Why is Microsoft not giving Xbox Live free?
- Thread starter Hellblazer12
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Because they can make money and it's not like a load of people are gone to just quit XBox Live so they don't have to make it free.
there's a difference between download speed and your own internet's speed. if you're using a high-quality internet like comcast then you wouldn't think anything is wrong, but if you were using somthing like the 15 dollar a month AT&T service then it would always seem laggy and crappy.Xyphon said:
Yeah, I was wondering as well. Windows seven is like a God after the vile that was the operating that shall not be named. *shudders as it's still on his desktop*bl4ckh4wk64 said:
Ot: I'm pretty sure that it costs because of how much you get from it. I personally don't own an X-box, but when I've used friends X-box live accounts and gone online the stuff is pretty sweet.
That said, steam is coming to the ps3. This can only be a good thing.
Where I'm from, Chicago, Comcast is faster than AT&T but AT&T's connection quality is better and more stable. I'll take 1.5mbps DSL over Crapcast's 10mbps connection any day.Azaraxzealot said:
Yeah, MGO has dedicated servers for weekly survival and tournaments. Plus, MGO supports dedicated hosts so there is no player host running around with 0 ping like COD.Xyphon said:
or you could use open office (it,s free and legal it can also read more file types then MS office)SpAc3man said:
It costs as much as a normal game - how much could you complain? At least you GET to complain about Xbox live - not the same when it comes to, say, the PSN.
Besides, there are many ways to sell. Sometimes you make it cheerfully cheap to attract as many as possible, and sometimes you make it slightly expensive to give a sense of spending. Some clothes costs 10.000$ and are only used once, merely because the tailor has a name and the rich who buys them wouldn't have it any other way - they like spending a lot.
If you REALLY don't wish to spend for supported servers, you could just hit the PC. But don't expect the same service if you're not paying squat. You get what you pay for, after all.
Besides, there are many ways to sell. Sometimes you make it cheerfully cheap to attract as many as possible, and sometimes you make it slightly expensive to give a sense of spending. Some clothes costs 10.000$ and are only used once, merely because the tailor has a name and the rich who buys them wouldn't have it any other way - they like spending a lot.
If you REALLY don't wish to spend for supported servers, you could just hit the PC. But don't expect the same service if you're not paying squat. You get what you pay for, after all.
I know "fanboy!" will be yelled at me when i say this but surely with the amount of adverts on xbox live that is enough to cover the costs of running live
Let me put it this way...Jumplion said:
You've been on my PS3 friend's list for what? 2-3 years now? How often have you noticed me online? How many times have we spoken or played something together? How many times have we dropped each other a message to say "Ahoy friend, how are you?"
Exactly.. none.
On the XBOX however, I'm almost constantly being annoyed by people I played one freaking game of Crackdown with 5 years ago, who just want to chat about everything from the weather to what's fun to do in my town, or inviting me to jump into a multiplayer game with them if I have the game.
In a nutshell, it's the difference in community that separates the two. PSN is free but it's like Farmville... you might not be paying for it and it's good for a little spot of fun here and there, but it's a pretty empty experience in pleasant window dressing. That and quite frankly it's simpler to use, jump into a party, and join your friends with a simple flick of the button, where as PSN is less aesthetically pleasing, droll, and needlessly complicated at times to the point that I rarely play multiplayer titles on the PS3.. instead it's my "watch blu ray, play occasional JRPG (when available) system.
Steam isn't really a fair comparison. I mean, Steam is a distribution platform first, and a community second. It's profitable because of the money they make selling games, the community services are just to keep you on the platform so you buy more games. XBL Gold is a multiplayer service first, distribution platform second.
I have an XBL Gold family subscription for my whole household and a PSN+ subscription. I prefer my Xbox for online gaming, but that's primarily because the titles I want to play on it handle it better (I want all multiplayer games to have the "Halo-style" matchmaking where I just say "I want to play a game" and it actually connects me to roughly the right people).
Of the two I think XBL is worth more to me. I've had it since it was in beta and never once regretted it. I've had more hours out of XBL multiplayer than any other platform (possible exception of WoW and EVE, but MMOs don't count - I had to pay for them separately). Multiplayer on the PS3 just doesn't feel as smooth or as well integrated. I'm hoping this eventually changes, but in the meantime getting "free" games from PSN isn't so bad (as long as I keep paying them).
But the bottom line is as has already been stated:
The market is willing to pay for it, why give it to them free? (i.e. at a loss).
I have an XBL Gold family subscription for my whole household and a PSN+ subscription. I prefer my Xbox for online gaming, but that's primarily because the titles I want to play on it handle it better (I want all multiplayer games to have the "Halo-style" matchmaking where I just say "I want to play a game" and it actually connects me to roughly the right people).
Of the two I think XBL is worth more to me. I've had it since it was in beta and never once regretted it. I've had more hours out of XBL multiplayer than any other platform (possible exception of WoW and EVE, but MMOs don't count - I had to pay for them separately). Multiplayer on the PS3 just doesn't feel as smooth or as well integrated. I'm hoping this eventually changes, but in the meantime getting "free" games from PSN isn't so bad (as long as I keep paying them).
But the bottom line is as has already been stated:
The market is willing to pay for it, why give it to them free? (i.e. at a loss).
I agree though another contributing factor is that their greedy bastards just like Sony who try to get more money from console sales by saying that their on-line is free its just two different tactics to reach the same end.MEGA PROFIT.Valkyira said:
I think Windows 7 is great! Well....It is next to Vista anyhoo. Certainly beats Windows ME *graphic shuddering*Souplex said:
OT: I quite like Xbox live. It's simple. I played both PSN and Xbox Live round a friend's before I decided on my Xbox. I just found it less alien to me, despite being a PS1 and 2 owner.