Pachter Predicts $100 Xbox Live "Platinum" Membership
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Pachter really likes this idea of an Xbox Live Platinum membership doesn't he? [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/95558-Pachter-Xbox-Live-Gold-Will-Get-More-Expensive] But I guess he was right about the price increasing (it remains to be seen if it's going to go up even more as he said a year ago).
The dollar sign goes before the number by the way (ie $50).
I consider the valuable part of Xbox Live to be online play only and I think it's well worth $60 a year. I think your perception of its lesser worth is purely psychological so you may be more able to make a good purchasing decision if you imposed a concrete value metric. For entertainment products I like to say that an hour of use is worth one dollar (if you want to be a little more frugal you could say that a minute is worth one cent).cursedseishi said:
The dollar sign goes before the number by the way (ie $50).
Pactcher... SHUT THE F*** UP! DON'T GIVE THEM ANY IDEAS!
First this guy says it will be a good idea for Activision and others to charge a subscription fee for their multiplayer games, and now this?
Do all these "important" people believe everyone has thousands of dollars to spend on a moments notice?
First this guy says it will be a good idea for Activision and others to charge a subscription fee for their multiplayer games, and now this?
Do all these "important" people believe everyone has thousands of dollars to spend on a moments notice?
Agreed. Someone should shut it for him. Extra weapons and armor? Bullshit. There is no way in hell I'd pay an extra $40 a year unless I could get all DLC for free, all Xbox Live Arcade games for free, a free subscription to Netflix, and anything else they charge money for on the service. If that's not the case then fuck that shit.cursedseishi said:
That was awesome! "It's as high as a game like that will get. We here at Gametrailers put a heavy emphasis on originality." "And game of the year is..Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2!". LOLGoGo_Boy said:
If the 'bonuses' are there, and something that interest me, then I'd be all over it.Sniper Team 4 said:
$100 a year? $8 a month? That's cheaper then any MMO I know about.
Even cheaper if I time it to get the subscription for Christmas or my birthday something, because then I'm paying zero dollars, and my family is paying the $100.
But, as I said, the bonuses would have to be worth it. As in: Gimme a web browser. A good one.
Right now I have zero problem paying the $50 or $60 for XBL Gold.
I payed $15 a month for WoW for about a year, so $5 or $6 isn't outrageous to me.
We get extra weapons and armor for money, it's called DLC for games and it's actually optional instead of forcing you to pay for something you might buy.
In an ideal world we'd have a teir specially for online playing that didn't have any of the fancy bells and whistles they harp on about that was either very cheap or free altogether. (which it SHOULD be seeing as game servers are being taken down without penalty and the entire mode works via P2P)
Of course MS knows if they do this they'd lose 95% of their Gold status clients overnight because all we want to do is just play the damn games online which has been a free capability of PCs for DECADES and on consoles since the Dreamcast back in the 90s.
In an ideal world we'd have a teir specially for online playing that didn't have any of the fancy bells and whistles they harp on about that was either very cheap or free altogether. (which it SHOULD be seeing as game servers are being taken down without penalty and the entire mode works via P2P)
Of course MS knows if they do this they'd lose 95% of their Gold status clients overnight because all we want to do is just play the damn games online which has been a free capability of PCs for DECADES and on consoles since the Dreamcast back in the 90s.
While I'm not a fan of the price hikes, they'd have to add some significant value to the service to justify it.
It's a classic price vs. value argument. If we'd have to pay more to get what we already have, then that's crap. Yet, if they add a lot more function, value, media, services (and not just access) then I'd consider it.
It's a classic price vs. value argument. If we'd have to pay more to get what we already have, then that's crap. Yet, if they add a lot more function, value, media, services (and not just access) then I'd consider it.
I'm worried about that as well. The way they are like, "Hey kid! Join Xbox Live for free!!!! Get a silver account today!!!" Then the kid is like, "Oh hell yeah! Online domination here I come!" Then once the kid has the silver account he realizes that his "Xbox Live Experience" is nothing more than what he had by not even having the console connected to the internet. Then he gets money from his parents to purchase an Xbox Live gold account, then ends up sending naked pictures to a guy in Florida for free Microsoft points. Fuck Platinum.Outlaw Torn said:
If you're thinking of what I'm thinking you're thinking of, they already did that, and basically you pay per month to get free shit, discounts, and early demo access. Kind of like Sams Club compared to Walmart. So, not quite the same.LitleWaffle said:
Pachter predictions aren't news, they're a joke - I can't recall one time that he's actually been a 100% right on something. I'm not saying Microsoft won't introduce a higher tier membership, they're bound to be looking at how playstationplus performs.
My prediction:
On the next console generation a subscription will be mandatory for online play on both the Playstation and the XBox, both will offer a premium service on top of this with roughly the level of bells and whistles PSPlus offers now.
My prediction:
On the next console generation a subscription will be mandatory for online play on both the Playstation and the XBox, both will offer a premium service on top of this with roughly the level of bells and whistles PSPlus offers now.
This is precisely how I look at the matter. It is not realistically X amount per month or week or day; I am straight up dropping a trip to the grocery store, a small electrical appliance, or just buying a Full New Release game.cursedseishi said:
If anything, they need a "Bronze" plan for those of us who accept that Silver will apparently never get online, but would like to actually use their Halo or Gears disc for more than a coaster. I would honestly be content with free random online play where I can't even use/hear chat or something of the likes because that is how little I really care about online play. I have used Live before and it's a nice service for multiplayer, but only if you use it enough to give it that value.
But really, I love the "incentives" that he mentions. Armor for Halo? Seriously, the best you've got is a freaking model change that you can't even look at while playing?!? And considering inane features like Twitter and Facebook for Live (plus a price raise), what other BS would they randomly throw in there that has absolutely no relevance to just playing a game online?