Poll: Should Xbox Silver have Multiplayer?
- Thread starter WOPR
- Start date
... Perhaps this is why you don't buy xBoxes? You know they charge you for multiplayer, so why buy it?
I agree that they should either make gold free or add some shiny new reason to get gold and let silvers play multiplayer for free. I have been an XBL gold member for about 5 years or so now, and I've never had a problem paying for it until recently.
Early on MS was miles ahead on the online front and a simple comparison of services showed that is was far ahead of the non-existant/poor services offered by Nintendo and Sony at various times. This increase in service made it worth paying for.
However, now PS3 and Nintendo (to an extent..) have got their own running online services which boast similar capabilities to XBL - Very similar infact. I've honestly only tried Little Big Planet on the PS3 online, so I don't consider it a fair test of the service's capability, however I know several people who prefer their PSN service to that of XBL, even while paying for gold.
Since the gap between services has been bridged and one service is free while the other costs money, I don't see how MS can reasonably charge for such a service, let alone hike the price. I understand the arguments of customer services/server fees etc. However given they use the host and are nothing more than a glorified matchmaking service, I don't imagine those costs can be THAT high. Sony certainly manages to swallow them with good grace.
I do recognise that there are a few other reasons to join gold, the only one standing out in my mind currently being the discounts of the week. I imagine if you buy a lot of video games, those weekly discounts would probably save you more than you paid for gold, however for someone like myself who rarely buys games, I feel the price of the service isn't reflective of what I'm receiving.
Early on MS was miles ahead on the online front and a simple comparison of services showed that is was far ahead of the non-existant/poor services offered by Nintendo and Sony at various times. This increase in service made it worth paying for.
However, now PS3 and Nintendo (to an extent..) have got their own running online services which boast similar capabilities to XBL - Very similar infact. I've honestly only tried Little Big Planet on the PS3 online, so I don't consider it a fair test of the service's capability, however I know several people who prefer their PSN service to that of XBL, even while paying for gold.
Since the gap between services has been bridged and one service is free while the other costs money, I don't see how MS can reasonably charge for such a service, let alone hike the price. I understand the arguments of customer services/server fees etc. However given they use the host and are nothing more than a glorified matchmaking service, I don't imagine those costs can be THAT high. Sony certainly manages to swallow them with good grace.
I do recognise that there are a few other reasons to join gold, the only one standing out in my mind currently being the discounts of the week. I imagine if you buy a lot of video games, those weekly discounts would probably save you more than you paid for gold, however for someone like myself who rarely buys games, I feel the price of the service isn't reflective of what I'm receiving.
I remember back in the day when Xbox Live Silver had free multiplayer for arcade games. I thought this was great (even though I purchased gold).
Paying to use your own internet connection which you already pay a separate company for is stupid. I would bet money that Microsoft just uses the servers they use for MSN messenger for the chat functions of the Xbox. Especially since it is trivial to link the accounts together. (From the user perspective.) If I was going to pay money I would expect to have dedicated servers for all games period.
I can answer that for you. Recently, my Xbot(I mean that in the nicest way) roommate moved out and was promptly replaced to cover rent. He took with him his Xbox and gold account, obviously. I did get fairly regular use of his Xbox and played over live fairly often.That-Ginger-Kid said:
Now that he is gone, and that there are 360 exclusive games coming out that I want, I am considering buying a new 360. However, I didn't really feel like lIVE was anything special (this is a guy who switches from PSN, LIVE, to PC multiplayer on a regular basis) and most of the games I'm interested in are single player, so I won't be buying live with it. Instead, I'll be using that $60 to buy the new game that's caught my eye(fable 3).
The thing is, I personally think what the PC/PSN have going is the best option. I'm already paying for the internet, the system, and the game. So, using one of the games built in features is only natural. However, if I want some additional cool stuff that is focused at more hardcore gamers, I can fork out the money. Or maybe even if I just want to donate for the service being so good, that option is there.
Making a fee for online multiplayer, especially when the servers are user-based, just seems unnecessary to me. I have plenty of other outlets for online play, I don't need the 360 to be another one that holds an additional yearly cost.
OT: I think they could make multiplayer free (and should if the only focus was being fair to the consumer). I don't think they would though. They've gotten enough people to buy into the idea that it is something they should have to pay for, and therefore can get them to pay. As a company, that is a perfect situation. They don't know I'm feeding them the exact thing others get for free, they're willing to pay for it, and even when they notice others getting it for free, they just assume what the others are getting is worse and stick with me. Of course, by that time, they're so invested in me monitarally that they think it a waste to just leave. It's a perfect trap.
I have. Downloads are much faster, updates are almost instant, plus the XBL community is probably more than twice the size with any given game. I don't mind spending the extra few bucks a month to ensure my stuff works the way I want it to. Never had a problem with XBL on the technical side. However on my ps3, it happens. Not enough to be "often" but it does indeed happen more. A lot more.SomethingAmazing said:
I think it should. Microsoft would never do it because they would lose so much money. Multiplayer is the only reason I have xbox live in the first place
A lot of people use the argument that "Xbox live is user hosted" most of the multiplayer games, yes, but not the sercive itself, with all of its content, updates, etc etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't silver get almost exactly what Gold gets, just not multiplayer and filesharing in games like Halo? The Gold members pay for silver members services, so I say charge the Silver members too, and perhaps the Gold members less, but either way is fine with me.
Em stuff like downloads could easily been down on a torrent like p2p basis as well whether they do that or not is up to them. I think the main point is that every other online service does all this and you should get updates/patches for free. You should also game for free for the type of gaming you do on XBL on a purely multiplayer perspective there is 0 need for the fees. I mean it is not like the PC get free updates and free mods that run off servers obviously these are add payed for and community payed for but what they do is not worth paying for subs wise.Larsirius said:
The reason why we pay for multiplayer on xbox is better service. From what I've heard, xbox live is much better than PSN.
Well aside from the fact that they'd need to create a new type of account (bronze?) for the people who refuse to pay for either, which would then result in people only having gold or bronze. That idea doesn't even make business sense, given the majority of the "free" services available to silver members are services for buying stuff from Microsoft. The idea of charging for silver is the same as Walmart charging an entrance fee to buy your groceries.Larsirius said:
From what I've heard, you've heard wrong. There's certainly no way in hell I'm paying £40/year for Xbox Live in my experience, certainly.VelvetHorror said:
