itself, but for the PS+ membership.
It's like saying that F2P games for the PC aren't free because you have to pay for internet connection.
these are supposed to be F2P games. Which means there shouldn't be a fee to access them.
Like DCUO, Free Realms, Dust 514, etc. THOSE are f2p games. Games that operate off micro transaction and/ or ads alone.
The games you get with plus aren't F2P games, but game rentals.
XBL is a flat fee for the same service everytime.
Thus being the difference.
CPTN MITCHELL, why are you ignoring the LONG list of features on the PS3 that were heavily influenced by that which was first originally on the 360?
You seem a little hypocritical.
Out of that long list, you probably picked the worst example.
My argument was that the 360 controller had it first before Sony had it on the ps3 controller.
It's still a valid point of Sony taking what was seen on the 360 and implemented onto the ps3.
Really? Really!?
Copying a feature from a portable to a console isn't copying, but copying it from console to another console is?
Hilarious.
Fact is, whether it's a console or a portable doesn't make a bit of difference. The button does the exact same thing on both. By your backwards logic, trophies on Vita are a completely original concept that Sony thought up entirely on their own.
Just for the fun of it, let's assume that nonsense holds water...
You still didn't answer my question. Any proof that when it was unveiled for the PS3 just a few days after it was revealed for 360, that that button wasn't a button? Any proof that button wasn't there until MS revealed it on their controller?
You ASSUME Sony copied MS in the couple days between when the 360 controller and PS3 controller were unveiled. The reality of it is, you have no idea. And it's flat out stupid to assume that Sony got the idea from Microsoft, when they thought it up for their very own product years prior.
Are you kidding me??? All 3 of the console manufacturers copy from each others ideas and try to improve them. Whethers it's controllers, online services, user interfaces, perks, etc...
I'm so sick of the fanboys on this site playing that card. Seems Sony fans are the worst or at least most vocal on this site.
So you know. PSN Plus is Sony's way of countering XBL. By charging a subscription. Sony offers games and other content as an "incentive" to purchase a yearly subscription. Problem with that subscription is the moment you cancel it you lose all of the incentives you paid for. Which means that you are essentially "renting" the games.
Same concept different execution.
Its exactly the same. Xbl gold is essentially "renting" the right to play the online part of the game you already paid for, as soon as your gold runs out...no more cod bro teh Halos of war until you pay up.
PS+ is by far the better deal and completely OPTIONAL, MS knows they have to now start justifying their scam after sony has added so much value.
the last part of your statement proves you don't own nor have you ever own a 360. anyone knows you don't pay for demos AT ALL PERIOD and if you do list them so i can check since i have a 360 in my livingroom that doesn't have a gold account and see if they charge which they don't. but like you said your son sold his imaginary console.
you don't even need a gold menbership to download games including trial games which you play for free before you decide to buy them. something the ps3 including ps+ doesn't do.
if you don't like the 360 or paying for live i can respect that. but i call bullshit that you need a gold menebership for anything other than playing multi-player games and some of the services on there.
Edit: and why your on the subject of copting. sony copied the concept of paid for incentives for gametap which was on PC for years and still is to this day. gametap would allow you to play old arcade and console games from back in the day but limit some of the games unless you paid $9 a month and you could also download new and old games for free, but you need to pay to access all the good games.
so no sony's not original in their psn+ offering since they copied that from PC.
http://originals.gametap.co...
" like they said the truth hurts" yeah but lies ruin credibility and hurts worst.
I enjoy + for the cloud saves & discounts, I love PSN games and I save much more every year with plus discounts than without.
Xbox Live is an excellent service, worth every penny for those long nights of Halo,cod,forza,gears etc etc , and now FREE-TO PLAY? OMG nice move MICROSOFT!
That's some of the worst spinning I have ever seen!
You already pay around £25/$40 a year (sub cards go for that at the moment here in the UK), may as well give them everything else! While you're at it, may as well give your car to your bank and first born to your ISP! /s
You mean like Dust 514.
Either way, I'll be renewing Gold when Halo 4 comes out, but depending on how this F2P model thingy works, I might consider buying more than 1 month at a time.
Sure, it's not the most ideal, but it is still pretty good picking.
I'm not trying to sound like a fanboy, I just think it would be great if they gave us full games, But if you insist,
I suppose we can just take what we are given, I mean, us consumers have no right to ask for more considering we aren't given them any money /s
On topic: Adding content to XBL can NOT be a bad thing. Always good to hear that XBL Gold members are getting increased value for thier subscribtion.
This is one example that shows why competition is good for the consumer.
PS+ wasn't the first service to offer games for free with a membership with subcriptions. as i said before PC gamers was getting the same service for years with gametap. where you could also download free games just for signing up without paying anything but you was limited to certain old arcade/console games.
i do agree competition is good for gamers but PS+ isn't something original since it was already out on another platform.
I also believe that Playstation Plus is a better service in my own opinion.
LOL
By the way unlike the North Korean and Venezuelan dictator i respect the opinion of others even though i might not agree with them.
Edit: It amazes me how paranoid some people are by calling this site a web site run by Sony fanboys. All fanboys are horrible no matter if they are sheep, lemmings, cows or hermits they are all equally as bad. While i do think that its nice that Microsoft is offering you these games to play for free with gold in my opinion a free to play game shouldn't require a monthly subscription to play otherwise it isn't a F2P title. Best example of this on the PS3 is Dust 514 which doesn't require any type of subscription fee to play online which makes it a F2P game in my opinion.
Its free to play games, I'd look at it as a XBL+ as it were, free games for the price of Live.
I personally don't like "pay to win" games, I know its where we are headed, but that aspect is really just there to lure in non gamer's and families and casuals. That is why hardcore MMO fans absolutely hate free to play.
No surprise you have this type of understanding now that Microsoft is doing it.
Edit @ below
LOL people ALWAYS come out in PS+ articles just point out that the games aren't really "free" all the time man. Now that it's happening in a MS related article it's all "of course the trolls come out because it's positive for MS."
***"the only stories that will get heat on this site that are Microsoft based are negative ones or ones where the trolls come out."***
So negative Sony article don't get heat? Negative Nintendo articles don't get heat? This site isn't as one sided as you MS apologists would like to believe.
The only thing I've found out by going to sites like this is that the people who only take one side in a console war will ALWAYS find an issue with what the other side is doing. No matter how minor the difference is, they will harp on it over and over and over again.
Half the comments in this section are by well known PS3 fanboys, I've said it before and I'll say it again, the only stories that will get heat on this site that are Microsoft based are negative ones or ones where the trolls come out. Post something about how Rare is dead and you'll see 400+ replies, post something on how Microsoft does something positive like offer free to play and the trolls come out.
As for me, I was stating it like this so that the PS3 fanboys on this thread could understand it, I know what I get for the price I pay for live and I gladly accept the meager fee, same for PS+ and the same for Nintendo's online should they decide to offer a premium service.
Yet they can buy multiple $60.00 games in that same YEAR.
Please explain ^
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the 300 dollars I have spent on Xbox 360 games this year was really 600 dollars...
You want game A for the xbox 360. Game A has a separate single player and online multiplayer campaign. You're like "sweet, I've been waiting for this game." You pay $60 for it. You want to play the online campaign right? Need Gold for that. So you pay the $60 (or whatever deal you find) to play the online as well. May only be the one time you paid $60, but the concept carries to every game. Thus you paid twice to play one game. And every single time you buy a game that has online you are paying twice for the full game. Because if you DON'T pay for Gold, you're getting half the content.
You can throw all the buzzwords about Live around all you want to, but in the end it comes down to the irrefutable fact that without paying for Live you are locked out of half the content of every game with any online component..
Microsoft, the Apple of the gaming industry.
Hmmm, that logic has fail written all over it. ONE payment does not equel every single game paid for twice.
LMFAO. Are you a lawyer by chance? While yes I agree that you NEED XBL Gold to play "online" multiplayer. I don't feel locked out of anything.
I play as much offline as I do online. My kids and I don't need to go "online" to play multiplayer. In fact most of the time we play "offline".
Your concept has some truth to it. But it doesn't carry over to "every" game. You pay the "full" fee once a year and get access to IMHO a superior unified online gaming service in comparison to PSN or Steam. This is based on my own experience and that of my family.
Knowing your opinion already I know you are twisting this in line with your Pro Sony Anti Microsoft biased ways.
I just find it funny that Sony introduced a similar subscription based service and sugar coated it by offering "free" games that weren't selling any more along with themes and other perks and Sony fanboys think its the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's the same damn concept. Sell hardware and then milk the install base for additional money every year.
I wonder how well those "free" games will work once you cancel your subscription. I guess renting is ok in your book???
Sony, the Google/Samsung/BlockBuster/Net Flix/RedBox of the gaming industry.
U have a cheapass principle there there and also u should go back to school and take some basic math course or something. but seriously if people cant afford $4/month, I think u should worry about your financial issue than worry about games.
With that said, people do pay alot for the convenience like cell phone, tablet, etcc.. What xlive does is also about providing a convenient way to communicate with other gamers at a pretty affordable price. That what it does and it is pretty good at it.
Just like i refuse to buy games with disc locked DLC i refuse to pay to access online component of games i bought so yeah a matter of principle specially when online gaming has always been free on any other gaming platform.
the only way i can justify spending 60$ on xbox live is if they give me something of equal value, which they are finally doing so..with games.
You're paying 50 dollars to RENT games that already stopped selling signficantly at retail.
Value is subjective.
People talk about Microsoft brain washing people to pay for XBL. But Sony just brain washed thier owners into paying for a rental service...
Same concept. Different execution. Residual income from existing user base!!!
"You're paying 60 dollars for a SUPERIOR online gaming service.
You're paying 50 dollars to RENT games that already stopped selling signficantly at retail.
Value is subjective.
People talk about Microsoft brain washing people to pay for XBL. But Sony just brain washed thier owners into paying for a rental service... "
Watch this, I'll do caps too!
You HAVE to pay 50$ to play online on Xbox.
You CAN pay 50$ to get Exclusive content, early content, Cloud Storage, Auto Patching, and a large game library that if bought at retail would cost upwards of 100$ that you can enjoy while you're subscribed to the service.
So with the fact that one is necessary and the other is not cleared, the differences left between PSN and XBL are the name and XBL's Cross Game Chat.
There is literally no technical advantage that justifies paying for one service over the other, other than Cross Game Chat. Is chatting worth 50$? Besides the fact that PSN's lack of this feature isn't a network issue but a hardware issue with the PS3.
They're both based on P2P connections!
Neither Sony nor Microsoft are reinvesting Sub Fees into the network because everyones ISP's are doing the work. Why do you think PSN is still free? They're not losing money on it because the only thing they have to reinvest bandwidth in is the store, which sells content to pay for that!
I'm sorry, but the reality is, Microsoft is charging you twice for your internet.
Stop paying XBL, lose the other half of ALL your games.(online)
Stop paying PSN+ lose the bonus features and access games YOU DIDNT PURCHASE the + game library.
Final point.
BOTH are companies, NOT friends.
BOTH are out to make a dollar off of YOU.
Whichever is your preference, just pay and PLAY.
BTW like my use of caps?
Gold also has cloud storage but thats not all that important. PS+ cost money and you dont have any say in what you do get. if you could get new games for it it would be a great service.
But I see no point in paying to rent games I dont want or already have. Dl take longer and also need to be installed.
Live also has way more content.
"You're paying 60 dollars for a SUPERIOR online gaming service."
Not everyone. And even Microsoft knows that.
If Live's "superiority" was truly worth the money, the features that set it apart from PSN would sell themselves. Microsoft wouldn't need to block you from basic features like online play and being able to download a demo on day one just to get you to pay. Microsoft uses all those free PSN features to sell you that "superiority". The fact that Microsoft does that speaks volumes about their confidence in the appeal of the features that set it apart from PSN.
Personally I still don't bother as I don't play any online games on my Xbox, but £25 is hardly worth moaning about especially now there will essentially be some free-ish games.
MS I am happy to see seems to have felt the heat from Sony's PSN+ offerings and are looking to something similar yet slightly different. Competition once again is helping to shape the console industry...its a good thing.
And for those crying "its not really free"...yes you are right. Just like PSN+, XBLA costs money... your reward for paying for the service will now include some free games ...just like PSN+ and it will be tied to your account status....just like PSN+.
Heck PS+ has had this service for a while, whilst offering better games (more each month)and free themes on top.
Ascend looks really interesting, almost like Dark Souls with the whole online aspect of gameplay. And the fact that this has mobile capabilities furthers MS's objective of unifying their platforms.
Anyway, Ascend really does look interesting. I'll keep it on my radar.
Normally, the big issue of XBLG is being able to play online and the party chat system. Tossing in some "free" games does make it more appealing. Hopefully they toss in some good ones.
I don't see how tossing some bonus content to the current gold member base is a bad thing, which you would think it is given the number of negative comments on here.
Either way it good to see that there adding more game content to xbl members.