Mass Effect 3 Demo Shows the Absurdity of Xbox Live Gold

1UP: The current XBL Gold/Silver division needs to change. After five years of Microsoft's biggest competitor offering multiplayer for free, Microsoft maintains what amounts to a $60 annual surcharge to play online. Online gaming is not new or novel -- it gained popularity nearly 20 years ago. Even consoles began supporting the function in the Dreamcast era. Multiplayer gaming should come standard with any system in 2012.

The story is too old to be commented.
NYC_Gamer2119d ago

MS won't drop the fee since many people view xbl as being worth the 60 bucks a year

AgentWD402119d ago

Xboxlive is worth the fee in my humble opinion, I would happily pay double for it.

MariaHelFutura2119d ago (Edited 2119d ago )

I honestly don't even know how to respond to that.... But, I think I just threw up in my mouth a little..

kneon2119d ago (Edited 2119d ago )

And if online multiplayer was free without a gold subscription would you still pay for it? I would bet the vast majority would not.

kamanashi2119d ago

I wouldn't pay double, I just pay half. Get the 12 month cards on sale. But I will say for $30, it's worth it since it tends to have the best features and least amount of lag in comparison to other consoles.

BuLLDoG9092119d ago

one of the reasons why i never bought an xbox,
we already have to fork out for the console, the games, and the broadband bill.. why would i pay even more when i can get the same(if not better) for free....

anyone who thinks its not a rip off.. either ther parents are the ones paying the bill, or there lying to themselfs to justify paying for that bs,

gamingdroid2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )


... and without the fee, do you think Xbox would offer you all the sweeping changes and introduction of features it has?

The real question isn't why do we have to pay a fee, but why we elect to pay the fee despite free options available?

neoandrew2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

That is a PURE 100% BLIND Xbox 360 FANBOY answer!!!

Why in the hell would you be happy to pay TWICE the price for something you already have...

Man this is just unthinkable, abstract, you are a m$ puppet i guess, no hope for you, sorry...

trouble_bubble2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

Agent, you'd gladly pay double for access to -free- sites like this?

You'd gladly pay double for this:

You realise you already pay Netflix, right? Yet you'd happily pay Microsoft double the money for an app that lets you watch what you're already paying for and/or is free elsewhere?

The bubble's gonna burst, sooner or later. Sooner or later Microsoft will have to survive a console slump. It's happened to everyone from Nintendo to Sega to Sony. Gold could end up hurting them in the long run.

Almir9082118d ago

You're an idiot. Plain and simple.

trenso12118d ago

The fact that you have to pay is one reason why I havnt bought an Xbox yet. The cost of the console and the games is already enough and you pay your ISP for Internet. So you ganna pay MS to use your Internet on a console you purchased? Makes no sense to me.

omi25p2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

I barely play online multiplayer on xbox and yet i still think xbox live is worth paying for, Why??

Party chat and its the key reason i play my xbox nearly every single day and havent touched any other console in near on 2 months.

I only have another console for Exclusives and even then ive traded all but one decent game about a superhero. The rest of the "BIG" exclusives last year i thought were awful (including an xbox 1)

Montrealien2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

Watching people getting trolled like noobs is by far the most entertaining thing on N4G.

/on topic
For now, it is well worth the 60$ a year, and if you are a smart shopper, it can be only 40$ a year. And it offers more then just playing online, the cross game chat, persistent parties and a few more options still trump what PSN offers. I actually suprised these things are still not on PSN yet let alone PSN+ and I see many people on my PSN friends list that pay for PSN+ for what? discounted games free trials for a month and demos ahead of time. If people argue that is worth it, then they are being hypocrites when they say Xbox live is not.

Muffins12232118d ago

I think they need to add free dlc for there exclusive games then it would be worth it.Sure,the online service may be a bit cleaner looking and more easier to do but not near worth 50 :c

MrBeatdown2118d ago


"... and without the fee, do you think Xbox would offer you all the sweeping changes and introduction of features it has?"

If the people kneon mentioned weren't interested in anything but online multiplayer, would they care if they got those "sweeping changes and introduction of features"? Why would they be concerned with new features, if all they are interested in is accessing basic multiplayer?

If people do value those new features, shouldn't the costs associated with those features be passed on to the people who want them? Why should everyone have to foot the bill for additional features like YouTube, avatars, or Bing that they don't necessarily want?

Why not offer a basic tier that allows nothing but the ability to join matches from within a game, a secondary tier which offers cross-game chat, invites, parties and all that, and a top tier that includes everything?

Why must everyone foot the bill for everything, or be locked out of features in games already paid for if they don't?

And more importantly, if implementing all these changes and features isn't financially worthwhile for MS without a $60 fee from everyone, or can't drum up enough interest to get people to pay for it without a reliance on other features, should those new features even be implemented in the first place?

SixZeroFour2118d ago

i think MS should really consider Sony's online model where online is free, and extra is paid...i would still be the few that pay cause i actually do spend alot of time on the apps theyve released thus far, but i think if they offered online for free, they would take in a lot more sales AND THEN with those sales, they have possible gold users

kreate2118d ago

And u guys do know ps3 has party chat and cross game chat right?

From reading the comments above. Cross game chat and party chat is what makes it worth the 60 dollar price tag for them and claims ps3 doesnt have it.

Add me on ur friends list so we can have a party chat on the ps3.

MerkinMax2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

If you pay more than 45 dollars a year for XBL, you are a dumbass. Every year around renewal time I call and say I saw it for 30 dollars from an online retailer, and plan on buying it from them. They have always offered me live for a discounted price. A price I am VERY happy to pay.

2118d ago
cooperdnizzle2118d ago

@ Montrealin.
You are pretty ignorant. You speak of things you have no clue of. If you have psn + You get full ps3 games and ps1 classic and mini games for free. I have over 40 free games. If i add up all that i have gotten for paying 40 bucks a year, i have like 500$ of games. You can hold on to you cross game chat, because you have nothing better to speak of. You can have your one feature that really isn't that cool to begin with for 60 bucks. You make all 360 owners look like fools. All of you say the same thing. A we have cross game chat. You are clearly not the smartest of the bunch. And yes i own i 360 and have gold, but i don't go and say that it is better then ps+ Because ps+ is 10 X better. Fact, just look at all the free stuff ya get. Its in the numbers

Shackdaddy8362118d ago

I wouldn't say it's completely worth it. I just don't mind paying for it. I mean, if I can't pay $60 for 12 full months then there's something very wrong with my job choice :P

da_2pacalypse2118d ago

Seeing as how I have an xbox 360, ps3, and a pc with Steam on it... and yet I have been an xbox gold member for 4 years says a lot of XBL gold. It is completely worth it because it completely puts other services such as the PSN to shame. I think steam is better then xbox live for sure, but that is completely a different playing field. I don't think the fee is absurd at all.

mechanicleman2118d ago

Hmmmm. steam for PC is free! and its awesome thats kinda weird Wii free! PS3 free! and PS3 is where all the games are.

ShinMaster2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

And on top of that, you STILL have to pay for those features (i.e. Netflix, Hulu, sports and other features) plus you get advertisements. Fantastic. You can get Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, etc for free on PS3.

It's a terrible excuse and makes no sense. 

A don't bring PSN+ into this(it's called PS Plus not PSN btw, @Montrealien). This shows how little you know.
It's an OPTIONAL service. Not sure if you've hear of such thing.
It gives you access to free and discounted PS3, PSN, PS1 and classic games, avatars, themes and DLC.
Which, let's be honest, that's the main reason you pay for XBL.

Soldierone2118d ago

Then why not come up with a method like PlayStation? playing online is free, other stuff is a bonus and people have the OPTION to pay for Xbox Live? If EVERYONE on Xbox Live thinks its worth it and will gladly pay for it, then having the option shouldn't hurt them at all since EVERYOne will keep paying for it.

duplissi2118d ago

lol... just wanted to say to all you above me he got you hook line and sinker.... lulz


if you are serious though!? wanna pay mine too?

egidem2118d ago

Just to remind you how much you're getting ripped off by M$, Steam can do anything that Xbox Live can do, $60 cheaper, for $0.

aaronobst2118d ago

@AgentWD40 wqiCag

mysterym2118d ago

After sony's losses I bet they regret not charging for multiplayer now.

What's the betting that the next PS4 PSN will be a charged service?

Anon19742118d ago

I don't think it's hypocritical to pay for PSN+ but not XBL. With PSN+, I'm paying for content. With XBL you're paying for a service that should be standard. Developers build games with multiplayer. With XBL, you're being charged extra to play 100% of the game that you already paid for.

Imagine if you bought a bed. PSN+ would be like paying for extra thread count in your sheets or fluffier pillows. XBL is like paying extra to actually sleep in it.

plumber152118d ago

I swear people say that kind of BS so that they can come on the next day to see what people respond like , instead of having an intelligent comment to have an intelligent response .

Why o why2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

Lol, ive seen it all now. One guy saying he'd pay guessing thats tongue in cheek but montrealien saying getting full games isnt comparable to x game chat....i think hes actually being serious. Free games vs party chat to use whilst you play games.....hmmm. No wonder some people dont complain about It seems some value actual games more than others...not hard to work out which is which

Good result today gooners...sad times but at least she'll get a proper seeing to later if you know what i mean;)

+ Show (28) more repliesLast reply 2118d ago
spicelicka2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

It's definately not worth it and no one wants to pay $60 a year. I just love halo and gears of war online so much, i can't do anything about it.

Microsoft are money whores, now they know why people justify modding their xbox, if i ever got mine modded i wouldn't feel ao bad.

SwampCroc2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

Yeah.. you can't even watch Netflix when Xbox Live is down... even if your Gold.

atleast when PSN got hacked you could still watch Netflix...

you have to be Gold first before your Xbox can stream Netflix....

little shit like that definitely gets overlooked a lot in arguments like this...

I just got a new Xbox Live 12Month Card off digital order for like $42.56 or something after tax.. they have a promo going on... in my opinion that's better than $59.99 a year.. so I snatched it up...

but I also own PS3 and am PS+... and I will say in my opinion of having PS3 for 1 year and Xbox360 for 5 years... that I am more than satisfied with PSN and PS+... and I can tell that MS is starting to implement a more scheduled discount system similar to what PSN has been doing for months.

I have them both. I pay for both.. even though I pay for PSN's extra service since it is completely OPTIONAL because all you need for PSN is the internet and/or a wireless connection/ethernet cable... that's the main difference...

well 2 main differences.... if you buy an xbox game and go home... you can play it right away...

if you buy that same game or any game on PS3 and go home you have to do the mandatory install before you can play it..

this and the differences between network services I believe are two of the reasons gamers always bicker over this one or that one..

normal consumers are going to try and get the best deals for their money, regardless of the product.

for more people gaming online at any given time of the day I would say Xbox has more... but all those people pay for a service PSN offers for free.

otherZinc2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

@Ryan Winterhalter,

PSN "robust" LMAO! SONY's PSN+ is $50 per year & its the equivilant of a SAM's Club discount card! Who the hell do you think your audience is? We (true gamers) know PSN isn't XBOX Live! And Wii: efin please, its bs & you know it!

I've been a member of Live for 8 years, son 6 years, daughter 2 years. Also, only an idiot would pay full price. Live is offered at discounts all the damn time & thats without a "Sams Club card for $50 per year" as SONY charges.

Those of us that have both consoles (360 & PS3) know the facts & PSN isn't close, that is if you tell the truth!

Tell SONY to get cross game chat & have a unified online system; then talk!

Until then, Ryan; STFU!

MaxXAttaxX2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

PS+ has NOTHING to do with the ability to play online and it's optional.

And that "Sam's Club card" you call actually got me several discounted and free games(PS3/PSN and classics) and DLC amounting to $200+ in value. Including RRD+Undead Nightmare bundle for $25 last year and discounts on games like SFIII:Online for $10 on release/launch day instead of the $15 you had to pay.

PSN itself also gets discounts. BUT XBL discounts just don't compare to PS+.

PS Vita has cross-game chat for free. Expect PS4 to do the same.
Until then, you're still just paying for the ability to play online with friends, lol

jrbeerman112118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

I have both consoles and I only use Xbox Live and Psn to play games online. Thats what the core gamer does..... play GAMES ONLINE.

Xbox Live started the online console and charged in order to use it. PSN said OK came out with PS3 and offered it free.

Now xbox live is trying to add on features to make it superior to PSN to justify $5 bucks a month. But what it is giving us is things we already have and worse versions. such as facebook, twitter, youtube, espn, or cable provider tv (which in my case doesnt have half the channels so no thanks verizon).

so people pro Xbox live can brag about things we already have, but in the end your justifying paying $5 bucks a month to play games online and PSN does that just as well.

Xbox should at least go the way of the cellphone and make silver account have everything with adds so we can choose.

Cross game chat (i dont use but people mention it so much) is the only thing live really has over PSN.

rezzah2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

I believe the reason for why people accept a fee for free online and other features is because it is a set of mind.

By a set of mind I mean the 360 came out with the fee (50) already set in place. So it was considered to be a norm in the view of 360 Live. However, if the case was that there was no fee at first, but was added on later then people's reactions would not be "happy". In fact it would be the opposite. It would be the type of reaction observed if a fee was placed on anything that is free. An example would be PSN or wearing clothes.

This is why people do not mind a fee existing for online and feature access; it is because their minds have the fee set to being a norm in correlation to Live.

To understand this (if you do not) I will repeat it using an analogy:

If you and I were born into this world paying for clothes separately and with a fee to be allowed to wear it, we would consider it to be normal. We would not reject this idea or way of life because we grew up with it.

On the other hand, if we grew up paying for only clothes, the idea or enforcement of paying a fee to wear clothes would make us angry (PSN/some 360 owners).

So overall 360 owners who enjoy paying for live, or consider it to be a norm are people who accept paying for what is widely regarded as free. Furthermore, they are happily/unknowingly paving the way for possible company/government control of citizen freedoms. What is regarded as free might one day be seen as a privilege that will only be accessed through a fee (large or small is based on your perception).

nirwanda2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

@rezzah finally someone showing a bit of conmon sense rather than just throwing mud at the other side, i think sony would like to charge to play online but have been put in a position where they can't now.
When the PSN launch it wasn't a ununified service and it was down to devs to provide the service, but now after watching xbox live they realize now they need a ununified service which cost money to run.
The PS4 will be a fresh start for PSN this time and they will definatly charge to play online just like MS.

Sony3602118d ago

I don't think it is. I don't use many of the features that gold is used for other than to play with my online buddies, so why would I think it should be worth 60 bucks for something that's free everywhere else?

They won't drop it with so many people paying already. They are greedy after all.

CoolBeansRus2117d ago

People pay so they dont have to deal with hackers. Oh did we forget about that already?

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2117d ago
GraveLord2119d ago

I agree. Charging for basic online multi-player is ridiculous.

What Microsoft should do is make Silver accounts be able to play online for free, Gold members can have premium features like access to Betas, cross game voice chat and a bigger friends list.

I would never pay another fee to use my own internet connection. Those of you paying for XBL are getting ripped off.

Snookies122119d ago

Yep, that's what I've been saying... It's absolutely ridiculous that every other console and PC plays games online for free, yet with Microsoft you have to pay. Especially considering the quality of online play is in no way better than any of the others. In fact, I'd say I have problems playing online on Xbox more than I do with my PS3. o_O


No, the Xbox has a slightly better quality of online play but it still doesn't justify the $60.

I believe it should be like how 'GraveLord' described it.

hellvaguy2119d ago

"It's absolutely ridiculous that every other console and PC plays games online for free"

Every other pc game is free online u say? Wonder why World of Warcraft is charging me $15/month ($180/yr) and Im payin another $180/yr to play the Star Wars online game. I guess "free" is a relative term here.

despair2119d ago (Edited 2119d ago )


cost of a mmo and free online play are very different things. Its not like any normal online game (as in non-subscription based MMOs) charge anything at all. You're nitpicking.

But you already knew that and just felt the need to oppose Snookies12 point.

Megaton2119d ago (Edited 2119d ago )

Agree about having more problems on Xbox. I experienced far more lag in 3 months of XBL Gold than in 2 years on PSN.

@hellvaguy - You know damn well he wasn't talking about P2P MMOs and their ridiculous fee models. That's not a broad access fee like XBL Gold, it's just the fee that their greedy publishers charge you to play that game. Those also disappear when no one is willing to pay, hence the abundance of free MMOs.

kamanashi2119d ago

PC games typically have dedicated servers not ran by the actual company. That is why they are free.

Montrealien2118d ago


In 2006, Xbox 360 was out and charging for xbox live, a new console was coming out in Novemeber that had a new online service, that was free! yeah, 6 years later, here we are, with the Live service still going strong, why? because it is a good service.

now I didnt say PSN was bad, but when it comes to many features that many xbox live users are used to, the PSN is a little lacking, and I am suprised that PSN+ does not have these features yet...

Imalwaysright2118d ago

"Live service still going strong, why? because it is a good service." Bullshit. Its going strong because 360 owners are forced to pay for it if they want to play online. They have no choice.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2118d ago
LiL T2119d ago (Edited 2119d ago )

Wow it only took 6yrs for these idiots to figure this out.

@hellvaguy.. ummmmm those are mmo's no one forced you to pay subscription and you can still play for free. Do you not understand english.

edit @despair, damn beat me to it.

edit2 @ Noticeably_FAT... HAHAHAAAAAAA. is there schools where your from or just T.V. Sounds like you have no education but im from Canada so maybe I just can't understand how someone could be so dumb.

ZippyZapper2119d ago

Who the f*** has Silver? I don't care about people who have Silver. What's the point of it? Xbox should be subscription only.

Free = all the crap that comes with being free. If you want free go choose something that is free. MS should just get rid of the Silver option and adopt free to play only.

gamingdroid2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

I will be burned on the stake for this, but I agree to some degree. Fact is, there are numerous benefits of being a fee based network.

It keeps out the scum that just creates a new account that is filling up my friends list or people that think they can be @ssholes online and just get a new account.

I also like the premium features XBL has provided, but think the fee should be lower. I never pay more than $30-35 for my subscription.

The way it is right now, to continue to charge the fee MS will be forced to continue to lead. We already have a free option and it is PSN and soon likely Nintendo Network will be free too.

I say, there is plenty of competition as it is and there are plenty of options. Don't ruin mine.... but yeah, go ahead burn me at the stakes.

P_Bomb2118d ago

I'm not sure I follow. Scum that create new accounts that fill up your friendlist? They're your friends. You added them there. New accounts don't add themselves.

As for jerks online, once I leave a lobby I tend not to see those people ever again. There's lotsa rotations running out there. Lotsa people. Odds are slim that matchmaking will keep you with the same group forever, unless you're playing something like 007: Blood Stone which was dead from launch. Made a friend in that game actually cuz we were the only two playing, lol.

Septic2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

I agree with gamingdroid...the fact that Xbox live isn't free means that a gamertag has value and thus, a person's stats has value. Unlike the PS3 where you can have a myriad of accounts, you can never really rely on a person's online stats. Boosting is made that much easier. In that regard, the gamertag and the achievements and online stats associated with it are a more accurate representation of a person's 'true skill'.

However, I really do think playing online should be free. I'm happy with Xbox Live and the services it offers but I know a few of my mates who have been out put off by the cost. Make the use of party chat and other features for Gold users. I would gladly go Gold as I do now, but I think the annual fee should be scrapped. This will obviously dilute the value of a Gamertag though.

badz1492118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

"Free = all the crap that comes with being free."

You would think getting Gold would get rid of those annoying ads too, right? But unfortunately NO! ads are thrown to your face even with Gold. How about that? Still not greedy? Other services get rid of ads if you pay!

M$ is really in the odds here with paid online MP and ads-filled subscription, and yet here we are with people still defending them!


badz1492118d ago

"Free = all the crap that comes with being free."

You would think getting Gold would get rid of those annoying ads too, right? But unfortunately NO! ads are thrown to your face even with Gold. How about that? Still not greedy? Other services get rid of ads if you pay!

M$ is really doing the odds here with paid online MP and ads-filled subscription, and yet here we are with people still defending them!


P_Bomb2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )

Multiple accounts are pro-consumer and a good thing imo. You can make multiple accounts on the 360 too, and you can take em all online with the family pass. You can also change your gamertag. Difference is the fees, which people pay regardless.

I've never heard before that paying for online makes your kill/death ratio or 1000/1000 more meaningful. True skill? Are you honestly implying my near 50 platinums don't mean as much as your 'X' completed games? That Steam cheevos aren't as accurate?

That's a lot of hyperbole, especially when the 360 has sites like this http://www.xbox360achieveme... for guides and boosting. If anything, cross game chat, dashboard parties and that whole "everyone has a mic" thing I always read about would make boosting much easier to organise and more of an issue on the 360. PS3 couldn't even do in-game messaging til what, 2008?

BuffMordecai2118d ago

You already get the crap of being free, the ads, for a premium price.

gamingdroid2118d ago (Edited 2118d ago )


***Scum that create new accounts that fill up your friendlist? They're your friends. You added them there. New accounts don't add themselves.***

When I play online, I meet new people and if I enjoy playing with them, I add them to my friends list so I can connect with them again. On PSN, I find some of these people have multiple accounts that they use. Even my personal friends in real life that I hang out with occassionally, started a new account without telling me. I didn't realize it for over half a year.

Point being, if you have to pay you are far more likely to be attached to your account and play more often online. People that has a microphone and uses it effectively also tend to be more team oriented (or at least aware). Those are the people I would like to meet and play with it.

I also hate it when people change their gamertag, because it is hard enough to remember everyone I play with. Changing your name makes it even harder to keep track of you in my 60-70 friends and you might just fine yourself pruned out.

***As for jerks online, once I leave a lobby I tend not to see those people ever again. There's lotsa rotations running out there.***

I sense that you don't play online a lot... otherwise you would start noticing why building a network of people you enjoy playing with is important to the overall experience. Playing with *randoms* (i.e. matchmaking) is in my opinion a sub-par experience and I rarely do that anymore. If I do, it's a new game that my friends doesn't play and I have to start building that network again....

***Multiple accounts are pro-consumer and a good thing imo. You can make multiple accounts on the 360 too, and you can take em all online with the family pass. You can also change your gamertag.***

It doesn't prevent people from making accounts, but it certainly reduces it. There is a reason why Facebook only wants one account per person, or why Google wants you to post with your real name. The main problem with the "hostility" on the internet is due to anonymity, and having an account you are attached to reduces the likely hood of you being an @ss towards others.

Mutliple accounts might *seem* pro-consumer, but it is anti-community. It allows people to act like @ssholes without repercussion.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2118d ago
BX812118d ago

I'm not getting ripped off. I pay for it because I can and don't mind paying for it. It's not some hidden fee. It's up front. If you want to play MP you have to subscribe to xbox live gold.

Imalwaysright2118d ago

" It's up front. If you want to play MP you have to subscribe to xbox live gold." Bubble up for being honest on the reason why you're paying for live! Too many fanboys here.

Montrealien2118d ago

They will Grave, once the competition "PSN+" catches up on those features and has them in the PSN+ service.

DragonKnight2118d ago

Ok, I'm sorry but I'm quite disappointed that a Canadian (judging by your name) is this ill-informed. The lack of these allegedly necessary (read: completely unnecessary features that have only existed on consoles for one gen and somehow have become "the standard) has been explained by pretty much every Sony exec there is. If Sony could bring those features to PSN, even PSN+, they'd be there. Sony has been good with listening to what users want, hence the no longer HTML based PSN store, improved Trophy support, etc...

It's quite simply a memory issue, and also a patent issue (in the case of in-game custom music) that prevents these features, which is why Vita has the features people like you yammer on about incessantly.

I find it ironic you talk about people being trolled on n4g and then you make troll posts about what PSN is lacking that makes Live worth $60. So a chat feature is worth $60 to you? How much is your phone bill? Bet it's less than $60 and you get better service from it.

GroundsKeeperJimbo2118d ago

I want my phone bill to be less than $5 bucks a month...

DragonKnight2118d ago

GroundsKeeperJimbo: Oh, so when you pay for Live you don't buy the subscription per year, you buy it per month? So, you paid $5 in January I take it and have yet to decide if you want to pay $5 for February maybe? Oh wow, I didn't know you could do that... Wait a minute... YOU CAN'T?!

You almost got me there Willy, I mean Jimbo. Almost had me believing Microsoft would be content to letting people just pay for Live on a month per month basis and not as a whole fee of one game so that you can get a chat feature. Close one there.

Really? You're still trying to justify paying $60 a year for a chat feature? *sigh*

GroundsKeeperJimbo2118d ago

I know you're a fanboy and all, but you missed the point entirely. You pay more for your phone because of its better quality. I pay $75 a month for my phone and $40 a year for Live. So uhhh your point?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2118d ago
Rtard THE HD VERSION2118d ago

beeeh beeehhh bbbbbb butttt its like 16 cents a day , facebook and party chat are worth it.

Its not like you can do that free on other device...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2118d ago
MGRogue20172119d ago (Edited 2119d ago )

If Microsoft were to make online multiplayer free to play for all Xbox Live members.. There'd be a massive uproar from Xbox Live Gold members about why the decision was made straight out of the blue & they'd most likely demand something of value in return like some free Xbox 360 games.. not to mention a ton of lawsuits would be incoming for Microsoft to sort through.

Who knows what would happen, actually.. One can only imagine.

Put simply.. It's too late to change things now. Maybe MS will do the right thing with their next console & keep multiplayer free of charge. Sony has online multi-player nailed down on the PS3 though.. as well as their next console, I can just tell.

It'd be funny if they were to switch sides in the next generation of consoles.. so like, Microsoft's one would have free online MP & Sony would charge for it instead lol.. but nah, I think it's going to be like how it is now with X360 & PS3.