Xbox One Games With Gold Needs "Subscription Based Access"

[Alex Co]

Xbox One Games With Gold Needs "Subscription Based Access"

Microsoft's Games With Gold initiative for Xbox One will require that users stay subscribed to play the games much like Sony's PlayStation Plus program.

Amid all the commotion regarding the Phil Spencer pointed out that Games With Gold is "different" than Sony's PlayStation Plus [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/134456-Xbox-One-to-Get-Kinect-Free-Version-for-399-in-June] in the sense that you get to keep the games even if your subscription expires, it seems the Xbox One's "free" games initiative won't be different after all. Starting in June, Xbox One users will be able to download Max: The Curse of Brotherhood and Halo: Spartan Assault for free in what Microsoft calls "Subscription-based access."


We're pleased to bring Games with Gold to Xbox Live Gold members on Xbox One in June. Members will have subscription-based access to free games ranging from top hits to breaking indie stars. The program will launch on Xbox One with "Max: The Curse of Brotherhood" and "Halo: Spartan Assault." A single Gold membership will get you access to the free games for both Xbox One and Xbox 360.

Yep, just like Sony's PlayStation Plus, Games With Gold will require that users be a Xbox Live Gold member if they want to continue playing their "free" games. While some might find the news upsetting, don't forget that Microsoft free-to-play games on the Xbox One will still require that players be subscribed to Xbox Live Gold [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/134446-Microsoft-to-Drop-Xbox-Live-Gold-Requirement-For-Netflix-Hulu-Update] -- something the company needs to change soon if it wants to achieve parity with Sony's service.

Are you fine with this news or should Microsoft have one-upped Sony by letting gamers keep the games even if their subscription lapses? Hopefully, the games in Games With Gold for Xbox One will be better than Microsoft's previous offerings for the Xbox 360.

Source: Xbox [http://news.xbox.com/2014/05/xbox-delivering-more-choices]

Permalink

 

[Revolutionary]

GG Microsoft you just killed the one thing you had on PS+.

 

[1337mokro]

GG Microsoft you just killed the one thing you had on PS+.

Well they didn't lie. You get to keep the games!... in your library. They never said you'd be able to play them without paying. Also you will still need to pay money to be allowed to use your internet to connect to microsoft's severs.

 

[Mr Fixit]

I wonder if this will affect games retroactively, I've picked up a couple of them, but don't maintain a gold sub. Not that it's a very big deal, I don't play one of them & the other I can pick up used for $3.

 

[Elijin]

Uh...

This specifically refers to the Xbox One titles with the program, and states so. Yet, within the first 3 posts people are questioning whether they get to keep the games they already got on 360.

Of course the XB1 version is limited in comparison. There are how many games on XB1? you could sign up for a year and have every title within like 8 months.

Im happy with the program really. Means I will play those overpriced XB1 arcade games I keep holding out on.

 

[Andy Shandy]

I wonder if this will affect games retroactively, I've picked up a couple of them, but don't maintain a gold sub. Not that it's a very big deal, I don't play one of them & the other I can pick up used for $3.

Xbox 360 games aren't affected by this, so you're good.

Anyway, I think it's good that they are introducing this for the Xbox One, and they kind of needed to make it subscription-based to make it worthwhile for themselves, as much as the consumer.

Glad to see that it's not changed on 360, as unlike yourself, I do quite enjoy the older range of games that Games With Gold has been offering. It's allowed me to go back and play the likes of Crackdown, and also pick up some old games that I missed. But I realise that's very much different strokes for different folks.

 

[Lightknight]

While it's ever fun to heap ridicule on Microsoft, this makes sense and prevents people from spending $10 for one month to get games and then never renew. This is the only way to maintain a library that has any kind of persistence.

One thing is for sure though, this program sucks for both current gen consoles right now. But 7th gen console owners are reaping all kinds of rewards.

 

[ShakerSilver]

That was the only thing MS had over Sony's PS+, actually GIVING you the games instead of having that glorified rental system. Now both services are practically the same, further emphasizing the homogenization of the console market. Woop-de-fucking-doo.

 

[josemlopes]

That was the only thing MS had over Sony's PS+, actually GIVING you the games instead of having that glorified rental system. Now both services are practically the same, further emphasizing the homogenization of the console market. Woop-de-fucking-doo.

Actually a lot of people prefered to have them rented as the selection of games would usually be more recent (a simple look at what Microsoft and Sony offer would show that).

Its probably more expensive for Microsoft to get the deal that way then Sony for the exact same game since Microsoft actually gives out the game.

I wonder if this will affect games retroactively, I've picked up a couple of them, but don't maintain a gold sub. Not that it's a very big deal, I don't play one of them & the other I can pick up used for $3.

Xbox 360 games aren't affected by this, so you're good.

Do you know that for certainty (do you have an actual source of that)? The end of the phrase does mention the 360.

It would make some sense to make it subscription based for the One alone since its games are all so recent but you know how these things go if we arent 100% sure of what they said.
I really hope that the 360 isnt affected by this.

 

[Andy Shandy]

I wonder if this will affect games retroactively, I've picked up a couple of them, but don't maintain a gold sub. Not that it's a very big deal, I don't play one of them & the other I can pick up used for $3.

Xbox 360 games aren't affected by this, so you're good.

Do you know that for certainty (do you have an actual source of that)? The end of the phrase does mention the 360.

It would make some sense to make it subscription based for the One alone since its games are all so recent but you know how these things go if we arent 100% sure of what they said.
I really hope that the 360 isnt affected by this.

From the source article for the story

**Free Games Offer: For paid Gold members only. On Xbox One, active Gold membership required to play free games you've downloaded. Must download titles during designated window. Kinect and/or hard drive required for some games.

While it obviously doesn't mention the 360 there, the explicit mention of this being the way you have to do it on Xbox One makes me 99% certain that it doesn't affect 360, otherwise they'd be obligated to mention it there.

 

[thehorror2]

One step forward, three steps back. And half the steps forward are things that should've been in place at launch, so it's like they took five steps back before the race even started.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

this is honestly not that bad

i really dont like the idea of having to keep paying a subscription just to keep my rented games avaliable, but in a console in which paying for online is pretty much mandatory, whats the difference?


hell the previous model didnt really make sense because of that

"i get to keep my games even if i cancel my subscription!" - yes but, are you going to? you need Xbox Live to play online, and the most absurd joke of it all, is that some of those free games you got have an online component, so if you stop paying, some of your free games stop working partially

that model wouldve actually made sense with PS+ (back when it wasnt a mandatory service), not with XBL

 

[Atmos Duality]

I would have been shocked if M$ didn't eventually cave to tit-for-tat on this issue eventually.

This is why I don't take any such perk programs seriously; the moment they've done their job and established attach rates...*YOINK!*

 

[Rozalia1]

So are they going to continue giving out old as hell/or bad games under the subscription? They need better content, and a lot more of it if they are going to be better than Sony's offerings. Granted Sony having the Vita gives them an edge when it comes to content so unless Microsoft really goes crazy they ain't topping +.

Also quick question because you know, microsoft. Can users redownload a game they've downloaded previously off this program after the date it was available? I'd assume yes, but its microsoft so it needs to be asked.

this is honestly not that bad

i really dont like the idea of having to keep paying a subscription just to keep my rented games avaliable, but in a console in which paying for online is pretty much mandatory, whats the difference?


hell the previous model didnt really make sense because of that

"i get to keep my games even if i cancel my subscription!" - yes but, are you going to? you need Xbox Live to play online, and the most absurd joke of it all, is that some of those free games you got have an online component, so if you stop paying, some of your free games stop working partially

that model wouldve actually made sense with PS+ (back when it wasnt a mandatory service), not with XBL

I agree with you in that it didn't make much sense.

 

[FoolKiller]

Well I don't care all of a sudden. I liked Games for Gold with the idea of keeping the games. Now its just PS+ and I don't bother with that.

 

[Strazdas]

well, thats one more console argument trampled. Thanks microsoft, your making PC advocacy easier.

 

[satsugaikaze]

The XBO platform (or any current-gen platform, for that matter) has a tiny library of games going on at the moment. If it was a for-keeps system like it is for 360 the subscription would cannibalize actual sales off any game.

For the 360 (which is still for-keeps), it gets away with the system because there's still plenty of stuff to choose from. One indie game and one AAA game (eg. for this month, Dust and Saints Row 3) is like a drop in the water for the 360's ginormous game library, and frankly I'm glad that their system runs like that (especially when online support might well cut out in the distant future).
It would have been absurd to assume the system worked the same way as it would for current-generation gaming - for now, at least.

 

[Glaice]

Stuff like this is why PS4 is ahead and PC multiplayer is miles ahead of you, Microsoft

 

[Racecarlock]

*gasp* You need a gold subscription to access games with gold? Shock horror!

They've been doing this the whole time. You need gold to get demos too. I don't like it, but, well, the xbox 360 was cheaper at the time.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

*gasp* You need a gold subscription to access games with gold? Shock horror!

They've been doing this the whole time. You need gold to get demos too. I don't like it, but, well, the xbox 360 was cheaper at the time.

The difference is that on Xbox One, when you get the Games with Gold, you can only play them while you have Gold. On the 360, you keep those games, and can play them, indefinitely.

Also, you don't need Gold for demos. They are delayed for Silver (the free service), but they are eventually available.