Xbox Live has changed a fair bit since its release but, arguably, not always for the better. Ben writes of his frustration at "your mum" insults being rapped at him, and the betrayal of XBL's purpose.
can someone clarify for me, did you have to pay fee on the original xbox to play xbox live. i was a GameCube & PS2 guy back in the day.
Yeah and it was real basic. Live has changed and innovated so much over the years. Live brought online entertainment like movies, music, games, apps, and marketplace to everyone.
I agree. Regardless of that, Microsoft still charge you for things that are free everywhere else. That goes beyond gaming if I'm being honest: Facebook, Twitter, Netflix and all other apps. It's insulting that they hold these otherwise free to access services behind XBL. Netflix, in particular - you're already paying for that! I don't know any other company that charges you each year to access an array of apps, especially ones that should be free to everyone. The service itself is great, unified, solid - don't get me wrong - but paying just to access games you've already bought to simply play online should not cost what they charge you. MS certainly don't need that money for network upkeep, so don't bring up that they do. Charging for advanced features, would be a fairer choice for gamers. Currently, you either pay for access to half of all your games, or you don't. Not a real choice. I think people need to think about it quite carefully to consider that if Microsoft have already raised the cost of entry to their online, what's stopping them from doing it again and again and again, if they know people will pay for it unquestionably because it's the only way for them to play with their friends (not because they think Party Chat and XGC is worth $60 per year)? We'll see how the situation plays out as Nintendo offers their service (for free? Probably) with a strong focus on community features as we've seen from their presentations - and as Sony offers more value with PS+, improves their network services for PS Vita & PS4 to match XBL, whilst keeping online free too. Vita's online is free, and so will PS4 be. I can imagine, the differences will only make XBL stand out stronger for what it charges you for. I'll just put it out there now - MS would gain so much more market share if they just let you play games online for free. I would seriously consider the next Xbox if that were the case. Do it Microsoft - just do it!
that's why I use a PC. Steam is free, and it can multitask basically everything with good enough specs.
Looks like it was a different experience in england as i remember the 1st game (or one of the 1st) to implement xboxlive on the 1st xbox was that mech game (can't remember the name)...but anyhow, his complaint's are not worldwide as i didn't have a problem with gears 2... Xboxlive doesn't really appeal to me because i encounter people talking non-sense 95% of the time. The same non-sense that the writer claims he misses... The only times i play multiplayer in any game is when i play one of my best friend's that lives across the country. Other than that, playing people i never met makes me a little uncomfortable. Not to mention the countless kids that argue with their moms and siblings while they play... sure i can mute them but at this rate i might as well mute everyone which doesn't help because if you refuse to talk to anyone, they either quit or kick you out, so no, it's not good to play together...at least not for me... As for the apps, i do believe you can access those apps if you're a silver member, which is free.
@DigitalRaptor: "The service itself is great, unified, solid - don't get me wrong - but paying just to access games you've already bought to simply play online should not cost what they charge you. MS certainly don't need that money for network upkeep, so don't bring up that they do. Charging for advanced features, would be a fairer choice for gamers. Currently, you either pay for access to half of all your games, or you don't. Not a real choice." Doesn't it speak for itself? When you have a competitor that offers a similar service for free, supposed more hardware features and more exclusives, yet people are still willing to pay to use Xbox Live Gold every year. I believe a large section of the people have voted! I can sell stuff on Craigslist for free, but I still use eBay! Because there is feature parity (which it isn't on PSN and XBL), still doesn't mean the reach or the community is the same. If you played online a lot with a lot of friends, you would know exactly why Xbox Live is chosen!
More power to you if you like to pay to play online but with a family to support and limited amount of time I just can't. Cross game chat is a huge reason why many people pay and I hope both Nintendo and Sony offer it with their next home consoles. One thing I don't like is when other systems offer something for free why do we have to ay for it on xblive? I just can not see xblive being a premium service forever I think Sony will give MS a run for their money with ps4 and with psn:plus already a better service IMO. It's only a matter of time before cross game chat will end up with ps4 than MS won't have a real argument when it comes to gamers. I feel like as someone who bought xbox360 at launch we were the consumers MS went after but than over the last 2-3 years they have totally forgotten about us and cared about casual market. My choice next time around will be wii-u and ps4. I know any will offer a lot of exclusives and improved psn and the chance to p,ay Nintendo first party games in HD also sounds gear compare to another halo or gears. I hope phil Harrison improves MS game studios because he is one of the main reason why Sony have so many studios
Basically MS have stagnated on the issue of Live, back when 360 launced the price tag was justified now PSN has really closed the gap and now imo the price isn't worth even a quarter of the service when you compare it with psn.
Microsoft has set the bar this generation for online, if you look back at the Dreamcast, it was clear that they felt like Sony would lag behind in the online department and it was true. Dreamcast launched with a built in modem, PS2 did not. Sony didn't really focus on the online aspects of the PS3, PSN is complicated and not very aesthetically pleasing. They haven't updated the looks of PSN since it launched over 6 years ago. Its decent if you are just looking for a bare bones online experience, but I pay for Xbox Live as a premium service and that quality is unmatched in my opinion. In almost 8 years as a customer I've never once not been able to log into Xbox Live, not once! That speaks to the quality of the service. If your a serious gamer, why wouldn't you want the best online service available?
Payed for XBL back in the day on Xbox & still pay for Xbl today on 360 . will continue to do so, have no issues about doing so guess it just preference.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.