Online Fees

I'm moving this discussion over here.

[QUOTE="waflerevolution"][QUOTE="Yagami-Iori"]I refuse to pay more to get online with a game. Thats like paying for the game and then paying AGAIN to get more game that I should already be entitled to.

Yagami-Iori

you are paying for the internet right? and you payed for your computer? same thing. also, you payed for your car... and you still have to pay for gas... same thing...

I get that you're very opinionated. I will agree with you to a point though... if all I was doing was paying to play 1 game online... I wouldn't see the point and the game would have to offer something amazing... for instance, I'd probably have payed to keep Steel Battalion online... but XBL is a service first... the online play of EVERY game available is a bonus. where I draw the line is doubble-paying. MMORPGS on consoles tend to demand that... FFXI, PSO, EQ, ect. but seriously... you aren't paying to play any one game... you are paying for a service. much like you buying a computer then paying to put it online. PSN may be free but it's hardly offering a service... same with Wii... though Wii offers something more resembling the internet... but since Dreamcast did that first... meh...

I probably shouldn't respond, because I don't want to continue this off topic conversation and get the topic locked but anyways...

Still hsouldn't have to pay for it, especially when a lot of it can be paid for advertising. There are plenty of non-intrusive ways to throw an advert at a gamer without runing the game, such as a scroll bar in the lobby or a refreshing electronic billboard during the loading & online initializing screens. And stuff like PSN is free and does exactly what I want it to, gets me online and playing my games, no questions asked. I can get onto EA Sports titles with just my EA account on silver. And all the play-through is fine. It's just MS trying to squeeze even more out of the consumer and I won't pay for it.

I don't mind paying for a game, but I really don't like how it's setup right now.

I'm in agreement with Yagami as far as XBL goes. Given the amount of advertising they throw at me, I would think they could keep the service free. PS3 and Wii don't bombard me with ads, unless I go into the store (but I expect them there). That seems backwards to me, take a look at most subscription websites. Free version is full of ads, pay version removes the ads. Not so with XBL, you get advertised to and you get to pay for it to.

As far as MMOs go I don't mind paying to play as long as they are actively adding content. Blizzard has been doing a very good job with this so I don't mind paying to play that game. My only beef with MMOs is the initial purchase price of the software. I feel that if I'm going to pay a monthly fee to play the game, then the software should be free. Flip it around and if I'm going to pay for the software, then the online should be free.

Thats just my two cents on the subject.

well hey, I'm not going to try to argue... it's not like people are going to change their minds... if anything else, it's the one thing I learned in my many years of internet activity... which I just realized is more then 20 years now...

but I'll point out that XBL is constantly adding new content... so Duncan, by your definition, it's ok to pay?

What new content are they adding that I don't have to pay for?duncanr2n

they add new features all the time... and I'm not just talking about other things to download (even though there are lots of free things now) but like I said, I really don't want to get involved in this discussion... I don't think t has any relevance on game collecting... unless you like reviewing... you can't really review something without using all its features...

I'll be perfectly honest with you, I used to think like Yagami but steel battalion made me a believer... and more to the point, all companies only care about gettign our money. if you think Sony or Nintendo are in it for the people or for the games... you're just being nieve. picking on any one company is silly. I know all companies are out to screw us and take our money, it's how capitalisum works... I don't wnt to hear *****ing about it in either direction...

[QUOTE="duncanr2n"]What new content are they adding that I don't have to pay for?waflerevolution

they add new features all the time... and I'm not just talking about other things to download (even though there are lots of free things now) but like I said, I really don't want to get involved in this discussion... I don't think t has any relevance on game collecting... unless you like reviewing... you can't really review something without using all its features...

I'll be perfectly honest with you, I used to think like Yagami but steel battalion made me a believer... and more to the point, all companies only care about gettign our money. if you think Sony or Nintendo are in it for the people or for the games... you're just being nieve. picking on any one company is silly. I know all companies are out to screw us and take our money, it's how capitalisum works... I don't wnt to hear *****ing about it in either direction...

But there are ways to do it which screws people on one side more than another. As me and Duncan have both said, you can make money on the advert route, which frees us up from having to pay for the pleasure of playing our own games. I'd rather deal with ads and have my money free for either buying more games or maybe even some products which have been advertised. Or, extra in-game content is another route. At least let me online to play and if others want to pay extra to have something shinier than me, let them.

I can see both sides of the debates,

But I have always been of the mentality that if something is worthwhile in my opinion I will pay for it,

If XBL and PSN were equal to me, needless to say I would question the 49.99 a year for Live. The issue is that I don't consider XBL to be equal to PSN. For example last night as I was playing Kane and Lynch, I was able to have a voice chat with a friend who was in Australlia while he was plugging through Mass Effect. Then when Live prompted me that another friend of mine was online and playing GTA IV I was able to invite him to my game of Kane and Lynch all the while still chatting with my Aussie Pal.

Even little things, like when I first got the Live Vision which came with Uno.

I was able to play a simple card game with three other friends who are from all over and we were able to chat and see eachother through Vision and voice chat during the game.

For 4.20 or so a month, I consider just what I save on Long Distance charges to make the cost of Live worthwhile,

But again it really depends on how many of the features that you use, if you are in it solely for Online play, perhaps PSN and XBL are equal for that most basis requirement but a lot of the other perks I use almost everytime I am online like cross game invites or cross game chats makes it well worth it for me anyway.

I don't think capitalism is "screwing people". Nor is profit evil. If a company produces something that others are willing to pay for, then everybody wins. I'm just thankful that Microsoft doesn't charge MORE for Xbox Live. $50-60 a year is not bad for what the service provides. They could have easily charged $100 and millions of people would still pay it. This whole idea whining about how this or that should be free is anathema to me. Don't people understand that you get what you pay for? I don't think the ads visible in Xbox Live are obtrusive. In fact, I'm glad they're there, because maybe the revenue they provide to Microsoft is what is allowing them to continue to only charge us $50 a year for the service.

BTW: It costs A LOT of money to create and maintain Xbox Live. It requires lots of servers, and lots of well paid network engineers. It's a wonder that they only charge $50 per year.

Nobody likes having to pay for stuff. Everybody wants stuff for free. But in reality that's never going to happen and $50 a year isn't that bad. It's way within most peoples budget and as long as people are willing to pay (which they are) it won't change. There's nothing wrong with it that I can see.

A year's subscription to Live is £40 here, that's $80. Even with that mark-up, it's not too bad. Like people have said, it's a good service with a bunch of features. If it was a useless service, or didn't work, or didn't have any real features... then yes, we would be right to question paying for it at all. If it was more expensive than it is, we would be right to question paying that much for it. But really, it's a tiny amount once a year for a good service.

I haven't got a paid subscription at the moment, simply because lately I haven't been playing online. I'm more of a living room multi-player gamer (so I can distract them with M&Ms), but I wouldn't really hesitate to fork out if I wanted to go back to online play.

What I do question is the cost of Marketplace items, be they arcade games or add-ons for retail games. Most of the time it's a complete rip-off. Though that's mainly due to the relative costs of MS points, which are not based on international exchange rates but some arbitrary figure made up at launch. For example (according to some online buddies), 1000 points costs about $12 in the US, while 1000 points costs £8.50 or $17 here. Now that's not fair.

i wouldnt want to pay for xbl when other systems are free like pc or ps3. now if all the consoles charged, then it would be a different story, but i pay $60 per game, and if i can get online for free, then i don't see the point to xbl. the contents they do have are nickel and dime charges. its not like these new features are free. jsmoke03

I love ignorance ^_^

You made mention of free gaming on the PC. It's hardly comparable. While a large percentage of online PC gaming is free, there isn't anything like a decent unified system. It's all rather a mish-mash of competing programs with no real inter-game connectivity or messaging. And frankly, the way PC gaming is going the concept of free online play is dying out. Sure, you can play for free to an extent, but if you want all the features you have to pay (Hellgate: London anyone?). Publishers love that kind of trickery these days. And what about all the MMOs and other online-only games that charge a monthly fee? Wouldn't a single, reasonable charge to pay for whatever server upkeep and maintenance is necessary for all games work much better? Oh wait, that's what XB Live did. I know that it's not at all viable for the PC, but it's better for us.

The PS3 system I shouldn't really comment on as I haven't used it, so feel free to mock my ignorance when I say it seems pretty bare-bones to me and a little crappy. So yeah, it's probably best that it's free. Bet it won't be long before some sort of 'Premium' charge is implemented with PSN though. There's also the quiet push for more MMOs on the system, like The Agency and whatever NCSoft pulls out of their hat. They aren't gonna be free.

[QUOTE="jsmoke03"]i wouldnt want to pay for xbl when other systems are free like pc or ps3. now if all the consoles charged, then it would be a different story, but i pay $60 per game, and if i can get online for free, then i don't see the point to xbl. the contents they do have are nickel and dime charges. its not like these new features are free. waflerevolution

I love ignorance ^_^

enlighten me....