Xbox 720 Reports on Connectivity and Subscriptions

"I have recently read several reports; probably several write ups of one single report, that say that the Xbox 720 is going to have a subscription fee attached to the system, as well as an always-online requirement. These requirements will scare off a few people; however, most gamers always have their console hooked up to the Internet, and pay a subscription to get Xbox Live Gold." -ZackC

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
iGAM3R-VIII1926d ago (Edited 1926d ago )

Anyway the subscriptions seem like a fair enough price with the feature. I would probably get them, just can't wait until E3 so we know all about the console and the games

1926d ago Replies(2)
josephayal1926d ago

I gladly pay my $60 to Microsoft

Kevin ButIer1926d ago

Things have changed, PS+ redefined the meaning of subscription. MS needs to catch up or GTFO

SITH1925d ago

@butler Yet you fools still take 45 minuets for an update.

kreate1925d ago

45 mins is better than 60 bucks.

It took me an hour to update starcraft2 when it first launched.

360 is better at downloading updates in general, but they also screwed up a lot when they have their major updates like bricking ur 360.

Though now they got a lot better. Last few updates went by pretty smooth.

fr0sty1925d ago

I think SITH forgot we are talking about next gen consoles here, and we've already been told all PS4 updating will be done in the background, even when the system is not powered on.

miDnIghtEr20C_SfF1925d ago

Really frosty? Even when it's not powered on? Sounds a lot like being "always on" and connected to the internet for something like that to happen.

But of course, it's PS4 in this case, which would be good.

TBONEJF1925d ago Show
Perjoss1925d ago

I'm pretty sure most of the people around here who complain about the £30 a year XBL service don't even have a 360 :)

It's the same people that go 'lolkinect' every time a new xbox 360 game is announced.

JC_Denton1925d ago

The blatant trolling in this comment section sets a new bar in terms of quantity.

GABRIEL10301925d ago

Good for you¡ you have a lot of money to throw it away. :(

geassdanny1925d ago

45 minutes, way'd a go to pull an overly overestimated time figure. Sure it's not the fastest system to update. But you cannot doubt psn+ is doing wonders for the playstation brand. You're not just getting games for the ps3, but vita as well. And I bet Sony will use it on the ps4 as well.

Xbox fans can bitch all they want, paying just for the privilege to play online with gold is a mindless rip off. Last I checked PC gamers didn't need to pay to play their games online, nor ps3, even Nintendo. Some MS fans are really oblivious!

ALLWRONG1925d ago (Edited 1925d ago )

PS fanboy says "HAHA you pay for Live!"

PS fanboy does "Now excuse me while I make my PSN+ payment. I will then pay Sony to allow me to play PS3 games I already own, through Gaikai, which "requires" you to be "always on".

PSN+ and Gaikai BC will end up costing more than Live.

amiga-man1925d ago

I have no problem with a company charging for services they offer like cross game chat or free games etc, but for M$ to block your internet a service you are paying your internet provder then expect you to pay a subscription to get it back crazy.

online should be free as thats what your paying your internet provder for not M$, yet people accept the scam and even defend it,

M$ do not own the internet so why are you paying them to access it?

1925d ago
GABRIEL10301925d ago

Good for you¡ you have a lot of money to throw it away¡

Pay more for an always connected Console, the internet connection, the hard disk, the controller charger, the HDMI, the online, DLC's and microtransactions and no second hand games¡¡¡


sengoku1925d ago

subscription should be optional.

Boody-Bandit1925d ago (Edited 1925d ago )

I have been a XBL member since day 1. Between me and my sons with now have 3 XBL accounts. I never pay full MSRP. I usually start looking for deals a few months before our subscription is up. With that said, I would prefer not to have to pay anything for it. So if always-on does in fact become a reality? That would make the XBL fee (sale price or full MSRP) even harder to swallow.

I am still holding out hope that always on will be one of the biggest mud in the face to those that are reporting it will exist but I'm starting to believe they are spot on. I feel this is an inconvenience for a guy like me that has multiple gamer areas in my home. 1 of them not having the possibility to hard wire and it gets poor wireless reception.

jacksons981925d ago

With PS+ it keeps your system and games up to date automatically. No waiting... And usually it's less than 5 minutes

Lvl_up_gamer1925d ago

PS+ is a HUGE ripoff to consumers. Only a fool would pay $50 a year so that they can save a bit on a game. Then on top of that, it's old games that everyone has already played.

PS+ is for the casual consumer. Hardcore players already owned, played, completed and traded in the game before it even becomes available on PS+.

Then on top of that, you don't even get too keep any of the "free" content when you unsubscribe.

At least with XBL, you get the best features available for online, the most robust online AND you get too keep ALL the free content.

Currently loving Happy Wars.

amiga-man1925d ago (Edited 1925d ago )

BY Lvl_up_gamer
Only a fool would pay $50 a year so that they can save a bit on a game.

I would agree with you if it was to save a bit on a game, but the truth is it isn't a game it's numurous games for free, already I have Darksiders, Infamous2, Space marines, dead space2, Mass effect 3, Bioshock 2, and many more, hardly a game as you put it.

you then go on to say
Then on top of that, it's old games that everyone has already played.

thats funny I havn't played any of those games mentioned so looking even more of a bargain

then you say
Then on top of that, you don't even get too keep any of the "free" content when you unsubscribe.

but before that you point out that people have traded in these games so they are not keeping them either, PS+ is an absolute bargain and puts xbl to shame, paying to access your internet is the biggest scam this gen and you fell for it.

oh well you enjoy happy wars, while your doing that i'll enjoy Darksiders, Infamous2, Space marines, dead space2, Mass effect 3, Bioshock 2, and many more lol.

andrewsqual1923d ago

@SITH Plus COMES with Automatic Updates dumbass. Learn the facts first.

With the recently announced Free2Play game Ridge Racer Driftopia coming to PC and PS3 this raises yet another question.
Why is this not on Xbox Live? Is it because of the awesome 2GB limit on Xbox Live content (which was 300mbs in 2008, by comparison Ratchet and Clank Quest for Booty launched on PS3 in 2008 at over 3.5GBs in size) or is it because it ISN'T free to play if you have to pay for standard online access. I guess there is no future for FreetoPlay games on Xbox Live either.

+ Show (20) more repliesLast reply 1923d ago
g2gshow1926d ago


lmao back under the bridge you have been banished no life loser who has time to troll hope you're on ms payroll light_bar

1925d ago
AngryEnglish1925d ago (Edited 1925d ago )

Lol at IGam3r getting disagrees, some people are so stupid.

You morons who only want the PS4 to be the only console are fools, you need competition to stay ahead of the game, 1 console = lazy complacent crap.

Why do people get so butt hurt because some people ain't loyal to one company...

vigilante_man1925d ago

I agree. Without competition from MS Sony would not of made so many great exclusives for PS3. Without Sony MS would not have massive advertising and Xbox 360 sales - cause they wouldn't need them.

Competition is great for all consoles. That said, I believe the Gold will stay the same and everyone else will get free game verification access through the internet. Even MS are not dumb enough to charge Everyone an annual subscription to play even single player games.

Yes I will get a PS4 day one. If the 720 can offer me exclusives or other cable/media services that I need then I'll get one of them too.

Sony have learnt from MS and will offer in-game chat next-gen. It would be a pity if MS did not learn from Sony and offer all their loyal customers the chance to play on-line gaming for free.

Psn8001925d ago

That is why I left Xbox 360 because live is far to expensive .

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1923d ago
shutUpAndTakeMyMoney1926d ago

I want a free subscription option!

clintos591926d ago (Edited 1926d ago )

I dout it. There are 46 million+ ppl paying for a p2p xbl service now, why would that change now? I think microsoft is leading the way with xbl & proving to all other companies that they can also charge for online & gamers will love it. It seems like thats where we are headed with online gaming thanx to xbl.

Edit: So im wrong? Prove me wrong then. =]

Edit: I thought so. Have a good day.

juandren1926d ago

You're not necessarily wrong, just arrogant. Your edits just go to show how important it is to you to be "right" on this website. It's quite pathetic. Mocrosoft has a good strategy, sure, but it relies heavily on the fact that people only pay because "their friends have an Xbox 360 and Gold membership". Good day to you too

Kingthrash3601926d ago

People are waking up my friend. Gamers are realizing they need more for thier money and ps+ is showing exactly what they can get. Hopefully microsoft Will start the same trend or they will lose 40 of that 46 million you speak of to sonys ps+.... noone can prove you wrong until something is actually released but how the economy is today if, killing used games, always connected, always on rumors are true I may not buy a 720.... and if ps+ does the same for the ps4 as the ps3 many will follow that ...have a good day

Mr Blings1926d ago (Edited 1926d ago )

There is nothing to prove wrong. Your statement "I think microsoft is leading the way with xbl & proving to all other companies that they can also charge for online & gamers will love it." is an opinion nothing more nothing less.

I happen to have a different opinion. I subscribed to xbox live gold starting the day it went live and was a paying member until only a few months ago. When Gold first went live it was something new, fresh and something you could not get as an experience anywhere else. I no longer deem the service worthy of my money in this day and age when you can find most services if not all for free elsewhere that they provide.

I instead switched to psn+ and have already enjoyed the ability to receive many games, over a dozen that I have been able to download and enjoy for free whether it be ps3, vita or psn titles.

I am still paying a fee which is fine because I am finding more value with psn+.

If I get to the point in time where Sony changes up their model and I feel as though it is no longer worth my hard earned money I will also decide to no longer subscribe to psn+, go back to being a regular psn member and still game for free online when I choose to do so.

As someone who was a Gold member from the very beginning, I get so tired of hearing how much better the live service is. It is in my humble opinion it is not. It is covered in ads, can't play online without it, can't view netflix without it and most of their new partnerships never bring anything to the table that really make the experience any better, just more partnerships to talk up that they have.

At this point my copy of HALO 4 is basically useless because I can't access much of the content on the disc because I choose to no longer support Gold. It's a joke.

clintos591926d ago

So basically your telling me because my friends enjoy playing on xbl its ok to charge ppl to play online while other systems pc/ps3/wii u provide free services to do the exact same thing. Makes sense? Lol

Theres a big difference though with psn because it provides free games, discounts, & gives u early access to betas & more which xbl doesnt offer none of besides playing online & a few apps. Ps plus is worth it and has value compared to xbl.

Mr Blings
I totally agree its my opinion but I edited and ask to prove me wrong to the eisagrees I had. None of them really could debunk my opinion because its the truth. Atleast im not the type to just comment with bs like some fanboys do on here. I voice my true opinion but never in a blind dishonest way. Good day to all 3 reply's & thank u for atleast replying.

MrBeatdown1925d ago (Edited 1925d ago )

"Prove me wrong then."

Since you asked...

There's 46 million active accounts, both Gold, and free. They aren't all paying.

Here's where the 46 million is from, with no mention of whether they are Gold or free...

MS claimed there that there was a 15% increase over the previous year's 40 million, which Aaron Greenberg said included Gold and free accounts...

And a few years ago, Microsoft said about half pay for Gold...

If that percentage holds true, and there's no reason to think that would drastically change over the past two years, the number of paying customers is around actually around half of that 46 million, so 20 - 25 million is more accurate.

Compared to the 80 million or so 360s out there, that's a whole lot of people not interested in paying.

Mr_Writer851925d ago

There are many reasons why Live took off. One the lateness and high price of the PS3 in Europe and the US.

Another is the Xbox is an American product, so it's no surprise that America is where it was bought the most (just like how Japanese consoles do better in Japan).

The Xbox with its early lead and cheaper price took a chunk out of Sonys market share. And because they released first many jumped onto live despite the price.

I'm sure you have seen countless threads and comments on gaming sites saying 'live is better then psn'. And to be fair it is stronger, but that's to be expected as your paying for it.

Now the new Xbox will be popular regardless of negative press, as again its an American product that will mean it will be popular in America at least.

BUT (and this is purely opinion) Sony have made a few plays this gen and for next gen that could take back a chunk of their market share back off MS (I think more so in Europe then the U.S)

First Playstation Plus. Already some multiplatform owners have claimed that they havnt re-subbed to Live, and instead used the money to go onto plus. Now I believe this will probably be a small number, but still.

Next is the rumours of a planned world wide release in October this year. Now that's one of the advantages MS had over the PS3 this gen gone. Without the year head start it means both sides have to make their product the most desirable.

The next is price, but until we see the prices of both its hard to say. If the Xbox charges for live but is $100 cheaper, but the PS4 online is free (I have a feeling it will be I tell you why in a minute) then some people who are ATM on 360 jump ship to PS4.

Now the reason I believe PSN will be still free is because of the Vita. It offers everything the PS3 does AND cross game chat. For free, now the Vita and PS4 where designed and worked on at the same time. So why would one be free and the other not?

geassdanny1925d ago

So Mr double edit, I am pretty sure getting an overall figure of Xbox users, doesn't mean they're all paying gold members. If that's the case you might as well say there are globally 74 million paying psn plus. But any sane person knows that's not the case. Except fanboys across the board.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1925d ago
Dlacy13g1926d ago

While I agree with the authors notion of "wait and see" on all matters of next Xbox rumors, I can't help but wonder why he hasn't taken into consideration any of the more recent developments as he discusses the rumors.

I suppose it is par for the course on all these rumor based opinion pieces. They are commenting on rumors and the rumors change as the wind does it seems these days.

sway_z1926d ago (Edited 1926d ago )

Microsoft need to allow basic MP as standard (Free) next gen.

If PS4 online play remains free, then surely MS will be heavily criticized, unless they include MP as part of an overall paid subscription giving access to everything.

Which would be cool if you want the whole Cha Bang Bang, but what if gamers don't want the media options?

I hope there is a media uproar and the net goes crazy mad at MS if it materializes at E3 MP is still going to cost gamers.

Especially since Nintendo & Sony (fingers crossed PS4) will probably keep MP free on their systems.

dcbronco1926d ago

Gamers want media options. PS3 users seem to want them more than anyone based on the amount of time they spend streaming shows and watching Blu-rays. Servers cost money. I've never understood why people think that should just be given to them. Besides Sony convincing them of that. Something Sony clearly regrets since they made PSN+. MS and Sony spend millions running those servers. Look at the poor job EA does with it's servers just to save money. People should expect to pay for what they get. Sony might have set themselves up for free Gaikai too.

IRetrouk1925d ago

You paid the company for that game, it it has a multiplayer part then ofcourse it should be up to those companys to provide a way to play that.

dcbronco1925d ago

They could just let it work like it was on PC where you had to link with another person. It's better to have it organized for you. No one really liked the way it was done on the PC but some seem to think the companies should cover the cost of providing the online. What happens when a game doesn't do well. Or the company needs money for the next game. At some point some of the pressure has to be taken off of the developer.

You can't have innovation, new IPs, long SP campaigns, free MP and constant upgrades based on a "give 'em everything they want" business model. All of the "1st day purchase, best game ever" comments don't often lead to sales that support all of the other things people seem to think are mandatory. People just want great games but they need to support them to get all of those other things.

geassdanny1925d ago

I don't agree with that. PC gaming has had online gaming with no charge before consoles even contemplated the thought. If you're paying full price for a game, and the components include mp, it should be as a set standard, not an extra fee to pay. I am already paying for my Internet service so I can pay online. I don't and many other users don't want to pay for another thing just to get the most out the game.

dcbronco1925d ago

But that means you can never make a mistake. You're depending on fickle fans supporting every game. That's unrealistic. Developer after developer is going out of business or being absorbed into a larger company(which is bad too).

Gamers want more and more and they aren't willing to pay anymore money. If you look at pricing on anything else in the last 35 years and the price has gone up several 100%. Not gaming. It's up and down, but even though the cost have gone up with everything else, the people that buy games aren't willing to pay much more. They'd rather go to Gamestop to save $5. Sixty dollars might be as much as people are willing to pay. The next thing developers are going to have to do is separate the SP and MP. Or not make one or the other. Or make everything subscription based. Though KotoR makes it clear that might be a waste of money too.

Developers may enjoy what they're doing, but there has to be some give and take. There are some things that I don't like, like microtrans-actions. People complain about all digital but that saves money. Not every game is going to be CoD. I guess we can keep it this way until we're down to EA, Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and Activision. Until they start falling. Orrr. we can go all casual. That would be awesome.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1925d ago
Oh_Yeah1926d ago

There's no way the next xbox will have to be always connected to play know how stupid that sounds? No where in the documents did it say that. Plus what about the troops and other people located in areas with spotty or no Internet... On the subscription thing though , if ms still continues to charge for multiplayer theyre going to get outsold quick.

DragonKnight1926d ago

Money trumps everything, even supporting troops.

Oh_Yeah1925d ago (Edited 1925d ago )

To Microsoft it may..I just did the math and with 40 million paying for live they make about 1.5+ billion dollars a year off of it, yikes.....Where does that money go..early dlc? It's not like we see a bunch of exclusives or any deals on xbox live. I hope customers refuse to pay for it next gen if they decide to charge without making it competitive/ comparable to ps+.

Show all comments (72)
The story is too old to be commented.