Microsoft removes mentions of Xbox Live from its service agreement

Shortly after one-year Xbox Live Gold subs disappear

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
IRetrouk44d ago

Replacing with xbox online service..

ziggurcat44d ago

more like just lumping it into Game Pass subs.

IRetrouk44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Do you mean gold? It's already in ultimate to be fair, theres no way they are dropping gold, makes them way more money than gamepass alone does.

ziggurcat44d ago

I don't think they're really axing Gold, I think they're just going to tuck it into all Game Pass subs, and not just Ultimate.

IRetrouk44d ago

That would anger a lot of users, more users pay for gold than they do either of the gamepass subs, it would also push up their costs, making them pay for something they dont want, not sure that will work for ms to be honest.

Shaggy230444d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Or, the other option is that they are just getting rid of Xbox Live Gold requirement for multiplayer.

People hate paying for multiplayer, Ive read comment after comment about the requirement for Xbox Live Gold and PS+ for multiplayer and yet PC gamers don't have to pay. Could this be that Microsoft is dropping Xbox Live Gold and instead doing something similar to PS+ on the PS3, ie multiplayer is free, but if you want "free games" you have to subscribe to Game Pass.

IRetrouk44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Why would they give up all that money? What incentive do they have to do that? I mean they could, I just dont see it, gamepass is barely covering the costs of the games ms is putting on it,(ms admits this) how would it also take on the loss from gold? And the cost to run the network? Makes no sense to me.

RazzerRedux44d ago

Microsoft is still selling Xbox Live Gold memberships. You've got people who have paid for multiple years. Does anyone really think Microsoft is going to refund all that money? Game Pass Ultimate explicitly states that it includes Xbox Live Gold. ziggurcat is right. They are reorganizing their services, but expecting free multiplayer to come out of all this is a pipe dream, I'm afraid.

MagUk44d ago

@ Razzer, they could just upgrade anyone who has time remaining on gold to game pass. That way it will up there subscribed game pass numbers for a while to.

RazzerRedux44d ago


For those who bought Live Gold explicitly for multiplayer then they will have to provide a refund if multiplayer is suddenly free. Sure, they could give those customers the option to move to Game Pass, but they cannot arbitrarily move a customer from one service to another. That would invite a class action lawsuit.

crazyCoconuts44d ago

In leaning towards Gold being free and dropping the free games. Doubling the monthly sub as a requirement would be suicide at this point. They can't compete on games (yet) so they're going to have to go the value route again. Free Gold will lose them money, but they'll market the hell out of GamePass and hope to transition people. I think they're going all in and taking the $ losses short term.
Only other option that makes sense is a GamePass Basic that costs $5 and includes MP, but that's honestly it's a bit weird to bundle those two and still call it GanePass

alb189944d ago

I think it will be free.

sinspirit44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

My guess is they will rebrand Live Gold as something related to GamePass.

What I mean is. Live Gold may be renamed so they can have three tiers of GamePass. This way they get GamePass in everyones heads. Give a new solution, and make more incentive to upgrade the tier of service you have. Gold could become a new service, still offering access to games and online, but it may instead give access to one or two GamePass selected titles a month instead, or perhaps the user gets to choose what GamePass titles they want to access for the month. Live Gold could be renamed GamePass Gold. Then, GamePass could be called GamePass Platinum. And, GamePass Ultimate will keep its name. All priced 60,120, and 180 respectively. Then the 120 option would have to offer online play for games through its service to make sense.

This would have to be a while from now. Gold subs would need to run out before a full transition. But, I could see them doing this.

This is a pure speculation and imaginative post of a possible avenue I'd find as a realistic solution IF they were to change the Gold service model.

1Victor43d ago

R.I.P Xbox Live 😢 your name is in the annals of history rest well you earn it.
Anyway I feel it’s a bad move to replace a big recognizable brand name with some new service

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
NeoGamer23243d ago

I think people are making this out to be more then it is. Any changes would be to address games like FF XIV and the Gold paywall requirement for online. It is nice to see MS working to (hopefully) fix these things.

But I doubt there will be any less money wanted from gamers. If people think a bargain is coming I think they would be mistaken.

Christopher44d ago

Not necessarily tied together. One seems more about branding/terminology update, other seems like a way to promote annual of game pass/game pass ultimate.

RazzerRedux44d ago

It is simply for brevity.

"We’ve updated “Xbox Services” to include the Xbox online service, Xbox Game Studios games (including Mojang Games), applications, subscriptions, services and content provided by Microsoft."

Xbox Live is still listed in the Covered Services section.

locomorales44d ago

Xbox Live Gold is no more. They will remove the service and any anual subscription.

You will have three options:
1) Don't pay anything and play F2P games for free, as they always should be.
2) Pay 9.99/mo for Gamepass in one Xbox or one PC.
3) Pay 14.99/mo for Gamepass Ultimate with xCloud on Xbox and PC.

No more anual subscriptions, no more XBLG, no more paywall over F2P games, and no more option to play online without GamePass.

IRetrouk44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Gamepass is barely making money, xbox live gold is making lots of money, if gamepass can barely turn a profit with all of their games on there then how will it also support the loss of gold money? and take on the costs of running the network? For 3 pound more a month? Really? Not every user is going to jump at having to pay more because ms decides to consolidate all of its services into one, I just dont see it. If that were the case all of the gold users would have moved on to ultimate by now, but they havent.

alb189944d ago

Calm down. People have try Gamepass and they will stay paying what is worth. At least, I will. 14.99 for gamepass ultimate is a good subscription. Maybe you can use mutilple Xbox with one subscription.

IRetrouk44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Calm down? What makes you think I'm not? Because I'm not praising or seeing sense in a move I think is stupid? Ok then..

Just for your info though, I'm subscribed to ultimate, I use it, my wife uses it, and my two younger kids do too, it's a great service that offers my family loads of value, but tell me, do ms make more money from me now?, or when I had to buy gold for all the accounts or get a family pass?

I used to buy ms first party games, now I dont have to, ms makes less money from me now than they ever have, how is that good?

My overall point being is that ms can only subsidise gamepass so much, taking the live money away and forcing not only those gold and network costs onto gamepass but gamepass onto people is the wrong move in my honest opinion.

RazzerRedux44d ago (Edited 44d ago )

"Calm down. "

lol....what did IRetrouk say that makes you believe he isn't "calm"? His post is clear and makes sense. Live makes a lot of money. Game Pass does not according to Greenberg. Live Gold, Game Pass, and xCloud for $15 is a good deal and people will see the value in that. $15 for Game Pass and xCloud, not so much. So now you have a service with less perceived value at a higher price and Microsoft has less revenue coming in. None of this makes any sense to me. Certainly not for a company that is moving more and more towards "services" as their primary source of revenue.

locomorales44d ago

I'm not saying I like it. I'm just saying what they are trying to do.

franwex43d ago

I believe their insensitive to free multiplayer is 1-uping PlayStation and Nintendo.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 43d ago
SamTheGamer44d ago

Best strategy to tie up every services. All in one.

Show all comments (31)