By Definition Free To Play Games Are Not Free to Play With Xbox Live

Though by now it should be understood that Xbox Live Gold is synonymous with anything attaching itself to the full access of the Xbox ecosystem. This is a mindset in which Microsoft wants to be considered as the given. From here all the wonderful riches within the Live ecosystem are yours for your pleasure. The only problem, there are other attractive options by which gamers can also have a true free to play experience. With that said, is it then fair to state that by definition the free to play model is non-existent due to the Xbox Live Gold paywell? The simple answer…yes!

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
zeal0us1589d ago

Its free after pay. Honestly requiring XBLG beats the whole purpose of calling it F2P.

cyguration1589d ago

Four people disagreed with you without even offering a counter-argument to explain their disagreement.

Sometimes we see statements where a blanket agree/disagree is necessary, but seriously what could the disagreers honestly have to say to convince someone that you need to pay a subscription fee first to play a free game?

The backwards logic required to defend such an asinine practice would probably make Kant turn in his grave.

n4rc1589d ago (Edited 1589d ago )

Nope.. You choose to assume f2p applies to every cost.. Is your PC and internet free?

No.. The game is free.. That's all f2p is.. No cost for the game itself.

cyguration1589d ago


Funny you should mention that because we're talking about accessing a game. Access to the game is behind a paywall, not the game itself.

No one is talking about paying for the platform (in which case, anyone who is interested in the game and has an Xbox 360 has already paid for the platform, the same as you mentioning a PC or internet access, which is completely irrelevant to accessing a free game on a platform you already own).

It's like Reddit charging a subscription fee to post comments where-as N4G stays free, and someone's defense is "Well you have to pay for a PC and internet to access Reddit, so you shouldn't assume free-to-post applies to every cost."

Backwards logic is still backward.

JokesOnYou1589d ago (Edited 1589d ago )

I can see them likely adjusting at least this part of the XBL Gold/Silver strategy, just for PR purposes, and it would cost them nothing....I mean the f2p stuff is peanuts compared to all the other stuff behind the paywall, and it will likely only really affect a small minority of gamers because still MOST ARE GOING TO BUY A $500 X1 TO PLAY ONLINE.

Hicken1589d ago

Most? Do you have some polls or something to confirm that? Most didn't even play online with the 360, so I don't see where you would get some evidence for your claim.

JokesOnYou1589d ago (Edited 1589d ago )

Hicken here ya go:

"Most impressive, and most illuminating about the company’s future plans, is the growth of Xbox Live. The Xbox 360-centric online service grew 18-percent over the past year, with 46 million members worldwide. With worldwide sales of approximately 75 million consoles, Microsoft has finally reached a point when significantly more than half of its console audience is using Xbox Live. The year-on-year growth is impressive enough, but consider the long term numbers. In December 2010, there were only 25 million registered Xbox Live members. Five years after the console first released, Microsoft was able to nearly double its networked audience."

-hmmm so about 61% are online, and obviously dual console owners for 1 household most likely don't get a 2nd gold, then of course some like me brought the new 360 models, then of course however many 360's no longer work, taking these factors into account that would likely(educated guess)put those who are online at least around 75%. So even 61% is still more than 50% which easily= "MOST".

Even now although its not scientific out of about 20-25 friends and associates I literally do not know anyone currently with a 360 who are NOT online. Furthermore think about it, X1 is already positioned as a more online centric console than 360 was, and it also costs more and while none of the single player portion of the games NEED to be online many will still be *better online, the message from this and the initial "always on" policy is clear that this is an online focused console, honestly and I'm not trying to be rude here but if you are going to buy an X1 with no plans for paying for online you should seriously think about buying another console, you are going to basicly get 2/3rd's if not 1/2 of the experience over the lifecycle of the X1.

Hicken1589d ago

That 46 million includes both Silver and Gold accounts, and in no way indicates that any significant number frequently or even regularly get online. I'm certain my own Gamertag is included, though I haven't used it in so long I don't even remember what the hell it was.

Furthermore, this doesn't break down how many of the accounts are still valid, given the numerous reports of yearly account bans from playing Halo ahead of time and the like. If they DID include banned accounts, this would be inflating the numbers, since those accounts can no longer be used. Of course, we don't know one way or another, but that should obviously be taken into consideration when mulling over these numbers.

Lastly, the quote you give says "more than half of its console audience is using Xbox Live." This does not specify if they're doing as little as downloading demos, or using it for Netflix, or what have you; it simply says they're "using Xbox Live," and I'm certain you know that you don't need Gold to buy games or DL demos from XBL.

Overall, this means you haven't answered my question.

Kudos for the attempt, though.

JokesOnYou1589d ago

Well Hicken all I can give you is that 61% of the users are online, to me that alone is a amazing statistic which is likely much higher given the above factors I already mentioned, of course I can't give you a breakdown of what exactly it is, only suggest that common sense would be the majority are gaming due to 360's main incentive being multiplayer gaming, hell the most popular 360 games are by far online multiplayer games, which is why its often chosen for the aspect. To be fair I think ps4 has really done a great job *on paper* of matching XBL/X1 but make no mistake XBL has always in most any serious gaming conversation been known as the more complete service thus lends creditability to why I believe the above numbers point to the idea that MOST people get xbox for online gameplay.

Finally its either way as much as folks downplay it as a gaming console its played more online and offline than ps3.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1589d ago
strifeblade1589d ago

Yeah i dont think it really matters at this point with sony's mandatory pay to play online and xbox live being good old xbox live gold it is the same thing.

Chances are if you are interested in playing online or f2p games you will buy psn plus.However if sony sees f2p take off and no one buying psn+ because all they play are playing is f2p then sony will readjust their policy to maximize their profits- if not this gen than definitely ps5 lol.

cyguration1589d ago

F2P games are completely free on PS4 and you don't need PS Plus to play them, unlike Xbox One.

Shadowolf1589d ago (Edited 1589d ago )

Quite the contrary.

It is obvious Sony is looking to push the free to model heavily on the PS4, as the article points outs. The launch of War Thunder, Planetside 2, Warframe, DCUO, Don't Starve and Blacklight Retribution all appearing as launch PS4 titles says this is a direction Sony believes they can establish.

We already know Warframe is a cross-platform online experience allowing PS4 and PC users to play together online at launch and b/c Sony doesn't require you to have Plus to play these games online while Microsoft requires you to have XBLG, ultimately means Sony will have the attractive F2P edge unless Microsoft removes the free to play titles from behind the paywall.

If Sony continues to aggressively push the F2P model on the PS4 as it seems they are, PC gamers will be more opt to adopt the PS4 as it closely relates to the PC experience. Just an observation...

dark_1011589d ago (Edited 1589d ago )


its like saying ps3's online service is not free because I'm already paying for electricity and the internet broadband

get the point.. you are paying for the service.. not the game..

If that's your logic, then nothing is free..

Shadowolf1589d ago

Lol! Very true and well said.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1589d ago
Shadowolf1589d ago

Free after pay is no doubt an oxymoron and does defeat the purpose of calling a game free to play with the exception of Xbox Live Gold.

dedicatedtogamers1589d ago

If f2p takes off like a rocket on consoles (up until now, it's only been a minor attraction) then Microsoft is going to need to either

a) change their policy, or
b) get left in the dust

People interested in f2p aren't going to want to pay a yearly sub know, play these free games.

Automatic791589d ago


Having Xbox live and enjoying all the benefits that come with it including free 2 play is just one part of the xbox ecosystem. They don't need to change a thing. Xbox live has just gotten better with time.

Godmars2901589d ago

If only half of all 360 owners are both online and Gold subscribers, then MS is going to have reality to deal with over all of their own PR.

n4rc1589d ago

How are you supposed to get the game in The first place?

Download it off xbl. Hence the need for gold.. Why would ms foot the bill to give you a game that will not benefit them and actually cost them money?

strifeblade1589d ago (Edited 1589d ago )

Why would they get left in the dust?

Take sony psn network for example and compare it to gold. I am sure it took off because there are so many psn players (probably more than gold members). Guess xbox live gold got left in the dust... but wait a minute doesn't xbox have 40 million active subscribers? And didn't sony just follow msoft policy for pay to play online for full fledged retail titles like call of duty and battlefield on ps4? i guess sony is following a dusty path that was set by msoft.

So what happens if f2p players on x1 get interested in f2p games and then decide to buy a gold subscription? If sony sees the market is willing to buy gold (and gold subscriptions rise as a result) for the sole reason to play f2p... then dont you think sony will follow suit and lock that feature to psn+ the same way they have introduced pay to play with the ps4?

So what happens if f2p sky rockets as you said on both consoles- but for some reason psn+ members are far lower than gold subscribers. That would mean sony just closed off revenue and would have revise their policy when they get the chance just like they did with psn+.

ACESupERIC1589d ago

I don't understand why f2p couldn't be free on xbox. Sony is allowing f2p on psn but you'll have to pay for plus for online multiplayer. I'm not happy about paying on psn for multiplayer but I understand the need for it. But f2p is still free. MS locking everything behind the paywall is just wrong. Live is a great service for gamers who want to game online but to charge for access to services your already paying for or are free everywhere else is crazy. I pay for live for the gaming and gaming only. But with the ONE being advertised as an all in one media center a lot of non gamers will be interested in it. What do you think is gonna happen when those people get it home and findout that all these services that they already pay for are locked until they pay MS 60 bux a year?

dcj05241589d ago

You said what I was going to say but better. Well said.

Confickercrash1589d ago

So basically it becomes a fee-to-play game?

Show all comments (31)
The story is too old to be commented.