Submitted by OllieBoy 1148d ago | opinion piece

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. (Mass Effect 3, Xbox 360)

« 1 2 3 »
NYC_Gamer  +   1148d ago
MS won't drop the fee since many people view xbl as being worth the 60 bucks a year
AgentWD40  +   1148d ago
I am one of them
Xboxlive is worth the fee in my humble opinion, I would happily pay double for it.
MariaHelFutura  +   1148d ago | Well said
I honestly don't even know how to respond to that.... But, I think I just threw up in my mouth a little..
#1.1.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(178) | Disagree(21) | Report
kneon  +   1148d 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.
#1.1.2 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(87) | Disagree(3) | Report
kamanashi  +   1148d 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.
BuLLDoG909  +   1148d 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,
gamingdroid  +   1148d 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?
#1.1.5 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(52) | Report
neoandrew  +   1148d ago
Are you serious ?
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...
#1.1.6 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(77) | Disagree(14) | Report
trouble_bubble  +   1148d 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.
#1.1.7 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(74) | Disagree(5) | Report
Almir908  +   1148d ago
You're an idiot. Plain and simple.
trenso1  +   1148d 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.
omi25p  +   1148d 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)
#1.1.10 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(51) | Report
Montrealien  +   1148d 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.
#1.1.11 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(26) | Disagree(47) | Report
Muffins1223  +   1148d 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
MrBeatdown  +   1148d 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?
SixZeroFour  +   1148d 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
kreate  +   1148d 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.
MerkinMax  +   1148d ago
I've said it once and I'll say it again.
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.
#1.1.16 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(16) | Report
burger_bob   1148d ago | Spam
cooperdnizzle  +   1147d 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
Shackdaddy836  +   1147d 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_2pacalypse  +   1147d 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.
mechanicleman  +   1147d 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.
ShinMaster  +   1147d ago
You pay $60 to ACCESS content and features that can be accessed for free elsewhere.
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.
#1.1.22 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(23) | Disagree(2) | Report
Soldierone  +   1147d 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.
duplissi  +   1147d 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?
egidem  +   1147d 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.
aaronobst  +   1147d ago

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqyix wqiCag
mysterym  +   1147d 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?
Anon1974  +   1147d 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.
Ace_Man_6  +   1147d ago
Most. Dislikes. Ever.
plumber15  +   1147d 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 why  +   1147d ago
Lol, ive seen it all now. One guy saying he'd pay double...im 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 exclusives...lol. 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;)
#1.1.31 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
spicelicka  +   1148d 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.
#1.2 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(19) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
SwampCroc  +   1148d 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 gamestop.com 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.
#1.2.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(4) | Report
otherZinc  +   1147d 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!
#1.3 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(16) | Report | Reply
MaxXAttaxX  +   1147d 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
#1.3.1 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report
jrbeerman11  +   1147d 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.
#1.3.2 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report
rezzah  +   1147d 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).
#1.4 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
nirwanda  +   1147d 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.
#1.4.1 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report
Sony360  +   1147d 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.
CoolBeansRus  +   1146d ago
People pay so they dont have to deal with hackers. Oh did we forget about that already?
GraveLord  +   1148d 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.
Snookies12  +   1148d 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
CYBERSNAKE  +   1148d ago
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.
hellvaguy  +   1148d 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.
despair  +   1148d 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.
#2.1.3 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(35) | Disagree(7) | Report
Megaton  +   1148d 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.
#2.1.4 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(25) | Disagree(8) | Report
kamanashi  +   1148d ago
PC games typically have dedicated servers not ran by the actual company. That is why they are free.
Montrealien  +   1148d 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...
Imalwaysright  +   1148d 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.
LiL T  +   1148d 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.
#2.2 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(22) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
ZippyZapper  +   1148d 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.
gamingdroid  +   1148d 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.
#2.3.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(20) | Report
P_Bomb  +   1148d 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.
Septic  +   1148d 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.
#2.3.3 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(12) | Report
badz149  +   1148d 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!

#2.3.4 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(1) | Report
badz149  +   1148d 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_Bomb  +   1148d 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?
#2.3.6 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(1) | Report
BuffMordecai  +   1147d ago
You already get the crap of being free, the ads, for a premium price.
gamingdroid  +   1147d 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.
#2.3.8 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(4) | Report
BX81  +   1148d 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.
Imalwaysright  +   1148d 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.
Montrealien  +   1148d ago
They will Grave, once the competition "PSN+" catches up on those features and has them in the PSN+ service.
DragonKnight  +   1148d 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.
GroundsKeeperJimbo  +   1148d ago
I want my phone bill to be less than $5 bucks a month...
DragonKnight  +   1147d 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*
GroundsKeeperJimbo  +   1147d 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?
Rtard THE HD VERSION  +   1148d 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...
enkeixpress  +   1148d 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.
#3 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
digitaleraser  +   1148d ago
I'm an Xbox Live Gold member (have been for several years), and if the next Xbox console still requires me to pay for basic online play, I'm probably going to go with a PS4 instead (as will many of my friends).

The only reason I went with a 360 is because most of my friends had a 360, and the only reason so many of my friends had a 360 was because the core system has always been less expensive than a PS3. Granted, Xbox Live Gold technically makes the 360 more expensive in the end, but that's how MS gets people.
AgentWD40  +   1148d ago
I will put my house on
Sony charging a fee for PSN next gen
despair  +   1148d ago

I'll be expecting you to vacate within 30 days..when you're proven wrong :)
TKCMuzzer  +   1148d ago

Online play will be free for all. Other aspects may require a fee as the PS4 is going to be offering much more in terms of content. But online play will be free, as it should be, that's why we pay the prices we do for games, so we can access ALL of their features.
BlackTar187  +   1148d ago
I pay for live to play with family and friends. But i can never not once justify to myself that it is 'OKAY" in fact it disgusts me that i buy the game and the system and THEN pay my ISP and im not done with paying . its just ridiculous. I have no idea how someone could be okay with it. Im not short on funds either so its not like im just poor and can't afford it. But beuing that i can afford does not mean it sits well with me just cause i can
RXL  +   1148d ago
why would they change anything if people keep paying for it?


like...if people WERE to smarten up and stop paying for it...then they would probably do something about it...

change something...but nope..people still buy it..

sure you get a solid list of stuff but nothing worth the subscription fee IMO

btw..it's not just 60 bucks..you look around and you can get 12 months for 35 dollars..
Megaton  +   1148d ago
They wouldn't charge for it if people stopped paying for it. They caved on GFWL's fee, they'd do the same on XBL if they were backed into a corner. Unfortunately, their fans tend to be more inclined to justify the completely unnecessary fee rather than fight against it.
PixL  +   1148d ago
There are $10 HDMI cables and $200 HDMI cables. They're exactly the same but some people believe in marketing bullcrap which says those for $200 give better picture.

If there's a flock to be herd, there will be a shepherd... or Shepard ;)
hellvaguy  +   1148d ago
Or the counter example would be cambell's .99 cent can of condensed soup with the 2-3 small cubes of meat in thier vs the $3-4 can of chunky beef stew. Im gunna pay more to get more usually every time.
BattleTorn  +   1148d ago
Good example.

It's like people saying they would rather choose to have free-food, than buy their own food.

How could anyone possibly think that the free-food will even compare to what money could purchase?

Sayings like "you get what you pay for" don't stick around because their illogical.
#6.1.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(7) | Report
TKCMuzzer  +   1148d ago

eh? the food thing does not really work. If someone offers me a cheeseburger for free there's a good chance it will taste better than one from MacDonald's. I just would not be getting the extras that the money would buy, which of many don't really make the burger taste any better.
#6.1.2 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report
OllieBoy  +   1148d ago
I'd pay $60 for XBL Gold if it was more like PlayStation Plus. Throw us some free games, themes, and avatar items every month.

All you're paying for is the "privilege" to play online which is a joke. It's a shame millions of people just don't know any better.
#7 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(17) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Noticeably_FAT  +   1148d ago
You get what you pay for, I like the look and feel of the premium service that is Xbox Live. I also like the fact that people cant go around creating new accounts whenever they want.

I know a lot of people who use certain PSN accounts to strictly cause trouble or learn maps on certain games, so they can get better and then play under a main account to get a better K/D/R.

Microsoft is making hundreds of millions off their online and I don't think it's going to change. If anything, I fully suspect PSN will be a paid service next generation. Imagine what Sony could do if they got some of the hardcore online players like Microsoft has.

I've said it for years, PSN=casual online players and XBL=hardcore.

People say the Xbox 360 is for shooters, that's not exactly true, shooters are online and the best online is XBL. So that's where all the core shooter fans go to play.

PSN is so rudimentary in comparison, it's almost a last generation feel, when you consider they've done nothing to update even the look, let alone the feel since it's launch in 2006.

I know I'll get disagrees and that's fine, but you can get free TV with a antenna, which is the equal of PSN or you can opt for Satellite which is like the XBL of television service.

Either way, nobody forces you to buy it, but a lot of us 360 gamer's actually prefer a premium service. It helps keep the riff raff out.
Megaton  +   1148d ago
Exhibit A ^
dcortz2027  +   1148d ago
I've had both PSN and XBL gold, the only difference is one service charges to play online, while the other is free to play. Stop trying to justify paying for XBL gold, you aren't fooling anyone! By the way, why bother bragging about Microsoft making millions off you morons if you guys don't get a single penny from all that money?
FACTUAL evidence  +   1147d ago
^ IKR! Not only that, but these fools can barley get an exclusive made off the hundred of millions of dollars MS makes off these pawns.

I actually laugh all the time people talk about XBL keeping trolling away....go on youtube...soooooo many damn 360 trolls it's not even funny.

You get what you pay for and that's netflix and Xgame chat, because everything else is free everywhere else.......Also, I hate hearing this whole "XBL is hardcore", lol I remember when I had my free 30 days playing COD4 on 360, ownin with the m16........when on ps3 and tried it and got ownt...I'm just saying, the "hardcore" people must be rare to find on 360 because majorit of the time it's kids, and racist crying about dying too much.
trouble_bubble  +   1148d ago | Well said
@noticably fat
"You get what you pay for..."

Only when it comes to MS though, right?

Because when people had to pay more for a PS3, for the Vita's memory cards, for an online pass, for the 3DS, for the freaking 3DO or just 3D in general...suddenly everyone was on a fixed income and Sony, Nintendo, Panasonic, EA, Warners, Activision, THQ, Ubisoft were the devil.

But nevermind that MS charged you way more for a proprietary hard drive, charged extra for wifi for how many years, and not only charges you for online access to games you've already paid for, but also for access to apps you're already paying for like NETFLIX.

That's okay, right? Because paying MS extra to watch Netflix on a 360 is so much more economical than watching Netflix for no extra charge on the PC, PS3, Wii, TV stream or soon the Vita http://www.techradar.com/ne...

This is the oddest gen I've ever played through. People need a Gold subscription just to access Youtube, YOUTUBE, and they think they have a premium service and say 'thank you'. Uh, -nobody- charges you to watch Youtube, except on the 360. Gold's a dinosaur charging people for the WWW piecemeal instead of simply installing a browser. I ain't paying for Facebook, or a demo. Darn right ME3 better have a free gold pass for the demo.
#8.3 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(36) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
PirateThom  +   1148d ago
See, you get it...

Everyone else does something like, say, an online pass and they're the devil. Microsoft have an online pass for EVERY GAME and it's just that "you get what you pay for".

Honestly, it's an odd situation. Microsoft have people so held to the service, they've got them thinking "I pay, so it must be better" and then they'll actually have people DEFENDING a charge for online when no other platform does it.

Well, it's their money. Can't argue if they want to pay for something others get for free.
#8.3.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(28) | Disagree(6) | Report
superrey19  +   1148d ago
Damn, well said.
Majin-vegeta  +   1148d ago
Well said man here's a bub.
kingslayer1000  +   1147d ago
Stop drinking the kool-aid
Captain Qwark 9  +   1148d ago
i........really dont care about the fee either way. its like 5 bones a month, not exactly breaking the bank. would i rather it be free? yes. but do i care that much about 5 a month? no
BlackTar187  +   1148d ago
I think the fee is minimal too but that means nothing you need to look at big picture how much money has microsoft made off you to play online then add up the price of games and the cost of intrnet in that same period the result should be enough for you to care.

When you pay isp and ms and all you do is online gameing your paying to pay online 3x


Some may say the system as well but i don't look at it.

I say all this and i pay yes i do i like playing with my family across country and oversees so im a sucker i'll admit it but i don't like it and you will never see me justifying it as ohh just $5 a month not bad well times that by the users and thats how much more they are making you pay to play something you already paid for.
Hatmantc  +   1148d ago
the point of the article isn't the fee. it's just that multiplayer shouldn't be one of the core reasoning for the fee. it's cool if they make you pay for things like your voice mail, party functions and things of that nature, but to lock out multiplayer, and services like Hulu & Netflix to nonpaying members is just some what of a dated idea
tigertron  +   1148d ago
I hate the Xbox Live fee, especially when the core PSN service is free and just as good.

However, Microsoft know the majority of 360 owners with an internet connection love to play online multiplayer games so they can charge what they like. Its the same principle as convenience stores at service stations. They charge whatever they want because they know customers want what they have.
AgentWD40  +   1148d ago
I just don't get why
Paying for live is still a problem, it isn't expensive and its a great service. Microsoft will never drop the live fee. They make a shit ton of money off it and have plenty of customers like myself who think xboxlive is worth its fee. I have a PS3 as well and yes PSN is free but its such a bog standard service. I can log into xbox live and be in a game with my friends in a matter of minutes thats why I love it.
christheredhead  +   1148d ago
Thats great and all, but like many people have mentioned, the services and online play should be split. If people want to pay to have extra services on top of their account than so be it.

Playing an online game is the same no matter what platform, its a basic service that should be functional with the game. Ive played BF3, COD, homefront and about a dozen other games on ps3 and 360, so what is the difference? Absolutely nothing. Not one single difference. It's always the same game. Only, I have to pay a fee for the same game I could play for free with ps3/pc. It just doesn't make logical sense in any form.

I can log on my ps3 and be in a match with friends within a matter of minutes as well. I wouldn't pay 60 for it though.
#11.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
TKCMuzzer  +   1148d ago
I don't see your point. I switch on my PS3, load up Battlefield 3, press start, select my friend and join. Easy as that, why would I want to pay extra to do exactly the same thing on another console?
Many PS3 games make it easy to play with your friends these days, people are stuck in 2007, things have changed.
#11.2 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
MrBeatdown  +   1148d ago
The problem isn't being unable to afford it. It's the principal of being roped into paying for a hodge podge of additional features that aren't necessarily wanted, just to access the most basic of features in games we've already payed for.

I could pay $60 extra to get better versions of a lot of stuff I have. I could get a faster internet connection. I could get a better TV package. But why should I when I'm perfectly content with a basic package? Unlike other services which offer tiers, Microsoft makes it all or nothing.

People like to justify it by saying "you get what you pay for" but the reality of it is that Microsoft charges for many features that Sony, and everyone else offers for free. If Microsoft was confident that customers valued those features that set it apart from PSN, they would sell the extras separately and wouldn't need to tie in basic online multiplayer to seal the deal. If Microsoft doesn't believe enough in those extras to sell Gold without relying on online multiplayer, why am I expected to think it's worth my money?

If Sony was to tie online play to PlayStation Plus, what would that say about Sony's confidence in their Plus offerings?
h311rais3r   1148d ago | Off topic | show | Replies(3)
munish23  +   1148d ago
After all these years, and people are still complaining? If you don't want to pay for it then don't. Why is it people have to criticize others for what they do with their money, I feel it is worth the price even though I never even pay the full $60 for the year. Even if it was a full $60 it isn't gonna put me out on the streets, people complain about money problems then go to Starbucks everyday willing to pay $5 everyday for a coffee SMH.
KingSlayer  +   1148d ago
"people complain about money problems then go to Starbucks everyday willing to pay $5 everyday for a coffee SMH."

And yet you're ok paying for the Internet twice. Stop shaking your head, it's causing damage.
PirateThom  +   1148d ago
I hate this reasoning... it's ignoring the issue entirely.

$5 isn't a lot per month... but it's working out at $60 a year... XBox Live has been running since 2002... even if we take it as $50 or so, that's $500 or thereabouts to play games online... before you even buy the console and the games. No guarantees they won't look at Live now and Live next gen and factor a higher price for the service in if they add more features either... how much is "too much" to play online?
#13.1.1 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(0) | Report
munish23  +   1148d ago
"It's causing damage"...........hilario us.

Like I said, $60 is not a lot, and if you are so short on money then maybe gaming is not the right hobby for you.

You only have one bubble so clearly you aren't willing to, or even capable of having a proper discussion.


You seem like someone who I can actually discuss with. I get where you're coming from, but using that reasoning of how it adds up over the years can be used for anything. I would hate for the price to go up next gen, but like you said, they probably will. People will still pay for it though, if the content is good I may as well.
We had the CEO of PostMedia, a company in Canada that owns a few Newspaper companies in the country, come speak to us. He spoke about how newspaper companies really screwed up by giving news away for free on the internet and how they will start charging for news online, using a new system. Companies are willing to change to make money, I think Sony may go that way as well next gen.
#13.1.2 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(15) | Report
jetlian  +   1147d ago
when psn gets to XBL level then they can say whatever they want.

Right now party chat, demos on arcade games, better DL games, custom tracks, better UI looks and full DL without install they can talk.

Live 40 on amazon and to add you still get deals every week so if your a hardcore gamer live pays for itself
Why o why  +   1147d ago
Demos for every arcade game is the feature i think gives live plus points. That and the fact ms forces their unified sytem on devs. The paying to access the online component of games you've already payed for on an isp you've already payed for is a minus point. If silver had online access without all the bells and whistles many people would downgrade.. MS knows this and always did. They have us by the balls im affraid. The moment silver is free to go online im not touching gold again.
yesmynameissumo  +   1148d ago
When I drop $60 on a game that has multiplayer, I'll be damned if I pay AGAIN in order to play it. Or use the Netflix subscription I've already paid for. Or watch Crackle videos that are free to watch on phones, PCs and the PS3. Or Tweet. There's not a single thing XBL offers that is worth $60 a year, especially when damn near everything it offers is free everywhere else.
FrigidDARKNESS  +   1148d ago
Folks spend well over 60!00 a month on fast food feeding there faces .....60!00 a year isn't that bad for online gaming entertainment.
Transporter47  +   1148d ago
You're ignoring the issue, is not the amount of money you spend, it's the reason why you're paying, why should you pay to play ONLINE, when you pay for an Internet Service already. Also why pay for something that is free everywhere else except on Xbox?
kevnb  +   1148d ago
If people pay for it they won't stop charging.
kevnb  +   1148d ago
Xbl hardcore Lmao.
jdktech2010  +   1148d ago
I payed 3.33 a month last year by buying 12 month card from Amazon.....If you can't afford 3.33 or have a huge issue with it, might need a better job.....You can find that much laying on the sidewalk.

Would I love it to be free? Sure I would but am I gonna whine like they're stealing from me? No

People need to worry about their own lives and stop telling everyone else how they should or shouldn't run theirs. There are opinions and then there is beating a dead horse with a dead stick with dead ants falling off in turn causing gravity to beat the dead horse again.

*Expecting PETA to come after me for no reason now*
#17 (Edited 1148d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
Beastradamus  +   1148d ago
Honestly if they stopped charging it would be a good move, but I won't hold my breath.

Related video
munish23  +   1148d ago
It may be a good move to get on the gamer's side but it would be a pretty horrible business decision. The reason why they have been so successful in terms of making profits in the gaming sector is due to XBL Gold, and like you said, I don't see them stopping.
Why o why  +   1147d ago
Depends which side of the fence you stand on

Gamer side


Shareholder side
romancer  +   1148d ago
I have never had to pay more than $40 per year for my Gold Membership (thanks to Amazon sales) and i get plenty of value for my $3.25 per month.

It's around the price of one coffee per month (Americano, Vente) from Starbucks.
What's all the fuss about? Jeeesh!
Beahmscream  +   1148d ago
I'd be fine with XBL's fee *IF* it was like PSN. Sony did it right.
SITH  +   1148d ago
After a 2.9 billion loss by Sony, they might want to consider charging for psn services.


And for you delusional people who think that Sony's game division is magically immune to this loss, you need serious help. No matter what the game division did or does, it will be affected by this loss.
undisputed  +   1148d ago
Learn how to read. That loss didn't come from their gaming division. Stop justifying this with an article that has NOTHING to do with the topic.
SITH  +   1147d ago
Take your own advice high-speed, and this quote is from the article you failed to read.

" Sony's executive deputy president Kazuo Hirai (hey, look who it is), who was named new president and chief executive officer as of April 1, speaks during a news conference as the Japanese GAMES, music and electronics giant releases its quarterly earnings reports in Tokyo on Feb. 2. Japanese entertainment giant Sony more than doubled its full-year net loss forecast to 2.9 billion U.S., one day after announcing that its president and CEO Howard Stringer would step aside."

And a gaming division is not separate from the earnings (lack of in this case) or debts of a company. That is a subsidiary dumb-ass. Next time you try to insult someone, try not looking like an ass.
#21.1.1 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(4) | Report
josephayal  +   1148d ago
Best service for just $60
egidem  +   1147d ago
(Steam) better service for $60, no, $50, nope, $10, naaah, but for just $0 a year.
InTheLab  +   1148d ago
If people want to pay to access their own bandwidth and matchmaking, let them. Fools with money do foolish things. There's no convincing 360 gamers that they're being ripped because they don't feel like they're being ripped. Just stop it.

Before I go, I'd like to point out a few more absurd things I've read in this thread...

-There is no $5 a month plan. There's a $9 a month plan which is the only monthly sub MS offers. It's either $9 monthly or $60 annually.

-There's a difference between paying $15 monthly to access an MMO that constantly receives content updates and paying $60 annually to access all of your games and still pay for DLC. If you're not feeling the $15 fee, don't pay it and skip that game. Only that game is affected. If you're not willing to pay for XBL Gold, you're entire multiplayer library is screwed.

-cross game chat...big f***in deal. That's the difference between PSN and XBL. Stop with the lag nonsense. You don't need to lie to yourself to justify paying for Live. If you feel it's worth it...then it's worth it, but don't pretend like PSN is garbage and lacks features when you probably haven't used the service enough to know the difference between the two.

-Sony charging $60 for PSN won't magically heal all of Sony's problems. 2.9 billion loss for the entire company....but a $60 sub will fix that? No wonder you have two bubbles /facepalm.

That's all I got....this is stupid.
leogets  +   1148d ago
its called a 360 cos when people bought the system and realised u have to pay to play online their brains done a full 360.u know the feeling right? when u know uve fucked up.
ive seen people play 360 and moan about lag so ya fee isnt towards connection.broadband is broadband right. so im guessing its to supply them really lame dash board changes that have no effect on online gaming at all. not knocking the system it delivers just as good visualls as the ps3 but u wouldnt get me paying for something thats free elsehwere. simples!
ironmonkey  +   1148d ago
for a lot of people its still a bad time to be paying for shit like that. rather have two pairs of jeans for 60$.
cycofoo831  +   1148d ago
Ill tell you guys one thing... Employees at ms still have their jobs. Ms is doing.a good job at making.people spend money. Sadly its expensive but dam they do a good.job at business
Bob570  +   1148d ago
Let's be honest here, anyone who owns both consoles knows that XBL is much better than PSN. To argue otherwise is utterly ridiculous. And anyone who does a little searching can find a 12 month code for $40 or maybe even a little bit less. And $40 a year comes out to $3.33 a month. It's worth that.
Majin-vegeta  +   1147d ago
Umm bs i own both and they both feel the same the only thing XBL has over the ps3 is Xchat other than that their both the same.
DigitalRaptor  +   1147d ago
XBL is NOT "much better than PSN". It's more unified and has a better interface - that's it. Performance wise, they're on almost equal ground.

And about the $40 a year comment: do you understand the value of money? Do you have kids who might want to hop online as well as yourself? Charge adds up and there are other things such as bills and shopping that need to be paid for with the money you're spending on a universal feature that shouldn't have to be paid for. No-one else does, but Microsoft gladly charges because of apathetic opinions like yours. They charge because they're allowed to, not because it's reasonable.

You can tell me how much XBL is worth it until the cows come home, but it doesn't cease the fundamental principle that to access at least 50% of every game you've bought and will buy costs you that much EACH year and EVERY year! And Microsoft won't stop charging unless something drastic is done. Hey, they might even raise the price a bit like they have done in the past. XBL Gold is like one of those things that reaches a level of irritation among its userbase and lots of angry comments are made, but nothing is quite done about it, and Microsoft keeps smiling!

When the Vita comes out and then the PS4, with the same features of XBL Gold and more and for free, the value in paying for XBL is going to look even more absurd and less worth it than ever. Breaking it all down to cents per day doesn't relinquish the bigger picture. Just because you're forced to pay for it, doesn't mean that you're also forced to sit there defending Microsoft's decisions.
#27.2 (Edited 1147d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Silly gameAr  +   1148d ago
If MP was free, there's no way I'd pay for a Gold sub. I'm sure MS knows this.
Acquiescence  +   1148d ago
As soon as I got my PS3 at the end of 2009...
I never renewed my Gold membership again. Both PSN and Xbox Live offer the same services, the key difference being one is free and the other isn't. In retrospect, paying for Xbox Live was daylight robbery and I'm glad I don't do it anymore.
dkp23  +   1148d ago
I pay for xbox live usually around $35 due to available deals throughout the year.

I switched to ps3 a few years ago to play 3rd party games such as COD and Madden since the online access is free. I had played these games on the xbox prior and didnt want to pay anymore.

So after a couple years of COD/Madden on the ps3, i switched back to xbox because i found out, you get what you pay for. The online experience on the xbox was so much better than the ps3 in terms of connectivity, lag, and smoothness of the games online. My xbox/Ps3 are side by side and the lag i would experience in madden/cod on the ps3 was not fun to play through.

I play in a madden league and in my league, there would be constant disconnects in the group and having to restart games. Games were lagging/disconnecting although i was pulling in 20+ dl speeds and 3+ upload spds, but the lag remained. So i decided to go back to xbox to see how the online experience was and i havent gone back to the ps3 since.

I have not had random disconnect in my madden league games since i started playing may of 2011 outside of my opponent internet dying and EA going down for maintenance, limited connectivity issues with MW3. Both games run smooth online and i really dont have to worry about any disconnects.

This is just my experience and i am sure others will have other experiences as well. But I am ok with paying the $35 or so annually for faster and less clunky interface, better messaging system, better connectivity, better online experience, and better party/chat system.

Take it for what it is worth, but i am ok with paying, but not dumb enough to say i would be happy to pay double :p.

It is pretty common knowledge that the ps3 is free in terms of online access, but xbox live continues to have millions of gold members. You can make excuses that people stay cuz they have a lot of friends on xbox or people are sheep, but clearly, with the amount of people on live, you can see how much people enjoy the experience.
« 1 2 3 »

Add comment

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

Assetto Corsa Vs Project CARS Sound Comparison - Pagani Huayra

16m ago - Here’s a comparison video which focuses on comparing the sounds of the Pagani Huayra in two games... | PC

Jamestown+ Review - Pixel Related

23m ago - Jamestown is a bullet-hell, top-down shoot ‘em up set in an alternate 17th century on Mars. That... | PS4

Find out when Uncharted 4 releases on PS4

Now - Start tracking Uncharted 4 at Releases.com to get important updates about this game release. | Promoted post

Sega Super Bundle Gives 93 Titles at 92% Discount

25m ago - Steam users, from today till Monday March 30th at 5 PM PST, will find that yet another sale has j... | PC

Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - Characters' faces have up to 500 "bones"

26m ago - The lead writer of Uncharted 4: A Thief's End, Josh Scherr said that characters' faces will have... | PS4

Bloodborne Review | US Gamer

28m ago - Does FromSoftware's latest measure up to the high standard set by Dark Souls? Bob shares his f... | PS4