Microsoft Marketing Man Explains Xbox Live Rate Hike

[Torrasque]

The new dashboard looks and feels like shit imo.
Its so Wii-ish that it completely passes Wii-ish-ness, and just comes across as stupid.
And I own a Wii?

Honestly, there should be a setting "Put my interface back to what it was please" or "I am sick and tired of looking at Wii motion ba-?I mean Kinect ads. I am not going to buy one, so please put shit back the way it was".

You'd think by jacking up the prices, they could make an interface not look stupid.
Or at least give us the option of not using it.

 

[DragoonX13]

As an owner of all 3 "next-gen" consoles, I can only say that I DO place Xbox live's quality above that of the Wii, but almost the same, if not worse, than the PS3, which gives us it for free.

I stopped using live a bit before the price hike, and I don't plan on going back.
The Xbox Exclusives just don't do it for me, I'm not a huge fan of Halo or Gears.

 

[Sixties Spidey]

Is it just me, or does Microsoft just have the shittiest PR ever?

Sony told gamers that they'd be willing to get a second job to afford a PS3 before launch.

At least Sony isn't trying to hop on the Steam bandwagon. Having to hear MS go from "PC gaming is for fags!" to "We love PC gaming so much, we want to have its babies!" reeks of hypocrisy and stupidity.

 

[mjc0961]

The only problem with their line of thought is that some of us don't care about any of the stuff he mentioned in the article. I don't play Call of Duty and therefore don't care if we get the overpriced to hell and back map packs come out on 360 first. I have zero interest in sports and therefore will never download the ESPN thing. And yet I have to pay more for all this new content I didn't ask for in the first place.

I still say they should go with a second tier with all that bonus crap, and for those of us who only want to play online and get Deal of the Week, we can pay less and let people who actually want stuff like ESPN and Duty maps earlier pay for that themselves.

 

[Brotherofwill]

"As you can imagine, the costs associated with waintaiming ahh serwise ahd thad wuevel and wading wuw wah oh wos weawuwa wah wah whah wu wha *sob* wuuuhehahuuu wahrghhg *tears streaming down the face* wu wu waaargh. Ugh...Ugh..*sniff* Inwastructahrg cows, oh wah couwse... and we...wah..we continuwahghn wah wah *breaks down* waaaaaaaaaaa"

That's what that statement sounded to me. If you have an issue, here's a tissue.

 

[Outcast107]

i love how people who don't have xbox live complain more than those who do.

lol'd

This Lol.

 

[Digikid]

Translation: We saw that you would be able to pay for it so we jacked up the price to make us richer.

 

[antipunt]

I...suppose I can understand it. Xbox live is pretty good and cheap already, so wutevs

 

[Aiden_the-Joker1]

Yes I see his point as no other company could possibly keep multi player running for a very large group of people and not charge anything eh?

 

[SelectivelyEvil13]

I refuse to pay for live any more off of principle, and this load of bollocks makes me feel good about that decision. I only have interest in the online play and have not one iota of care in my being regarding the superfluous rubbish Microsoft is tacking on to make Live look like a better deal. .

1. There are Gears and Halo, and that's it. Most popular online titles like Call of Duty are on the PC and PS3. I'm more of a single player individual, but that in itself leaves me pretty much screwed with the 360...

2. $120 total for two of the "latest" exclusive games, yet I can't even access the one specific portion that makes the price justifiable in the first place? (because the minimal single player campaign is worth a $5 rental)

3. Now it would be another $60 to simply use the multiplayer, no real "game" or additional product, just the "right" to play online as well as have access to numerous features either free on your own computer already or downright asinine (did I bloody ask for ESPN of all things on my game console?!?)

4. I'll take that $60 and buy a game that I can keep and play whenever rather than subject myself to vitriolic, hyper-competitive tossers that should be BANNED. With more regulation and upholding the age limit for Xbox Live, I'm sure Microsoft could cut down the funding due to a decrease in total members while improving the quality of service for the rest of the community.... oh wait, those trolling eleven year olds are their bread and butter with mummy/daddy's credit card...

The problem that has arisen is that Microsoft has not adapted to the demands of that growing audience that is subsequently more diverse. Instead of catering to different interests reflected by varying pricing structures, MS has taken the roll of Frankenstein in stitching together a load of features not everyone cares about, let alone can use like those in countries outside of the United states.

Xbox Live is, in my opinion based off of past experience, a perfectly competent system for online play. But as someone who does not regularly play games enough, especially online, I see no value in what would amount to a wasted $50 $60 considering the minute return of service. So in the scheme of life in general, is ten bucks much? No. But if we are going to attribute an arbitrary entitlement to every cost in life, then I believe we would find much of what we know is inconsequential. Realistically, we are all striving to save where we can, and if that means playing a game on the PC or PS3 for free (or even if it came down to simply cheaper) online play alone, it's Microsoft's stubborn idiocy to blame.

growing infrastructure

Which is what exactly?

ongoing influx of new content

Which most people don't want and would have voted down if given the choice. After all, most of it can be done on PC and other consoles for free.

sheer size of its user base

See this makes no sense, the more customers they have the more each customer must pay. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Well, if alot of people drop Live then maybe we can get the price back down. That is what they are saying.

I absolutely agree with your sentiments.

 

[VanityGirl]

And its *still* cheaper than paying for a damn WoW subscription. I have no problem paying

That depends on how many games you buy to play on live.

WoW costs $180 a year. Live costs $60. You buy two games to play on Live (say Halo Reach and MoH) and you have spent $120. Add the $60 for Live and you have spent the same amount.

Now, people who play on Live probably buy more than two games a year, right?

The WoW client is another cost but hard to calculate because you could just buy vanilla for less than $20 but there are expansions. Let's just say that buying the WoW client is another $60 360 game. So now, if you buy 3 360 games and pay for Live, you have now paid the same as WoW.

HaHa! I caught you now child!

You're right, WoW cost about $180 a year. However, if you want to enjoy WoW, then you'll most likely be purchasing the expansion. For the game to be cheaper, you may want to buy all the current expansions plus the game itself.
The Battle Chest (with WoW and BC) cost $40, add in the $40 Lich King expansion and Uh-Oh, you've already blown $80! Also, with Cata coming out (I think it's $50-60), you'll be spending more. Plus if you want some of the neat little pets/mount that cost money, it will also set you back.

But just paying for a year subscription to WoW+the game and expansions will probably set you back about $240-260.

Now, for XBL.
You pay $60 for XBL. You buy two new games for $60 a piece. If you just total that together, you'll be paying $180, still cheaper than all of WoW's stuff put together. Or, $180 for the things I mentioned with XBL would be equal to a year subscription to WoW.

There's no win-win or lose-lose in either situation.

 

[nofear220]

snip

Basically you can sum up what he said as easily as this

So, we never have enough money to line our velvet pockets with so basically were going to make billions by charging 20% more while not changing xbox live in any drastic way, just keeping it at about the same quality of PSN which sony grows and maintains for free.

 

[nofear220]

[double post, delete mods]

 

[Delusibeta]

And its *still* cheaper than paying for a damn WoW subscription. I have no problem paying

That depends on how many games you buy to play on live.

WoW costs $180 a year. Live costs $60. You buy two games to play on Live (say Halo Reach and MoH) and you have spent $120. Add the $60 for Live and you have spent the same amount.

Now, people who play on Live probably buy more than two games a year, right?

The WoW client is another cost but hard to calculate because you could just buy vanilla for less than $20 but there are expansions. Let's just say that buying the WoW client is another $60 360 game. So now, if you buy 3 360 games and pay for Live, you have now paid the same as WoW.

HaHa! I caught you now child!

You're right, WoW cost about $180 a year. However, if you want to enjoy WoW, then you'll most likely be purchasing the expansion. For the game to be cheaper, you may want to buy all the current expansions plus the game itself.
The Battle Chest (with WoW and BC) cost $40, add in the $40 Lich King expansion and Uh-Oh, you've already blown $80! Also, with Cata coming out (I think it's $50-60), you'll be spending more. Plus if you want some of the neat little pets/mount that cost money, it will also set you back.

But just paying for a year subscription to WoW+the game and expansions will probably set you back about $240-260.

Now, for XBL.
You pay $60 for XBL. You buy two new games for $60 a piece. If you just total that together, you'll be paying $180, still cheaper than all of WoW's stuff put together. Or, $180 for the things I mentioned with XBL would be equal to a year subscription to WoW.

There's no win-win or lose-lose in either situation.

The problem with that argument is simple: you won't run into the expansion content until level 60 or so. Thus, there's plenty of time to play the game without restricting yourself. (And, honestly, learn to shop. Download vanilla via the trial website, buy Burning Crusade for $16, money saved.)

 

[VanityGirl]

The problem with that argument is simple: you won't run into the expansion content until level 60 or so. Thus, there's plenty of time to play the game without restricting yourself. (And, honestly, learn to shop. Download vanilla via the trial website, buy Burning Crusade for $16 and import in Lich King from the UK for $34. And, if you really want Cataclysm, I've spotted it at $39. You need just the base game until level 60 or so, so there's no rush to spend that $89.)

Even though out current conversation is not on topic (but fun!), I will say this:

I wouldn't recommend people buying from the Blizz website. My boyfriend bought Lich King from their website and the key he was given did not work. We thought it was no big deal and called in and the next day he was given a new CD key. So he entered the key in, then had to wait an entire week before playing because Blizz had to verify that my boyfriend (well his acount) was in fact the one entered the code in the first place.

I also know a lot of many gamers who AREN'T smart shoppers and who buy from Gamestop, Wal-mart, ect. Your argument also has the slight flaw of thinking everyone shops smart (or shops S-Mart). And for that matter, the guy I wrote my response to also has a flawed arguement. He assumed all people will buy games new, which is NOT the case by any means.

I can agree that my argument would be flawed, but then again, not everyone buys online. I can agree with you though, seeing as how I have bought things from Blizz's store before. (Except my copy of WoLK, I wanted the box for that, I had to go to Wal-Mart ^^)

 

[hooksashands]

I don't mind paying the extra $10 every year, but can they at least explain all this in everyday English instead of bullshit marketing robot jargon?

"Blah blah consistency blah blah infrastructure dimensions functionality"

Translation:

"Christmas is coming up and we need our holiday bonus. Please help put my kids through college."

 

[Skratt]

So, they shittied up the interface AND charged more for it? Nice. Way to stay classy Microsoft.