Try our new beta!Click here
Submitted by DeeZee 1170d ago | opinion piece

Let's Be Honest, Xbox Live Gold Has Become a Huge Ripoff

GR's DeShaun Zollicoffer writes:

Xbox Live didn’t have any real competition when it hit the scene. PlayStation Network wasn’t around and online gaming was the last thing on Nintendo’s mind. Sure, a decent amount of PS2 games worked online and the GameCube had games like Phantasy Star Online, but both consoles lacked a unified online service.

Fast-forward 10 years later — we have PSN and the recently launched Nintendo Network. These services let you play games online, use Netflix, watch videos on YouTube, and connect with people on your friends list. It’s free to connect to these services through your console provided you have an Internet connection and a Netflix subscription. (Xbox 360, Xbox LIVE)

« 1 2 3 4 »
NYC_Gamer  +   1170d ago | Well said
MS will charge long as people are willing to pay
Akuma-   1170d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(16)
NeverEnding1989  +   1170d ago
Unfortunately, Sony or Nintendo have a ways to go before they catch Xbox Live so until then I'm paying $30 a year for Live. IMO PS+ has forced M$ to reevaluate Live for next gen. I'm excited to see what they come up with.

Everything's better with friends :D

Well, except singleplayer games first time through. Which only represents 1% of my total game play time.
#1.2 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(29) | Disagree(104) | Report | Reply
MAJ0R  +   1170d ago
That's why I love Steam. You don't have to pay for any service, especially in order to get good deals and F2P games. Sales are way better than Playstation Plus or Xbox Live as well. So I think in general paid console services have become a huge ripoff.
HammadTheBeast  +   1170d ago | Well said
Wait.... catch up to what? Party chat? Ok fine. But how about tons of new games for free, with diverse choices every month? How about discounts, betas, packages, and overall goodness? How about cloud saves, awesome F2P games and loads of other things?
jessupj  +   1170d ago
While Sony has dedicated servers for almost all their first party games, it's actually MS that's been playing catch up this entire gen.

Unless of course you think the tiny extra bells and whistles are more important than actually playing the game.
flankhim  +   1170d ago
Dang dudes its not like we are doing a paper route and getting $30 a week. A couple hours of real work will get you a year of online playtime. Fork it up you cheap bastards!
EVILDEAD360  +   1170d ago
'Unfortunately, Sony or Nintendo have a ways to go before they catch Xbox Live so until then I'm paying $30 a year for Live. IMO PS+ has forced M$ to reevaluate Live for next gen. I'm excited to see what they come up with.'

Again as I stated, if your a fan of Live and are a part of the millions of core 360 gamers that game daily and love what Live offers then most likely you arent in the audience screaming that Live is worthless.

IMO Xbox Live is the best console online this gen, but that doesnt take away from PSN at all. From the days I picked up my PS3 Slim, I bought games like Demon Souls and UC2 day one, and gladly played online for free.

People who only have one console enjoy what that console offers whether it's Gold on the 360 or Plus on the PS3.

But, I do disagree with the thought that PSN plus is going to make MS 'reeavaluate' what is offered next gen when it doesnt even put pressure on what Live is even doing this gen. But it definately provides a great incentive to subscribe if you already own a PS3.

But, I'm with you it's going to be interesting what Sony and MS decide in regards to what come next.

SilentNegotiator  +   1170d ago

So your point is that people who aren't fans aren't fans? Wowie, you really justified XBL there!


I'm still only seeing the "justifications" that...."It's only X a month after I buy it on sale! Getting ripped off a little is okay by me!" (X being a number based on the breaking down of long sub times, not actual per month rates), Chat, "Anyone who disagrees is a pstree fanboi!", and "It's popular, and thus is good and justified".
#1.2.6 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(7) | Report
Imalwaysright  +   1170d ago
"if your a fan of Live and are a part of the millions of core 360 gamers that game daily and love what Live offers" I have a hard time believing that someone "loves" something that is free on every platform. Maybe im giving to much credit to the human race but i dont think that anyone is stupid enough to gladly be ripped off because that is exactly what Live is, a rip off.

Online play is free on every platform so why the hell does MS charge for it? What exactly is MS charging 360 users for? Nintendo, Sony and Valve do it for free. Why can these companies offer free online but MS cant? I have no doubt in my mind that MS charges for live because they know that 360 users have no choice but to pay if they want to play online. MS is taking advantage of 360 owners because they can. Just another case where this industry fucks the consumer.
#1.2.7 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(4) | Report
pixelsword  +   1170d ago
I like XBL but in my heart of hearts I know to me it's not worth paying for; if my friends have it, then I'll play it; if not, the I don't, not when I play PC and PS3 for free.

I don't *need* to have my friends online to have fun in a game; that's the games job.
#1.2.8 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(2) | Report
DarkHeroZX  +   1170d ago
lol all sony is missing is cross chat which is a limitation of the ps3's ram pool not the network.

But please tell me what features live has that I must pay to have it? I don't know of any.
#1.2.9 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(5) | Report
Cam977  +   1170d ago
To me it's always been a ripoff, however; the introduction of the redesigned PS+ has brought that issue to light and exposed how extortionate it truly is.
#1.2.10 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(4) | Report
tee_bag242  +   1170d ago
Online should be free. You kiddies are fooling yourself trying to justify paying for online. Finally after 6 years most of my friends (and me) have migrated over to steam and/or PSN where online is free, the way it should be.
Party chat is great but not worth $70 (oz) per year. Screw paying for online.
FriedGoat  +   1169d ago
The main point is, If I'm using MY internet connection to host online games, why is Microsoft charging me to do this? I don't use any of the other crap. Peer to peer online play is free everywhere but Xboxlive, If I want to connect to somebody I pay my ISP for that.
s45gr32  +   1169d ago
Explain what Sony and Nintendo need to catch up. Sony already offers free games, cloud saves, and the communication features are fine it even includes social services integration into say games like youtube or facebook even twitter was added to the uncharted series............
Consoldtobots  +   1169d ago
I let my xbox live subscription lapse nearly 2 years ago. Haven't missed it one bit. To each his own though. I really don't care what other people do with their money no matter how foolish.

btw the real issue here is that part of the industry that likes Microsoft's online gaming business model of transferring the cost of multiplayer support for their titles to the end user in order to reduce their cost and maximize their profits. Just because THEY think it's a good thing doesn't mean it is. Im being optimistic here about the relationship between MS and game developers. The fact that alot of titles have p2p online says they are just pocketing the money.
#1.2.14 (Edited 1169d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report
Picnic  +   1170d ago
Yes- and by doing so they have made it very likely that I will get a PS4 following this generation's PS3.

I do hope that what looked to some people as desperation on Sony's part to drive up PS3 sales (givng online play free) works in Sony's favour.
The Xbox 360 said 'Jump In' and then decided to charge for part of the swimming pool.
Consoldtobots  +   1169d ago
regardless of what it looked like to others it has more to do with Sony being an OG in the industry back in the days where it would have been considered unethical to milk the consumer like this.
kopicha  +   1170d ago

your comment is the worst comment ever I have seen. So people who wants to contact you need to buy a 360 with XBL Gold membership? What kind of justification is that. Almost everyone owns a cellphone / tablet these days. There are tons of "free" ways to keep in touch with friends and families. Whatsapp, Tango, Skype, blah blah blah and the freaking list go on forever. And they are all FREE. All you need is a cellphone which is something essential in today's day to day life. Even a 10 year old kid down the streets I see them using their own iPhone (and no, those devices definitely not their parents' phone as you dont need 4 smart phones with a family of 4). But you dont need a 360 for day to day. I dont think you even can differentiate between what's actual needs and luxuries. I too find XBL Gold a huge rip off where almost all the services are suppose to be obtain for free. The only reason I sign up for Gold is only because of friends who want to play Halo or Gears together online. Other else there is no other reason to even actually pay for it. In short is actually being forcefully paid for since we cant do so if we dont go Gold. If there is a choice I would play it on PC or PS3 since they are free and it has always been how it should be. Even PS+ give way more value than what Gold does and it's fact. Especially to those who actually own both PS3 and Vita concurrently.
blackbeld  +   1170d ago
Exactly kopicha, he totally ignoring facts.

So damn pathetic. Everybody has an smartphone aka 2012.
andibandit  +   1170d ago
I've tried using the free apps like Skype and Viber, and my honest conclusion is that it depends on the connection. I live in Europe and when my wife calls me on Viber im almost prepared to immediately hang up cause i know well be saying

"Can you repeat that"
"No you go ahead and talk"

most of the time. However it is my preferred method of texting. Also sometimes i enjoy talking with random people, it's a great way to make friends and one of the reasons i still pay for live.
showtimefolks  +   1170d ago
look as long as gamers see value in xblive than why should MS make it free? here is the real question come next gen when ps4 will support cross game chat from day one for free than what will be the excuse for some to keep paying for xblive?

with online passes in most games and having to pay $10 to play online if bought used than paying another company to go online, i mean how does that make sense?

IMO xblive will see a huge decrease if sony plays its cards right from day one with ps4 cross game chat and a much better cloud based service. if its possible to avoid downloading games from psn and just playing via cloud that would be killer feature IMO

right now people see value in xblive and many say their friends have xbox360's so they want to stay connected gaming wise. but i do believe come next gen if sony does everything right there is no way xblive will be worth paying for.

psn:plus is the kind of service MS should offer, where we pay $50-60 and get free stuff plus discounts
Ashby_JC  +   1169d ago
I have both systems at the moment. Been a XBL member for 10 years. Do I feel ripped off....nope.

Both XBL and PSN have the pluses and minuses. At this point in life. I can afford the fee.

Next gen....I will sit back and see what Sony and MS come up with.

If I had to BET....Sony will figure out a way to charge for there online service. Thats just my opinion. I cant see them NOT figuring out a way to do what MS is doing.
CommonSense  +   1170d ago
4 dollars a month is such a HUGE rip off. It's cheaper than a crappy meal at mcdonalds but i am such a desperate fanboy that i need to find any excuse to criticize the competition.

it's such a rough life paying 15 cents a day for superior service.

I'd pay 15 cents a day for JUST the ability to voice chat with a party of people. Hell, i paid a lot more than that when i rented a Ventrilo server. Hell, I'd pay 15 cents a day just to make it so I don't have to wait 60 seconds for my trophies to sync up EVERY time i want to compare games with a friend.

Gamers are such entitled babies on n4g. get over it. If my choice was between free PSN and 15 cent Live, it's a no brainer. Fortunately, i don't participate in the console war, and i own both. So i have no reason to be a child about this. Maybe you should consider getting jobs...rather than complaining about spending 4 whole dollars a month on a great service.
#1.6 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(20) | Report | Reply
Cam977  +   1170d ago
Comparing it to Psn has just exposed how much of a fanboy you are. It's a ripoff, stop being blinded by fanboyism.
NonApplicable  +   1170d ago
I get your point, but don't use your comment to bash PSN.

I would rather use that money to pay for my Netflix subscription or purchase a psn/xbox live games, but in the end, Live still is a quality service. Comparatively it isn't the best deal, but it is worth paying for.

Think of it like this. Music can be downloaded for free. When I pay for a good CD, I don't complain about it being a "HUGE Ripoff". Sure the same content can be had for free, however there are certain advantages to owning a physical copy.
oNIXo  +   1169d ago
Dude, most computers come with a cd/dvd/bd burner.
ziggurcat  +   1169d ago
your math is wrong. XBL is $60 per year, not $48.

as far as XBL being a "superior service"? that's debatable. paying that much per year just to party chat is a bit much, imo.

and paying $60 extra per year just to be able to play half of the game you already paid $60 for is also a bit much... or paying $60 just to be able to watch netflix on your X360 when you're already paying $96 per year on that service...

why would you prefer to pay money for a service when all other platforms offer those same services for free? it must be nice to be able to throw money around.
moparful99  +   1169d ago
I love it when people try to break it down to a monthly fee like you just did... Thats cute, however you have to pay all of it up front.. I you were to pay month to month you would spend 3-4 times more in the long run.. But most of us complain, not because we cannot afford it but rather out of principle.. I could easily afford the cost of live but whenever I get to play all of my games online for free with PSN why on earth would I ever pay for live? As of now both services are essentially the same thing.. Both services have minor gripes like your trophy syncing.. Something I dont have to worry about since my Ps3 turns itself on, downloads updates, patches, and syncs trophies whenever I'm away... But when you consider VALUE Psn blows live out of the water...
360ICE  +   1170d ago
Oh, cry me a river people who say Xbox 360 is a rip-off too. If paying next to nothing for a machine that plays many of the greatest games this generation is a rip-off, then just about everything is a rip-off.

Consoles in general give a lot back for your money. If you want to buy a 360 just for Halo 4, you're still not wasting all that much.
moparful99  +   1169d ago
But when I can play 99% of the games you play but for free on my ps3 why would I spend that money? I'm not a Halo fan so it makes much more sense for me to have a ps3..
360ICE  +   1169d ago
99% of the games? Factually incorrect. And I wasn't aware quantity was what mattered anyway. What if you really want the new Halo? Also, you can't play them for free. You still have to pay for the game, and then you can play the online games for free.

You're right it makes more sense for YOU. Which is my point to begin with. Me, I can't pick a favorite, so I went for both. (and scratched Wii :P)
#1.7.2 (Edited 1169d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report
tordavis  +   1170d ago
If you don't have a 360, why are you complaining? It's not a ripoff, you get to play online with your fee. PSN+ doesn't have free games, you have to pay a yearly fee to 'RENT' those games. The only ones who ever complain about it are PS3 users who don't have 360's. I find that hilarious. If a 360 owner doesn't want the service, they stop paying. Simple as that.
moparful99  +   1169d ago
Ok and? You RENT the right to play the online component of your games... You sit here and mock PS+ subscribers but you are paying more money for a privilege that shouldn't cost you a dime.. But 360 owners will defend that point till the death... I will never understand that logic...
tordavis  +   1169d ago
Yep and I'm also a PS+ member. PS+ is game rentals, PERIOD. XBL is a mp gaming service. If I stop paying for either, I lose something. That's my point!
Cueil  +   1169d ago
These people are to ignorant to understand that their opinions don't matter if they don't have the system. In the end it's an opinion and we all know what opinions are like
T3MPL3TON   1170d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(2)
mcnablejr  +   1169d ago
This website is dead to me.
if a comment gets 107 agrees from brain dead fanboys AND is flagged as trolling, you know something is wrong.
Jaces  +   1169d ago
I stopped paying due to my lack of game time on my 360. I'm mainly a PS3 person so a lot of my online and multiplats are played there.

The more I compare to what LIVE offers to what PS+ offers, it's obvious to see which is the better deal. You just get more bang for your buck with plus, that's a fact.
mcnablejr  +   1169d ago
please explain? I'm curious
moparful99  +   1169d ago
@Jaces I'm in the same boat as you I love all of the exclusives on PS3 and I have 6 years worth of online activity on my PS3 so thats where I spend most of my time.. I have no need to pay for Live.. But people are always going to argue and justify their choices. People that pay for Live will say that the service is more unified, better quality players, more social etc all of that of course is preferential.. I feel that social connectivity of PSN is just fine.. I've used both services and there's nothing about Live that makes makes me want to pay the fee... I'm more then happy to put up with the quirks of PSN considering it's free... Now if Sony charges for PSN then we wouldn't be having this conversation, I wouldn't pay for PSN the way it is.. PS+ on the other hand I have no problem paying for, the amount of content that I get from it justifies the price tag..
mcnablejr  +   1169d ago
@ moparful99

''I'm more then happy to PUT UP WITH the quirks of PSN ''

That says allot.
Jaces  +   1169d ago

Go to the xbox website and just see what GOLD offers. A lot of it is already free on PSN and the last few are straight up asinine to be paying for. "Chat with friends face-to-face on your TV with Kinect. Use Avatar Kinect to chat with friends as your avatar mirrors your gestures and expressions." Are you kidding me?

Then compare that to PLUS:

Yes I gave you a link because there's too much there to type it all out. The best part is the constant flow of FREE and Heavily discounted games I receive on a monthly basis. The amount of free games I've downloaded recently have surpassed my $50 a year so that right there is already worth the money, everything else is just extra.

I don't buy new releases any more due to PLUS offering them for %50 off a couple weeks later or free a couple months down the road. The only downside? You lose the games you downloaded for free if you quit PLUS, but who keeps games around (especially downloadable ones) forever after they've beaten them. So not really a downside if you think about it that way.

Good enough explanation?
LAZL0-Panaflex  +   1169d ago
Agree. I pay for live for a combination of reasons. Controller, polished online community, gears, call of duty looks better on xbox, forza, so i do like live better for $30-$48 and i play ps3 for infamous, killzone, uncharted, and god of war.

But if i ever take a hit financially i'm most likely going to game on ps3 because of the free online, plus i like killzone better than halo,...and infamous, god of war and uncharted outweigh gears, and i could just do call of duty on psn with my r2& L2 trigger extensions by pelican.
meetajhu  +   1169d ago
You got to be kidding me. Ever even touched a PC in your life? Oh Wait!
CalvinKlein  +   1169d ago
Lets be honest, its really not that much money to where people all over the INTERNET without xboxs cry about how other people spend their money.

I got xbox gold and ps+ and steam, why dont you go cry to your mommy because I bought something that makes you butthurt.
Gamer1982  +   1169d ago
NYC_Gamer NAIL MEET HEAD. You really cannot say it better than that. We are aware its a ripoff only the real hardcore fanbots disagree. You can bang on about features Sony doesnt have etc.. But in reality it is a ripoff but Hey while people keep paying for it they will charge and you know why people do? Because people are already invested in Xbox live. The great thing about being first was they got people initially invested in there service all there friends use it now and they only own a 360 so its actually cheaper for them to stick with XBL than switch to PS3 at least until there 360 finally cuts the bacon they think.. Then they look at there massive game collection and think.. Its not really a good idea to switch consoles as I would lose all those games..

Investing in a console early on was MS strong point but it will not have that with the next console and if both launch at similar times and Sonys service is still free MS will have a hard sell with XBL on 720.
Chuk5  +   1170d ago
MS better either stop charging or make it worth it next gen. Or I am gone.
omi25p  +   1170d ago
#2.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(18) | Report | Reply
chaos-lockheart  +   1170d ago
i see you like to give free money away
MikeMyers  +   1170d ago
Live is still the easiest and most streamlined service of the bunch. How the games connect with one another, how gamers keep connected no matter what game is being played, and all supported by voice chat. Is that enough to warrant a fee? That depends on how much you value the small differences between Live and something like Playstation Network and Steam.

I find there is far more value from Playstation Plus. I see the value over what else is offered. I don't see a lot of value in Xbox Live Gold over what others offer.

If Microsoft really wanted to shine a light on how people are willing to pay for Live then offer a basic service that simply allows people to play with others for free. Everyone else does! Trouble is Live isn't designed that way. It's all integrated so that all the services run seamlessly within it. Live was something fresh back in 2002 but now it's very questionable how they can continue to charge.

Unless people stop supporting Live they will keep charging and for one reason only, because they can. It's the same reason people pay a premium for the iPad over other tablets, because they are willing to be part of the IOS service provided by Apple. People like the ecosystem Apple has. It's easy to use and it's universal across all Apple products. Difference is it's free to sign onto IOS but you still pay a premium for the devices.
B1663r  +   1170d ago
Xbox live is totally worth it for the Bing search, and directory of tv shows and movies, on the various tv and movie services. That feature is totally missing from every other option including your Windows or Mac PC.

It is utterly unique in the industry.
tee_bag242  +   1170d ago
you're being sarcastic right? Please tell me you are
#2.2.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report
Gamer1982  +   1169d ago
PC has had them features for years and even better ones.. You really need to get out more.
Intentions  +   1170d ago
Idiots will buy it at the full price, where you can research to get it cheaper. Eg: $1 - 30 for 12 months.
Old McGroin  +   1170d ago
Agreed. If you pay for your Gold account here in Europe through Live it will set you back 60.00 Euros. A bit of investigation work online (e-bay and Google are your friend) will see you pay half of this amount.

Still an absolute rip off though when you compare it to the amount of content you get as a PS+ subscriber.
8bitHero  +   1170d ago
wow really? im about to go google this. maybe i might actually renew live so i can play halo 4.
Old McGroin  +   1170d ago
Yeah, here's just one example:
SnakeCQC  +   1169d ago
yh ive been buying the 12+2 month gold memberships for about 25 pounds on ebay
8bitHero  +   1169d ago
ahh im not from EU. i live in the US :(
#3.2.3 (Edited 1169d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
THC CELL  +   1170d ago
People are slow I realize when ps3 come out
Sketchy_Galore  +   1170d ago | Funny
Many moon ago when Sun rise over hill like great buffalo?
Pillsbury1  +   1170d ago
I realized this a long time ago which is why I chose to sell my 360. This is my personal opinion so no need to start foaming at the mouth because of the conclusions I have come to but live does nothing but let you play the other half of your game. alot of people put cross chat as the single reason why its worth to pay to play online but I can connect and chat with friends the same as anywhere else. they either need to add more value to its service or stop charging for what is offered free everywhere else (ps3,pc and wii u).
lashes2ashes  +   1170d ago
I agree with you. I don't like online playing for the most part so it seems like a waste of money for me.. Plus cross game chat seems really stupid to me. I really don't want to talk to my friends while we are playing two completely different games. I would rather pay attention to what's going on. Most people I know that cross chat spend most of the time not having a clue what's going on with there game, that would be fine with online halo or cod but during something like bioshock or assassins creed I don't see what the point of even playing story driven games if you don't want to pay attention to the story.
Tetsujin  +   1170d ago
I regretted buying Live a few days after hearing the racial comments towards me and others from kids half my age and younger, the wanna-be rappers, people breathing in the mic, and couples arguing over what they did sexually the night before.

If I had it my way, I'd make Live free with advertising all over (more than what's there now); or have it at a cost with 0 advertising and special features that PS+ has with the free games and added cloud storage, etc. that way if someone can't afford it or only plays online limited times a year they don't feel pressured into buying something they really don't need.
hellvaguy  +   1170d ago
"after hearing the racial comments"

Just select mute everyone for all games except for your friends list. Problem solved. Love that option.
kopicha  +   1170d ago
not trying to troll or whatever. but honestly there are many way to do "free cross game chat" in a way. example ventrillo / teamspeak / mumble. these apps are even on cellphones and you dont need a pc to use it. connect a BT headset to the phone and there you go. chat with multiple friends be it on same game, different game. same console or even different console. it is not entirely impossible. its really only want to or dont want to.
SnakeCQC  +   1170d ago
games are cheaper than the psn store but i hate paying just to play online(which i rarely do nowadays anyway)
bubblebeam  +   1170d ago
Prices vary from XBL Store and the PSN store.

The biggest gripe I have, as you said is that I rarely have time to use it. That's why I buy 1 month at a time whenever a game comes out.

The sometimes have good deal on Family packs (4 for the price of 2), which I got one year, but then I had only played online for like 150 hours in 9 months (that's not that much, I checked my stats on the website).

Also, WTF is the point in the number of years you have been a member next to your GT? You should get a discount the more years you have been a member.
Ducky  +   1170d ago
Wasn't it one from the start?
Shepherd 214  +   1169d ago
Not 5 - 10 years ago when Live was spearheading console online gaming and no one else was. Only in the past few years has PSN actually been comparable to Live.
Loki86  +   1170d ago
Let's be honest, this is a huge troll bait article. Stop approving this trash.
d0nT wOrrY   1169d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(1)
sdplisken  +   1170d ago
microsoft is a master at brainwashing
Gamer-Z  +   1170d ago
and Apple
vortis  +   1170d ago
Compared to Nintendo, PSN and Steam/Origin, there's nothing on Live you can't get elsewhere. And let's face it, Steam supports cross-game chat so even that's nothing special anymore.

Back in the early 00s when Microsoft transitioned the MSN Gaming Zone to Xbox Live it was fine because both were paid-for services, and at the time it was a quality service you couldn't get elsewhere. But now, times have changed and there's nothing on Xbox Live you can't get better and for free elsewhere.
KMCROC  +   1170d ago
Yes times have changed , but i still prefer to pay for live. feel no need to support the others .
kopicha  +   1170d ago
well said... it is like why so many p2p mmo fail these days. simply because time have change. there are so many f2p mmo out there. a lot maybe garbage. but that does not mean there are actually no good ones out there.
Norrison  +   1169d ago
That's why you buy MMOs like GW2.
SOULJER  +   1170d ago
I was't willing to pay microsoft another red cent for playing online. Miss schooling noobs on Halo4. Still hoping they do by gamer's with the 720.
Megaton  +   1170d ago
Has been since day 1. I know a lot of people on this site bend over backwards to defend and justify their purchase, but at the end of the day you're paying a fee for free things.
gnothe1  +   1170d ago
here we go again with this crap...just because YOU think/feel live is a rip off doesnt mean everybody else does..we got people saying they sold their 360 just because they didnt wanna pay for live..REALLY?...well i just traded in my PS3 for a Wii U..i got tried of dealing with the PS3 in general..i feel i would get more use outta the Wii U than my PS3..would you people quit approving this troll type article...all their trying to do is get hits...
StrongMan  +   1170d ago
Here we go again with this. If YOU like to pay to use free features then go ahead. Don't get all made because others feel ripped off. Ask yourself this, why do you get so mad and offended when others discuss how ripped off they feel when they pay to use free features?
BattleAxe   1170d ago | Trolling | show
gnothe1  +   1170d ago not mad at all...if a person fells their getting ripped off AN THEY CONTINUE to pay from something then they must be an idiot..why pay for something you you feel its not worth it...
stage88  +   1170d ago

I think you're going to regret that buddy...
gnothe1  +   1170d ago im not..i only had tekken tag team an time crisis for my PS3...i just dont care for most of the PS3 i traded in one of my PS3's..i got 3(had 3) in my house so the one in my game room was expendable...
calis   1170d ago | Trolling | show
BuryYourHead707  +   1170d ago

Well if you have a Wii U and a 360, compare them.
Wii U online free, you get discounts (deluxe version), Day 1 digital, cross game chat, game feeds, etc....

This isn't a Ps3 vs 360 article so calm down you dont have to lie about trading one in for a Wii U.
If you really got a Wii U and felt you'd get more/better experiences from it, then how have you not realized LIVE is a straight rip?

2005 Live is alone in the market, Halo was ON TOP.
2012 Live is alone in the fact that everyone else is free, COD (mult-platform) is on top.

Once all those COD drones realize that everyone else is offering the same cake as MS, but for free, they'll switch. If they don't, then they spend $ irresponsibly.
gnothe1  +   1170d ago
buryyourhead707...if you had a WII would know theres NO cross game chat at the can only attatch a 3rd party headset into the Wii pad an theres no head phone input on the classic far as halo goes I DONT LIKE IT...i had 3 ps3's an 3 360's in my house .1 of my PS3's is primarly a blu ray player(bedroom) my daugther use for LBP(living room)..she loves that game an the other is in my game room which i hardly EVER used.the 3 360 are all paid XBL gold accounts..i just dont care for the PS3 games like that
Pillsbury1  +   1170d ago
So let me get this straight, do you have a 360? Are you paying for an online service that should be free? If you are not then enjoy your wii u! It's an amazing system and I am excited for its possibilities ( and free online network). Too bad you didn't keep your ps3, there are a lot of great exclusives still coming out even at the end of
The console lifecycle.

Edit: just saw your comment above, 3 360's? Someone likes to waste money. Ballin!
#13.5 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Imalwaysright  +   1170d ago
Yeah... no its a rip off. When you pay for something that is free on every other platform then it becomes a rip off because there is no justification for it.
Gallimastro  +   1170d ago
Basically I agree now that PS+ is the bees knees. Only thing keeping me from making the full plunge to everything Playstation is a few titles.

I remember Saints Row 2 and GTA4 looked kinda bad on PS3 and older games played better on Xbox, but now the tables have turned. Also I'm a Fallout/Elder Scrolls junkie now. Playing FO3 was a bit of a headache with game ending glitches despite patches, and Skyrim still has problems and 2/3 DLCs will probably not appear on it.

I highly doubt MS will consider free games in the future, but Live Gold has party chat which is the only nice thing going for it at the moment.
blackbeld  +   1170d ago
Party chat? Is not worth €60 really. You can use Skype for free with better audio.
kopicha  +   1170d ago
ok i just want to joke a little which I know people wont be able to take it. but i still want to say this. Vita + PS3 = cross game chat :P
Gallimastro  +   1170d ago

Well that's the thing it's an expensive Party Chat function now, however with Party Chat on Live eliminates the need for Skype if all your friends use it.

I only have like two friends that use PS3, but every one else uses 360 and it's a strain on everyone's part to have a PC + Skype and PS3 open at the same time. Most of them are married so their wives + kids are on the computer while they are gaming.

With Xbox just plug in the headset on the controller and BAM, join a party and play different games. Maybe PS+ should have a skype app and all you would need is a usb headset.

And Bethesda needs to fix their shit, lol
SJPFTL  +   1170d ago
LOL @ people complaining for paying $5 a month plus additional features. Like on Xbox live you don't have to be in game to join parties and to do voice chat. You can do that anywhere even when your party are in different games. On PS3 you cant do that on the xmb, and the only way to communicate with your friends outside games is through sending them messages, which is kind of hassle. Or how bout when your party gets split up in game into different teams. ohh no cant talk to them now.

Going to be downvoted because the truth hurts to fanboys. Comparing it to PS+ which is just a renting service of games you can find in the bargain bin at your local gamestop lol. Not to mention a web browser that actually works and can be paired up with your tablet ala xbox smartglass,
#15 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(26) | Report | Reply
dennett316  +   1170d ago
How vital a feature is that though, really? Most of the time the party chat is insipid bullshit and singing to your idiot friends.

As for your comments on Plus, good luck finding all the games you can get from a years subscription in the bargain bins for less than the cost of Plus...and that's ignoring all the PSN games you get for free, as well as discounts of up to 20% on PSN purchases which you them get to keep. Even if you let the membership lapse and lose access to the free games, you could have easily made up the cost of the service in savings for the PSN games bought over the year.
They actually give an incentive for paying for online, as opposed to holding online play to ransom behind the guise of giving a few more options like party chat and the like.

Sorry dude, I had both. And only PLus is worth paying for for the full year, Live I only got when they offered it for a £1 for a month. And even then, I didn't bother with any of the extras you're supposedly paying for.
SJPFTL  +   1170d ago
able to communicate and chat with your friends no matter what each is doing? How is that feature not deal breaking? Maybe you dont have friends but millions of people on xbox live do. dont have to pause the game your playing to type a message to your friends when they come online, you can send them a voice message. also you dont have to worry when you get split up in game.
dennett316  +   1169d ago
SJPFTL, and that's a nifty little feature. But is it worth £30-40 a year?
If you're online and you're friends aren't, you're paying for no advantage. And tying features like Netflix into Gold is an utter travesty considering you already pay Netflix a subscription...why should you have to continue to pay MS as well in order to access the service?

Frankly, there's about a million things I'd rather do than have people constantly yapping in my ear when I'm trying to play a game. And from the level of communication you hear from the average little twerp online, I can't imagine their friends enjoying sharing in the random abuse they hurl at strangers, or the tuneless karaoke they use to annoy people in lobbies.

I played games for YEARS just fine without knowing what my brain dead friends are thinking the entire time.
fucadastates  +   1170d ago
"ommunicate with your friends outside games"... well you can videochat - you dont need a cam, just a mic.

"Or how bout when your party gets split up in game into different teams. ohh no cant talk to them now. " .. yeah.. cuz every game on xbox360 supports this? i dident work in dark souls with my mate :S

"Comparing it to PS+ which is just a renting service of games" ... well it works the same way, as with the renting service, of using the online funktion in a game i payed for..
SJPFTL  +   1170d ago
can you do video chat in game? no you cant

not saying PSN is bad, i have a PS3 too. but these fanboy articles are so lame. I will shell out money for these services because i find it worth it. just like how I pay for ventrillo and teamspeak servers on the PC when I game on there
#15.2.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(14) | Report
fucadastates  +   1170d ago
SJPFTL - now, thats somthing new you bring to the table. you said 3 things, and talked about that.

and agian. does all games on the xbox, alow you to cross game voicechat? no they dont (i know its a small number - but the feature is not universal).

i personaly dont find gold worth it. if i could play online with silver - thats where i would be.
MrBeatdown  +   1170d ago
I love when people use the "it's only $5 a month" excuse, as if a ripoff is okay as long as it's not a big ripoff. Maybe Microsoft should start charging a $.25 per month fee for having an avatar? I mean, it's just 25 cents right? No big deal?

It's really quite simple... Microsoft charges people to access features that are offered free everywhere else. Why? Because the features that actually separate Live from everything else aren't anywhere near strong enough to bring in as many subscriptions.

Some people like to bring up cross game chat and things like that to justify the fee, but even Microsoft doesn't have enough confidence in those features to let them drive Live sales on their own. If they did, we wouldn't be "renting" the online portions of the games we already paid for, as you like to put it.
#15.3 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
SnotyTheRocket  +   1170d ago
Its called Skype, and it has better audio anyway.
Jazz4108  +   1170d ago
These articles are getting as bad as the sony financial articles everyday. Its a opinion that is ment to troll and is very biased. If you care that much what 40 million gold customers spend there money on then maybe you should start a charity to save sony.
dennett316  +   1170d ago
Yes...opinions are often biased, well done. Have a cookie. They are not meant to troll, they are meant to offer an opinion. You may not like that opinion, but the entire purpose is to put that opinion out there.
Buzz7S  +   1170d ago
I dunno where you pulled your $60 from, but my 12+1 month redeemable code cost me less than $41 and guess what? It even came with a code for some MS Points on my account!

The article should focus more on retailers who charge the RRP as they are the ones who make Xbox LIVE look like a rort, not Microsoft themselves.

Sure, we could do without advertisements, but wait, don't you pay for cable TV? Last time I checked, which was a few seconds ago, there was an advertisement. STOP THE PRESS!!!

Oh look, normal, free-to-air TV. What's this? A commercial? ZOMG LETS RIOT!!!

Millions of Xbox 360 users have no problem with paying for Xbox LIVE, just the same way as millions of PS3 users have no intention of paying for PS Plus (mind you, I turn my PS3 on once every 2-3 weeks and I still pay for my subscription).

You call it a ripoff, Microsoft sees it as huge profits. Sure, we (oh yeah, in case you couldn't make it out, I pay for both PS Plus and Xbox LIVE) might be overcharged to play a game online, especially when a service like Steam does it better than everyone and does it for free, but we want what we want.

Perhaps if Sony was charging for its online service similar to Microsoft from the get-go, Sony wouldn't still have an issue of selling each and every PS3 console at a loss, since they'd make up the loss with that subscription.

At the end, it's players choice. I choose to pay while you choose to freeload.

Now if you'll excuse me, while I wait for Rage to install on my Xbox 360, I'm going to connect my PS Vita to my PS3 to update the firmware while I play my 3DS.

FYI, PS Plus is superior to Xbox LIVE. At least as an Xbox gamer, I can admit that. But it still lacks the simple features which Xbox LIVE has had from the very start. And after many hardware revisions, they are still lacking those simple features.
#17 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(16) | Report | Reply
DigitalRaptor  +   1170d ago
"But it still lacks the simple features which Xbox LIVE has had from the very start. And after many hardware revisions, they are still lacking those simple features."

You're right. But the reason PS3 doesn't have those features is it's RAM/memory. There's nothing Sony can do on that console to improve that.

The PS Vita has party chat. Do you really think PS4 won't have the rest of these outstanding Live features? Not a chance. And the thing is, what this whole discussion is really about, is that Microsoft charge for basic connectivity to games. THAT is the ultimate problem.

Whether or not PS4's network stands up to the Nextbox's is not the real focal point. It's whether or not Microsoft will rip off their consumers with a premium charge for basic connectivity. Disagree all you want people, I have a point. I'd like to see real responses here, not just excuses (although you'll have to reply by PM if you want a response from me cause I'm outta bubbles).
#17.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
BuryYourHead707  +   1170d ago
@ Buzz7s

This proves that your just dumb.

"Sure, we (oh yeah, in case you couldn't make it out, I pay for both PS Plus and Xbox LIVE) might be overcharged to play a game online, especially when a service like Steam does it better than ever
done and does it for free, but we want what we want."

IF you want it, and someone else does it better, and its also free elsewhere, then why are you basically saying "fuck it I'll pay."? retard I swear...
Buzz7S  +   1170d ago
"This proves that your just dumb."

And I rest my case.
Janitor  +   1170d ago
How exactly is it a rip off? People buy an Xbox knowing they have to pay for live, and do so willingly. People vote with their wallets, and the people have decided that it's worth it. I have live and PS+, because to me they are worth what they cost, simple as that. Nothing wrong with not liking live, or thinking that its not worth it, but if other people do then what's the problem?
DigitalRaptor  +   1170d ago
I hate to be the one to tell you this but a large portion of Xbox consumers don't know they have to pay for Xbox Live UNTIL they open the box, plug it in, and try to play Halo or Call of Duty online, because quite simply a lot of people buy an Xbox because their friends have it or have seen it advertised (just not the $60 per month advertised).

People continue to pay for Live not just because they know what it's worth, but because THEY HAVE TO.

I'm not even hating on the Live service, just the fact that Microsoft charge you $60 face value for simple online access to your games. It's utter BS, and an absolute rip off when considering only basic connectivity to required to run online games (peer to peer). I constantly ask 360 fans on here to ask Microsoft to charge for advanced features only, and let you play online for free, but nope. They just don't care. MS fans will constantly be in a vice as far as their online connectivity goes unless they make a stand... but they won't. It's terrible cause I might even own an Xbox console if it weren't for MS being so goddamn unreasonable.

@ ddelella

That's the exact mentality I'm talking about. But people are so invested they cannot consider an alternative, nor will they even try, which is sad.


I'll just add that it's good to see a lot of people talking sense here. It cannot be quantified as us being "haters", or it's "N4G for you" or whatever. It's trying to make consumerism better for everyone and stop companies charging for absolute crazy things. Good to see people standing up for their rights. Charging for online play??... pfft ridiculous.
#18.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(8) | Report | Reply
Janitor  +   1170d ago
So after 10 YEARS they don't know you have to pay for live? Please...

Methinks you are talking out of your ass.
#18.1.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(14) | Report
IRetrouk  +   1170d ago
I think you forget that xbox live only really took off his gen, live then and live even at the start of the 360s life are very diffrent, i only found out i had to pay to play online the day i pluged it in. Dont forget the original xbox was more of a niche console it was in far less homes than the 360 .
rainslacker  +   1170d ago
The article is flame-bait material. There's a difference between a rip-off, and a person not seeing the value in something. I personally don't see the value in Live because I don't play online much, and couldn't care less about the extras they offer, and being an anti-social prick, I don't care about cross-game chat. So to me for the occasional time I do play online $50 just isn't worth it.

I don't necessarily consider it a rip-off, but given what it does offer overall, I do find it rather behind the times. Most companies would charge for this stuff if they could though. When it comes to Sony they just found a good value proposition for it's subscribers, but that falls squarely into the same boat as my previous statement about MS. They wanted a revenue stream and knew people wouldn't accept a Live like service, so found something else to offer, and people like it.

The coming generation will be interesting with this on the table I think. Not sure I look forward to seeing it yet. Could get real messy.
joel_c17  +   1170d ago
Yeah a mum picking up a 4 gig console on the cheap or their kids birthday present will know they then have to fork out an additional 60 a year for their kid to use the console fully. Mums totally know all that...
dennett316  +   1170d ago
I paid a £1 a month for 6 months in a row when I went through a Black Ops Multiplayer phase. It wasn't such a rip-off then, but paying more than that is undoubtedly madness. I know regular Live users justify it due to a "better" online experience...but is it really £30-40 better?

For someone who plays online only occasionally, it's just not worth the cost. Sony and it's Plus service is the way to go if you want money towards online. Next gen, I don't think MS will be charging, unless it's something similar to Plus. If they do, they might get a bit of a shock at just how few people will be willing to pay...especially as Sony will undoubtedly improve their online service.

MS also need to look into getting some more exclusives...they lag FAR behind Nintendo and even Sony in this regard. Halo and Gears are OK, Forza too, but for me the only exclusives on 360 that matter a crap are Fable and Alan Wake - and both are available on PC.
Sizzon  +   1170d ago
Xbox Live is ok in my opinion, so is PSN and PS+ with great deals sometimes.

But honestly, I'm not yet a PC gamer (will be later on again) ,

Steam is the best service out there, it's free with cross-game chat and the Steam Sale is really good.
calis  +   1170d ago
Way to be Switzerland.
Sizzon  +   1170d ago
What has the country Switzerland to do with my comment?
dennett316  +   1169d ago
Sizzon, it's a joke. Switzerland were neutral during WW2, and still are largely neutral now.
ddelella  +   1170d ago
It's unfortunately but simple: Unless everyone cancels their Xbox Live accounts, which means no multiplayer, I don't see Microsoft caring too much how their gamers think. They continue to make money because they know they can. I only pay $35 a year for my membership because I buy them when I see them cheap. I believe Microsoft should go to a per service monthly charge and make multiplayer free, parties, and other basic xbox features free. Will they, no.
d3nworth1  +   1170d ago
Some people believe just cuz you pay for it makes it better. If you think about it with xbl you have to pay a subscription to be bombarded with ads. The only time you get ads on psn is if there is a promotion and no on wii. Plus with 1 year subscription of psn plus for$50 I got over $200 worth of free games. Infamous 2, Little big planet 2 , borderlands, King of Fighters 13 and Starhawk story mode. They were offering more free games but I didnt have the harddrive space.
iNathan  +   1170d ago
its expensive yes but i will keep paying so i can play Halo or Call of Duty online with my Friends
But yes it should be less expensive or Free... We know Live is a great service but we already pay for games and for having internet yet we have to pay for Live and lets not forget the Console Price, Acessories etc...
#23 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
Buzz7S  +   1170d ago
Sorry, but if you can't afford to pay ~$40 to access online multiplayer features for your favourite game(s) for 12 months, perhaps you should consider looking at another hobby.

As for the accessories you mention, they are optional. If you choose to pay for Kinect or some other peripheral, that's on you.
calis  +   1170d ago
360 = pay $x for a game and then pay $y to play that game online, therefore total cost is $x+y

PC, PS3, Wii, WiiU = pay $x for game. $0 to play online, therefore total cost is $x

For the 360, you are paying an added cost to access a feature of a game you have already bought and paid for.
Hicken  +   1170d ago
Um, no, sir.

Why the hell would I want to pay ~$40 to access online multiplayer features for my favorite game THAT I'VE ALREADY BOUGHT?

I don't care if it's a dollar a month; I already bought my game, and I already paid you for the system. You deserve NO money for the online features of my game.

Can't figure out WHY you guys think that's okay. They wanna charge for the other features(the beloved cross-game chat), that's fine.

Not online, though. As long as that's happening, it'll forever be a ripoff.

And they call people who like Sony delusional...
LOOK_AT_THIS_I  +   1169d ago
If they were charging this fee to use dedicated servers to make some of the games perform a lot better then I could see your view this would add value and would be a true feature offered by the service which would warrant a fee. Adding a few "functions" that not everyone uses or desires does not justify the price for a lot of people.

It's not about being able to afford a few bucks towards anything, it's the fact that by purchasing the game on one console I am forced to pay fees on top of the price of the game to access a feature that is available freely on other devices.

Consider this. You buy a house. It has a mailbox like all other houses. However you find out that in order to use your mailbox you have to pay 5 bucks a month. Your neighbor has the same house/same mailbox. Why would he pay for his mailbox if he didn't have to for the exact same mailbox. Comprende?
jack who  +   1170d ago
idk why this kinda articles keep popping up. if you cant or dont wanna pay for live DONT move on.
Pillsbury1  +   1170d ago
sound advice I will move onto my free online service.
badvlad  +   1170d ago
man if yall cant afford 30e for a year just change to ps3 gees. Its 2012 and people still cry about this
dragon82  +   1170d ago
It has nothing to do with being able to pay for it. I can afford it and I do pay for it. I also own the other consoles on the market. It's funny how only one charges me to play MY games online on MY console on an ISP that I pay for already on servers that are NOT owned by Microsoft. They are charging us for a feature that they literally have no hand in once you purchase the console. Does that really make sense to you?

I would love to see them offer "Playing Online" for free and charge for everything else like normal. It would be interesting to see how many of us would still pay for the other services if we didn't have to.
#25.1 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
badvlad  +   1168d ago
I feel like its not a big deal. I understand what you are saying but like in all you are able to choose or complain about it, or just dont care.
Also people always complain about the price thats y I mentioned it. My hooker costs 30e a hour she has cameltoe and eats icecream from my feet
th3n00bg4m3r  +   1170d ago
Finally, somebody got it.
The_Infected  +   1170d ago
I bet what they made off Xbox Live will pay for the Xbox 720.
TXIDarkAvenger  +   1170d ago
I questioned myself as to why I used to buy Xbox Live Gold. It was for one reason, to play online. I don't care about the deals they have and I'm still getting a shit load of advertisements. I own a PS3 now, but I still game here and there on 360. MS needs to have free online next gen or I'm just getting Sony next console first and hopefully it will have more RAM to have party chat.
Rupee  +   1170d ago
Getting sick of these shit articles on N4G. I swear it didn't use to be like this. You can almost predict what articles will post. There are the Xbox vs ps3 articles, the console vs pc, the mobile casual will destroy the hardcore, the tales of the gaming industy's doom, worthless opinion articles that are, more often then not, just bait articles. NEWS4gamers... news: newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent events. Fucking news!!!
#29 (Edited 1170d ago ) | Agree(11) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Pillsbury1  +   1170d ago
Dont forget ps vitas death.
tiffac008  +   1170d ago
or the Wii U is doomed. Sheez... so much hate in the gaming community these days.
joel_c17  +   1170d ago
Gaming journalism is dead
fullymoated  +   1169d ago
Your comment is better than most N4G articles
NotSoSilentBob  +   1170d ago
I could see charging to play online, but not to use Netflix, facebook, or any of the other "apps".
« 1 2 3 4 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Game Trailers Closes Down After 13 Years, What They Meant to Me

24m ago - A sudden tweet by Game Trailers confirms, the sudden closing down of their website. Joe from Poli... | PC

Arslan: The Warriors of Legend Interview with Development Team

26m ago - Travis Bruno of Capsule Computers writes: "Koei Tecmo and Omega Force have made quite a name f... | PC

Gran Turismo SPORT Beta Testing Begins early 2016

Now - Start tracking GTS with's release date alert service and be notified when the GTS beta launches. | Promoted post

Marvel Avengers Academy Review | about

45m ago - "Marvel Avengers Academy is simultaneously everything that's right and wrong with mobile gaming.... | iPhone

Atelier Escha & Logy Plus: Alchemists of the Dusk Sky Review [Capsule Computers]

46m ago - Travis Bruno of Capsule Computers writes: "Over recent years we’ve seen the Atelier series mov... | PS Vita

Nitroplus Blasterz: Heroines Infinite Duel Review [Capsule Computers]

46m ago - Travis Bruno of Capsule Computers writes: "There has been a pleasantly surprising uptick in th... | PS3