Why is Microsoft not giving Xbox Live free?

[Twilight_guy]

So? There making more money on the subscription fee then what they'd make from having a few people switch from PS3 to X-box due to the lack of membership fees. Its more molla to do it this way.

 

[JochemDude]

'Cause they can.

 

[Zaik]

Because people will pay for it.

You can harp on the PSN all you like, but Steam does everything Xbox live does and costs $0/ever.

You can claim PC is the best which it probably is if done right, but I prefer my 200 dollar game system that is designed for gaming than my 500 dollar PC that if I play too many games on, I need to invest almost another 250+ into.

lol? Take your fanboy trolling elsewhere. The op asked why people pay for a service that is offered free other places, and I answered.

I just threw in Steam because it does everything live does for free to brush aside the usual Live > PSN argument.

 

[GotMalkAvian]

The simplest answer is that we continue to pay for it. If you'll notice, Microsoft has slowly been chipping away at the features for free (remember when it was still silver?) subscriptions. Obviously, this method is working and more and more people are ponying up for gold.

 

[PettingZOOPONY]

Because server upkeep costs money, and more money means better upkeep. We pay so there is more money, therefore better servers.

That used to be covered when you purchased a mp game, companies were expected to keep official MP server s up for the lifespan of the game.

 

[Sarge034]

Live has better service then the PSN. It is also more user friendly. I own, and play, on both.

ALSO, you think $60 a year is bad? Why do people pay $15 a month for WoW?

 

[mb16]

For all you boasting about the PC, yes steam may do what XBL does for free, but playing on my xbox i dont have to upgrade my software every few years to play the new games at a good level
lets go for the last 6 years from when the xbox came out
Xbox 360- £2040
Console: £200, live for 6years: £240, 40 new* games: £1600
PC (steam)-£1900
Gaming PC: £600, hardware/software updates: £100**, 40 new*** games : £1200

So really there isnt much difference in it, only £140

*new=£40 per game
**just a guess
***new=£30 per game

 

[Sven_Untgaarde]

I think there is something they should've spent their money on instead of good online support.

i don't think I'd need to 'cough cough hardware problems cough cough' tell you what that problem is.

 

[jakefongloo]

Because servers cost money to run.
It's either charge you, or do what Sony does, and charge developers who will then be less likely to support you.

Not all games run on servers (Call of Duty 2, Gears of War 2).


They charge because they can, and people are willing to pay for what should be free. It's the same logic behind Avatar crap; make a paper doll, then create a market for dressing up paper doll with 1-5 dollar accessories and watch the suckers spend cash on something that does nothing.

The big mac comparison is lame (and overused). Apples and oranges. It's more like buying a nice looking suit you can wear around the house, but you have to pay a fee to wear it outside with others. Too many apologists will make excuses for the practice, but ultimately it boils down to the difference between having more sense than money or having more money than sense.

Thank god your here to tell us all how microsoft runs. Whew, now i won't need to actually know the real answer and I can just parrot little "factiods" that so many other people who have no idea what they're talking about say.

This goes for anyone who is 100% agreement with the policy as well. Unless you have the top executive in finance of this company sit down and tell me if this is necessary or not, you cannot possibly be as sure as you sound right now. If you are then you are identifiably sheep. You heard something you like and now you think you're and expert in it.

I have absolutly no idea why that pissed me off so much. I must have read something like this 3 times before your post. I apologise that it was you i quoted but i stand by what i said... err, typed.

 

[hooglese]

I dont know the offical "reason" but it makes them money... duh

 

[Ziadaine_v1legacy]

Microsoft and free will never happen, They're like two opposing forces.

 

[PettingZOOPONY]

For all you boasting about the PC, yes steam may do what XBL does for free, but playing on my xbox i dont have to upgrade my software every few years to play the new games at a good level
lets go for the last 6 years from when the xbox came out
Xbox 360- £2040
Console: £200, live for 6years: £240, 40 new* games: £1600
PC (steam)-£1900
Gaming PC: £600, hardware/software updates: £100**, 40 new*** games : £1200

So really there isnt much difference in it, only £140

*new=£40 per game
**just a guess
***new=£30 per game

No PC gamer has had to upgrade their PC in 5 years either. And you might as well use the 5 year ago prices on LCD TV's consoles and PCs. Not to mention most console gamers are on their 2nd or 3rd console by now.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Surely it's because they don't want me wasting my precious hours on this planet playing multiplayer games with mean spirited strangers. They have my best interests in mind. I bought a PS3 specifically to play online games for free, but I never use it for that either. Single player experiences are the only ones that seem worth my time. Even if I get all the way through a game and master its subtleties and get ready to compete, I'm already bored of the game and ready to move on. There are exceptions, but I just don't buy games with short campaigns and alleged multiplayer bonuses. I can barely keep up with the games I like anyways.

 

[mb16]

For all you boasting about the PC, yes steam may do what XBL does for free, but playing on my xbox i dont have to upgrade my software every few years to play the new games at a good level
lets go for the last 6 years from when the xbox came out
Xbox 360- £2040
Console: £200, live for 6years: £240, 40 new* games: £1600
PC (steam)-£1900
Gaming PC: £600, hardware/software updates: £100**, 40 new*** games : £1200

So really there isnt much difference in it, only £140

*new=£40 per game
**just a guess
***new=£30 per game

No PC gamer has had to upgrade their PC in 5 years either. And you might as well use the 5 year ago prices on LCD TV's consoles and PCs. Not to mention most console gamers are on their 2nd or 3rd console by now.

yes but after 6years my xbox is running fine and my PC is slowly going to the grave

 

[TheKruzdawg]

Even while paying for the bells and whistles I STILL HAVE TO PAY MORE FOR THE REST OF THE GAME(first strike *cough* *cough*)

Maybe I've missed it because I haven't bought the right games, but besides the DLC, what part of games isn't being included when you buy it? Could I get a specific example of HAVING to own a Live account in order play a game? I've never had that issue and I'm not able to use Live during the summer when I'm not at college

 

['Stache]

I have a theory; it's easy for a middle class man to put art and integrity before becoming wealthy, but an already-wealthy man will do almost anything to become even more wealthy.

 

[marblemadness]

Would you offer something for free when you could get a billion dollars per year by selling it?

($50/year x about 20 million annual subscribers = 1 billion $$$)

I highly doubt that they have lost too many customers to Sony due to the cost of Live...

 

[Kadoodle]

having to pay for something free on other consoles is a waste but xbox live has just too many features from better multiplayer to nice social networking options

Excuse me? Multiplayer is in no way better. Also, the social experience is shit due to the fact that 50% of the community is comprised of pre-teen boys screaming "******," among other things.

The PSN is like omegle, occasional trolls, but an overall clean and a decent experience. Xbox Live is like Chatroulette, you may be more "social", but half of the time you stare at some asshole's dick.



Answer to OP: Because they [Microsoft] can, and because people are too dumb to say "To hell with this shit."

 

[Icehearted]

Because servers cost money to run.
It's either charge you, or do what Sony does, and charge developers who will then be less likely to support you.

Not all games run on servers (Call of Duty 2, Gears of War 2).


They charge because they can, and people are willing to pay for what should be free. It's the same logic behind Avatar crap; make a paper doll, then create a market for dressing up paper doll with 1-5 dollar accessories and watch the suckers spend cash on something that does nothing.

The big mac comparison is lame (and overused). Apples and oranges. It's more like buying a nice looking suit you can wear around the house, but you have to pay a fee to wear it outside with others. Too many apologists will make excuses for the practice, but ultimately it boils down to the difference between having more sense than money or having more money than sense.

Thank god your here to tell us all how microsoft runs. Whew, now i won't need to actually know the real answer and I can just parrot little "factiods" that so many other people who have no idea what they're talking about say.

This goes for anyone who is 100% agreement with the policy as well. Unless you have the top executive in finance of this company sit down and tell me if this is necessary or not, you cannot possibly be as sure as you sound right now. If you are then you are identifiably sheep. You heard something you like and now you think you're and expert in it.

I have absolutly no idea why that pissed me off so much. I must have read something like this 3 times before your post. I apologise that it was you i quoted but i stand by what i said... err, typed.

Ain't mad atcha. Some of us are cozy with being plundered, some of us are not. It's when people qualify it that I start to raise a stink. If MS had a competitor (no, not PSN, I mean on their own system) offering a similar service for free, how long do you think it'd be before they abandon their subscription model? That's the thing about monopolies.

We're cool, though. Don't sweat it.

 

[SilentCom]

Microsoft makes a ton of money from xbox live subscriptions. If you really want to know why it's not free, ask Microsoft.