Should Online Gaming Services Be Free?

Online gaming has taken on a new life this generation. With Microsoft's Xbox Live service, Sony's PlayStation Network, and Nintendo's Wii Marketplace, the current generation of gaming is enjoying benefits that were limited to PC gamers for so Long. Live is the oldest and most respected of the three online services for home consoles, but Sony's PSN is making a name of its own. The main difference between these two, other than the PSN's lack of a few key features, is the fact that Microsoft charges a monthly or annual fee to utilize the full capabilities of their online service, while Sony does not. Live is more polished and some argue that you get what you pay for, but the PSN has made great strides and is only a few steps away from matching Live. My question is should Sony start charging for their online services, or should Microsoft make theirs free?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
GWAVE3240d ago (Edited 3240d ago )

I'm not going to say what SHOULD and SHOULDN'T be free or even what people should and shouldn't pay for.

I only wonder why people would pay for an online service when you can get 90% of its features for free elsewhere. I especially wonder why people would pay for an online service that is a peer-to-peer network with lag issues. I mean, I can understand the excuse to pay for a WoW account because that pays for server stability, new content, etc., but...I don't know. It's like having to pay a monthly rent on your Schwinn bike simply because it's a Schwinn.

DrRobotnik3240d ago

The money microsoft makes from live does not go toward improving live service. Those multitude of ads on live do that. They use the money they make from live accounts to pay for game exclusives.

rhood0223240d ago (Edited 3240d ago )

Since I use each service for the same thing--online play and downloading demos and DLC---PSN has a definite advantage because it's free. Even if I wanted to DL and watch movies, PSN woulds still hold the advantage for me because its free.

Going by features alone(and not the ambiguous "feeling of community" that some LIVE members claims justifies the price", the feature list of both is 98% identical (w/ each services offering somethings that the other one doesn't), the argument that "you get what you pay for" with LIVE's service really boils down to one or two items that the PSN doesn't have.

So the question should be, are those one or two items worth the yearly fee?

panasonic233240d ago

why do ps3fanboys cared about xbox live so much i mean damned every time i look their an from an ps3fanboys saying live should be free.

GWAVE3240d ago

Well, 360 owners brag about how much better their online games are. Maybe PS3 owners want to have a basic multiplayer experience (something that's offered for free on the PS3, Wii, DS, PC, and PSP) without paying a monthly fee.

3240d ago Replies(1)
Show all comments (9)