Wii U online to be free

Link

Nintendo is not planning to charge a subscription fee for the Wii U's online service, company president Satoru Iwata said during a recent shareholders meeting, the English translationof which was made public today. Iwata explained that the decision to make the Nintendo Network (which also operates on the 3DS) free to access was due in part to an effort to accommodate gamers' play habits.

Taking the Wii U online will be free, Nintendo says.

"We have a wide variety of consumers, from the ones who enthusiastically play video games to those playing more casually, who are not always interested in them but try to play a game only when it has become a public topic or play it just during certain periods, like a year-end season and summer vacation," he said. "We therefore believe that services which ask our consumers to obtain paid memberships are not always the best."

Nintendo posted its first-ever annual loss in April, with the Mario Factory losing $458 million for the year ended March 31, 2012. Iwata acknowledged shareholders must wonder how Nintendo is able to offer the Nintendo Network for free when the company is trying to return to profitability. The answer to this, he said, is that the Nintendo Network will be a social forum, which will eventually lead gamers to making purchases based on their friends' activity.

"In developing a network service called 'Miiverse' available for the Wii U, we are pursuing how to amplify and transmit consumers? empathy about a game," he said. "For example, when you see another user enjoying the same game you also play say, 'I enjoyed another game like this and that too,' you might be interested in a game which otherwise would not be on your wish list at all."

Nintendo sees a potential future in the museum guide business.

Elsewhere during the shareholder meeting, Nintendo designer Shigeru Miyamoto said museum guides like the Audioguide Louvre 3DS app could be a major part of the company's business in the future.

"One big thing I recently handled is the Audioguide Louvre Nintendo 3DS, referred to earlier in this meeting," he said. "This has not made money yet, but it has the potential to be one of our core businesses in the future."

Miyamoto also said he often finds himself thinking about the future of the Japanese movie industry and ways that Nintendo can be a part of it. However, Miyamoto tempered his comments by making clear that Nintendo is "not announcing any concrete business plans here."

Lastly, Miyamoto addressed his eventual retirement. He said the last time he spoke about leaving Nintendo, his comments were misconstrued, leaving the press to believe he was retiring. While he has no immediate plans to leave Nintendo, he is aware that the day will come.

"As I am getting older, I have already started thinking of Nintendo without me in the future and I strongly feel that the company has steadily been preparing for doing business after I leave here," he said. "However, last year when I said at an interview overseas that I was doing various things in prospect of Nintendo without me, it led to a direct report on my retirement. So I am aware I have to be careful in talking about this sort of thing."

Iwata also chimed in on the matter of Miyamoto's forthcoming departure from Nintendo. He said Nintendo is working to make sure appropriate replacements are found for Miyamoto and the rest of the aging directors at Nintendo.

"What I can add is that Mr. Miyamoto still will be actively creating things, but we are working for the transition of power to go to younger people at the same time," he said.

Gamespot

Well, at least this is one issue we won't have to worry about if any of us decide to buy the Wii U!

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-04-nintendo-cannot-promise-online-services-always-free

"We cannot promise that Nintendo will always provide you with online services free of charge no matter how deep the experiences are that it may provide," Iwata said in a meeting with company shareholders.

"But at least we are not thinking of asking our consumers to pay money to just casually get access to our ordinary online services."

Iwata explained that paying for such services via a subscription, such as Xbox Live, did not suit more casual gamers.

Question is, is it going to have any games you'd want to play online?Black_Knight_00

Activision released most of the CoD games on the Wii. They will be a given on the Wii U.

Of course its free, thats exactly how it should be.

Too bad i cant buy one at launch. Microsoft made me broke after paying for XBL all these years. Now if only i hadnt been paying for XBL, all the money i would have saved would have been enough to purchase any next gen console ( or current gen console as its Nintendo )

Microsft should take note here. In the future i wont be buying any console that charges for online.

Im glad online will be free, and wouldnt have been surprised if it wasnt.

MS could have made a lot more money off me than they did. I dont care about all the media perks XBL offers. I just want online-multiplayer to be free. I would have bought several games that I ended up not buying because they were mp focused, but I would have had to pay to play online

Im glad online will be free, and wouldnt have been surprised if it wasnt.

MS could have made a lot more money off me than they did. I dont care about all the media perks XBL offers. I just want online-multiplayer to be free. I would have bought several games that I ended up not buying because they were mp focused, but I would have had to pay to play online

svaubel

It's four dollars per month, assuming you can't find a sale on an XBL subscription card.

I really don't get the consistent lamentations about an excellent service that costs less than a Happy Meal. I literally drop more on a single soda at the movies than a month of XBL and yet people act as if the cost is some massive obstacle that cannot easily be overcome.

Also, bear in mind that Nintendo's online functionality has, to this point, been utter crap.

So yes, no sh** it's free.

[QUOTE="svaubel"]

Im glad online will be free, and wouldnt have been surprised if it wasnt.

MS could have made a lot more money off me than they did. I dont care about all the media perks XBL offers. I just want online-multiplayer to be free. I would have bought several games that I ended up not buying because they were mp focused, but I would have had to pay to play online

Grammaton-Cleric

It's four dollars per month, assuming you can't find a sale on an XBL subscription card.

I really don't get the consistent lamentations about an excellent service that costs less than a Happy Meal. I literally drop more on a single soda at the movies than a month of XBL and yet people act as if the cost is some massive obstacle that cannot easily be overcome.

Also, bear in mind that Nintendo's online functionality has, to this point, been utter crap.

So yes, no sh** it's free.

No it's TEN dollars a month.

Well obviously. Anyone who would've paid money for a Nintendo online service is out of their minds.

I always subscribe to XBL gold when I see a "$1 for one month!" thing pop up on my dashboard. That happens surprisingly often, it seems like I have gold all year and I only pay $12 per year. Sometimes I'll go for a week or so with a free membership but I don't really care.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

[QUOTE="svaubel"]

Im glad online will be free, and wouldnt have been surprised if it wasnt.

MS could have made a lot more money off me than they did. I dont care about all the media perks XBL offers. I just want online-multiplayer to be free. I would have bought several games that I ended up not buying because they were mp focused, but I would have had to pay to play online

S0lidSnake

It's four dollars per month, assuming you can't find a sale on an XBL subscription card.

I really don't get the consistent lamentations about an excellent service that costs less than a Happy Meal. I literally drop more on a single soda at the movies than a month of XBL and yet people act as if the cost is some massive obstacle that cannot easily be overcome.

Also, bear in mind that Nintendo's online functionality has, to this point, been utter crap.

So yes, no sh** it's free.

No it's TEN dollars a month.

I have no idea where you got that notion.

You can renew for 59.99 a year which comes out to 5 bucks per month.

You can also find sales and specials all through the year for 39.99, which comes out to about three bucks per month.

I have no idea where you got that notion.

You can renew for 59.99 a year which comes out to 5 bucks per month.

You can also find sales and specials all through the year for 39.99, which comes out to about three bucks per month.

Grammaton-Cleric

Come on Grammaton, let's not play this game. We both know that the 1 month XBL sub is $9.99.

http://www.amazon.com/Xbox-LIVE-Month-Gold-Subscription-360/dp/B001TIAEZI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341528575&sr=8-1&keywords=xbox+live+1+month

I can pull up Bestbuy, newegg, Gamestop links but you already know this.

What you are saying is that I should buy a $60 sub every year just so I can play online. I certainly dont game online on my 360 since I can play online for free on my PS3 and PC. So when a game like Gears of War 3 comes on, I am forced to buy a either a 1 month sub or a full year membership just for this one game. So it's either $10 a month, or $60 to play one game a year.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

I have no idea where you got that notion.

You can renew for 59.99 a year which comes out to 5 bucks per month.

You can also find sales and specials all through the year for 39.99, which comes out to about three bucks per month.

S0lidSnake

Come on Grammaton, let's not play this game. We both know that the 1 month XBL sub is $9.99.

http://www.amazon.com/Xbox-LIVE-Month-Gold-Subscription-360/dp/B001TIAEZI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341528575&sr=8-1&keywords=xbox+live+1+month

I can pull up Bestbuy, newegg, Gamestop links but you already know this.

What you are saying is that I should buy a $60 sub every year just so I can play online. I certainly dont game online on my 360 since I can play online for free on my PS3 and PC. So when a game like Gears of War 3 comes on, I am forced to buy a either a 1 month sub or a full year membership just for this one game. So it's either $10 a month, or $60 to play one game a year.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

I have no idea where you got that notion.

You can renew for 59.99 a year which comes out to 5 bucks per month.

You can also find sales and specials all through the year for 39.99, which comes out to about three bucks per month.

S0lidSnake

Come on Grammaton, let's not play this game. We both know that the 1 month XBL sub is $9.99.

http://www.amazon.com/Xbox-LIVE-Month-Gold-Subscription-360/dp/B001TIAEZI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341528575&sr=8-1&keywords=xbox+live+1+month

I can pull up Bestbuy, newegg, Gamestop links but you already know this.

What you are saying is that I should buy a $60 sub every year just so I can play online. I certainly dont game online on my 360 since I can play online for free on my PS3 and PC. So when a game like Gears of War 3 comes on, I am forced to buy a either a 1 month sub or a full year membership just for this one game. So it's either $10 a month, or $60 to play one game a year.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

I have no idea where you got that notion.

You can renew for 59.99 a year which comes out to 5 bucks per month.

You can also find sales and specials all through the year for 39.99, which comes out to about three bucks per month.

S0lidSnake

Come on Grammaton, let's not play this game. We both know that the 1 month XBL sub is $9.99.

http://www.amazon.com/Xbox-LIVE-Month-Gold-Subscription-360/dp/B001TIAEZI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341528575&sr=8-1&keywords=xbox+live+1+month

I can pull up Bestbuy, newegg, Gamestop links but you already know this.

What you are saying is that I should buy a $60 sub every year just so I can play online. I certainly dont game online on my 360 since I can play online for free on my PS3 and PC. So when a game like Gears of War 3 comes on, I am forced to buy a either a 1 month sub or a full year membership just for this one game. So it's either $10 a month, or $60 to play one game a year.

If you choose to renew it every month using the most expensive means possible then I guess you could make the argument that you are paying ten dollars per month.

But why would anyone opt to do that?

By that logic, there are ways to overpay for anything.

And I'm not playing games here; the fact is that most people are paying 5 dollars or less for their monthly subscription.

I rarely play online and I still happily fork over the paltry sum to have a Gold account because the premium content and sales justify the purchase.

If paying out the equivalent of a cheap lunch for online is that offensive to you, why do you even own an XB360?

If you choose to renew it every month using the most expensive means possible then I guess you could make the argument that you are paying ten dollars per month.

But why would anyone opt to do that?

By that logic, there are ways to overpay for anything.

And I'm not playing games here; the fact is that most people are paying 5 dollars or less for their monthly subscription.

I rarely play online and I still happily fork over the paltry sum to have a Gold account because the premium content and sales justify the purchase.

If paying out the equivalent of a cheap lunch for online is that offensive to you, why do you even own an XB360?

Grammaton-Cleric

Why would I renew it every month? I bought Mass Effect 3 recently for $30 and to play the Coop portion of the game I need Gold. Now instead of paying $10 for one month online, you want me to pay $60 because it brings down the cost to $5 a month? Pay $40 to play ME3 online or pay $90. Umm let me think... yeah, I think I will go with the $40 option.

And lol at your premium content and sales justification. You sure you're not confusing Gold to PS+?

I own a 360 to play games. Sadly MS holds the online portion of these games hostage for $60 a year or $10 a month because people like you are not only happy paying for it, but see nothing wrong with it.

I guess I'm the only one who sees the $1 for 1 month things pop up all the time. Sweetness. JML897

Why dont you post these deals on this board then?

Why would I renew it every month? I bought Mass Effect 3 recently for $30 and to play the Coop portion of the game I need Gold. Now instead of paying $10 for one month online, you want me to pay $60 because it brings down the cost to $5 a month? Pay $40 to play ME3 online or pay $90. Umm let me think... yeah, I think I will go with the $40 option.

And lol at your premium content and sales justification. You sure you're not confusing Gold to PS+?

I own a 360 to play games. Sadly MS holds the online portion of these games hostage for $60 a year or $10 a month because people like you are not only happy paying for it, but see nothing wrong with it.

S0lidSnake

I don't give a damn what you personally do. Most people opt to pay between 30-40 dollars per year for their subscription and that comes out to a fairly small sum per month. You clearly use the console sparingly so how you opt to implement the Gold subscription is your choice but that decision hardly represents the majority of those who use the service.

And why not just buy the PS3 version of ME3 since you clearly prefer the Sony model?

Also, I'm not confusing anything. XBL Gold offers demos earlier to members along with Gold-only sales promotions.

I also flatly laugh in the face of your righteous indignation given that, despite your angst over the price of XBL, you still opt to subscribe to it when it suits your needs. Had you any real integrity or conviction behind the pedantic, whiny assertions and animosity you wouldn't support MS or the service at all.

By the way, "people like me" invest ridiculous amounts of money into this industry every single year. I buy most of my software at launch prices so wetting my panties over 3-5 dollars per month for a service I like (and prefer) hardly seems like much of an issue.

MS has always used the pay model so if that offends you don't support them.

It's really quite simple.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

Why would I renew it every month? I bought Mass Effect 3 recently for $30 and to play the Coop portion of the game I need Gold. Now instead of paying $10 for one month online, you want me to pay $60 because it brings down the cost to $5 a month? Pay $40 to play ME3 online or pay $90. Umm let me think... yeah, I think I will go with the $40 option.

And lol at your premium content and sales justification. You sure you're not confusing Gold to PS+?

I own a 360 to play games. Sadly MS holds the online portion of these games hostage for $60 a year or $10 a month because people like you are not only happy paying for it, but see nothing wrong with it.

Grammaton-Cleric

I don't give a damn what you personally do. Most people opt to pay between 30-40 dollars per year for their subscription and that comes out to a fairly small sum per month. You clearly use the console sparingly so how you opt to implement the Gold subscription is your choice but that decision hardly represents the majority of those who use the service.

And why not just buy the PS3 version of ME3 since you clearly prefer the Sony model?

Also, I'm not confusing anything. XBL Gold offers demos earlier to members along with Gold-only sales promotions.

I also flatly laugh in the face of your righteous indignation given that, despite your angst over the price of XBL, you still opt to subscribe to it when it suits your needs. Had you any real integrity or conviction behind the pedantic, whiny assertions and animosity you wouldn't support MS or the service at all.

By the way, "people like me" invest ridiculous amounts of money into this industry every single year. I buy most of my software at launch prices so wetting my panties over 3-5 dollars per month for a service I like (and prefer) hardly seems like much of an issue.

MS has always used the pay model so if that offends you don't support them.

It's really quite simple.

Oh so you dont give a damn what I do, but have no qualms with telling me how to spend MY money? I believe you were the one in this thread telling people how they should spend their $5, spreading false information when it's clearly $10 a month and is $5 a month only if you buy the $60 yearly fee. And I am the self-righteous prick?

As for your assertion that most people 'opt' to pay $30-40 a month.. I'd like to use my lifeline to call horse sh*t! MS doesn't give us an option to pay $30 instead of $60. If someone was to go buy a yearly sub today, they dont have an 'option' to go pay $30 for it. If they are lucky, they will find it on a sale and yes THATS when they have that option. That option is NOT available everyday and you know it. Still, Best case scenario: they will have to pay at least $10 extra to pay ME3 online.

I bought the 360 version of ME3 because ME1 and ME2 were exclusives and I had my saves on the 360. It wasn't my love of Gold that made me buy it, and it certainly wasn't the prospect free bIowjobs affecting my 'integrity'. I dont 'OPT' to subscribe to it, I HAVE to in order to play my games online. With ME3, in order to get the best ending, you HAVE to play it online.

Also, being locked out of content by MS and calling MS out on it is whining? Now I've heard everything. I find it hilarious that people complain about ondisc DLC, yet turn a blind eye to the fact that this so called MS service locks them out of the entire multiplayer component of a game. I wonder if Sony launched MAG and asked everyone to buy a $60 yearly sub fee on top of the $60 and tried to justify it by saying hey, it's only the price of a Happy Meal.

Premium Service = The occasional sale and Early Demos that are available on every other platform on day 1. Got it! Cant wait for Steam to start charging me $60 a year to buy games from them and to have them market the games to me.

"MS has always used the pay model so if that offends you don't support them."

lol, love it or leave it. What an eloquent response from Mr. Grammaton. Instead of admitting there is something wrong with MS's policy of holding online mp hostage, you turn around and tell people to f*ck off. See, there is nothing wrong with supporting the industry by investing ridiculous amounts of money like you do (Hell I?ve bought 7 games this year on Day 1), but what you are doing here is supporting an anti-consumer policy and there is no denying it. ANY policy that locks off content that I paid $60 for is an anti-consumer policy.

I don't know why people are automatically assuming that the online is going to be a complete sh*tfest like it was on the wii.

If the 3DS is anything to go by they've been improving drastically. (inb4 no1curr bout handhelds)

Oh so you dont give a damn what I do, but have no qualms with telling me how to spend MY money? I believe you were the one in this thread telling people how they should spend their $5, spreading false information when it's clearly $10 a month and is $5 a month only if you buy the $60 yearly fee. And I am the self-righteous prick?

As for your assertion that most people 'opt' to pay $30-40 a month.. I'd like to use my lifeline to call horse sh*t! MS doesn't give us an option to pay $30 instead of $60. If someone was to go buy a yearly sub today, they dont have an 'option' to go pay $30 for it. If they are lucky, they will find it on a sale and yes THATS when they have that option. That option is NOT available everyday and you know it. Still, Best case scenario: they will have to pay at least $10 extra to pay ME3 online.

I bought the 360 version of ME3 because ME1 and ME2 were exclusives and I had my saves on the 360. It wasn't my love of Gold that made me buy it, and it certainly wasn't the prospect free bIowjobs affecting my 'integrity'. I dont 'OPT' to subscribe to it, I HAVE to in order to play my games online. With ME3, in order to get the best ending, you HAVE to play it online.

Also, being locked out of content by MS and calling MS out on it is whining? Now I've heard everything. I find it hilarious that people complain about ondisc DLC, yet turn a blind eye to the fact that this so called MS service locks them out of the entire multiplayer component of a game. I wonder if Sony launched MAG and asked everyone to buy a $60 yearly sub fee on top of the $60 and tried to justify it by saying hey, it's only the price of a Happy Meal.

Premium Service = The occasional sale and Early Demos that are available on every other platform on day 1. Got it! Cant wait for Steam to start charging me $60 a year to buy games from them and to have them market the games to me.

"MS has always used the pay model so if that offends you don't support them."

lol, love it or leave it. What an eloquent response from Mr. Grammaton. Instead of admitting there is something wrong with MS's policy of holding online mp hostage, you turn around and tell people to f*ck off. See, there is nothing wrong with supporting the industry by investing ridiculous amounts of money like you do (Hell I?ve bought 7 games this year on Day 1), but what you are doing here is supporting an anti-consumer policy and there is no denying it. ANY policy that locks off content that I paid $60 for is an anti-consumer policy.

S0lidSnake

I don't know at what point you decided to get overtly adversarial with me given our history of mutual respect and solid discussion but if this is the direction you want to traverse so be it.

Firstly, I didn't tell you or anyone else to do anything. What I question is the whiny lamentations of people who act like a few bucks per month is some sort of massive financial burden or some unethical paradigm that ruffles their enlightened sensibilities.

Secondly, there are constant sales on XBL renewals. Even MS offers sales from time to time. So paying full price isn't usually necessary.

I'm also curious what false information I'm spreading. One full year of XBL is 59.99, which comes out to 5 dollars per month. Obviously the decision to renew monthly costs more and that is hardly an atypical as most services grant you a discount for agreeing to a longer subscription term. The fact that you are incapable or unwilling to track down these deals yourself is incidental. Most people don't pay per month and plenty of us are nabbing renewal cards on sale.

And please quit playing the victim. MS has been charging for XBL since the beginning. Complaining about it now is the equivalent getting pissed that you purchased cable service but have to pay extra for premium channels. If the model is so repellant to you then you should have never purchased a MS console to begin with.

As to the quality of the service, that's relative. I own a PS3 and prefer XB?s online infrastructure. It's also ironic that you allude to the occasional sale or demo when that is precisely what Sony charges consumers for with PS+.

I don't consider XBL anti-consumer because I feel the price is justified by the content. I like the service and prefer it over Sony's (mostly) free offerings. I certainly don't see how my support of the model is damaging to consumers or the industry and you most definitely haven't demonstrated any connection despite your shrill accusations. (And kudos to your 7 games; my own purchases are more than double that since January so I guess I win the pissing contest that you seem so eager to engage in)

Also, just because you toss around a concept like anti-consumerism doesn't mean you have even the slightest notion of what that actually means. MS hasn't locked you out of anything; you opted to buy a game on a platform you knew charged for full online functionality. You literally have nobody to blame but yourself and no amount of justification changes the intractable reality that despite being immensely offended by the XBL subscription fee you still made the decision to pay them to play your game.

And one last thing: if you want to see a great example of anti-consumerism take a gander at the launch of the PS3. I paid a 200 premium for a Bluray player I didn't want (at the time) merely to play some Sony exclusives. They literally forced the tech on a consumer base at a time when the HDTV penetration was less than 20% of households because they wanted to push their proprietary media through an established brand and in doing so inflated the cost of the console drastically.

And then there is Sony's removal of Other OS, a touted featured taken away on a whim with no recourse for consumers who may have wanted it.

We can also see tendrils of anti-consumerism in Steam, despite all the circle jerking it receives. The user agreement clearly states that if Steam is ever discontinued they have no obligation to provide you with any type of access to the games you have purchased. That isn?t ownership so much as an extended lease.

Ultimately we all have to decide where the line is but frankly, I find yours to be incredibly illogical, especially given that you still opt to pay the fee when it suits you. Maybe you don't realize this yet but you support MS the same as I when you purchased that renewal card or even buy an XB game.

Eloquence isn't required here but merely pedestrian logic: either you pay or you don't.

It's four dollars per month, assuming you can't find a sale on an XBL subscription card.

I really don't get the consistent lamentations about an excellent service that costs less than a Happy Meal. I literally drop more on a single soda at the movies than a month of XBL and yet people act as if the cost is some massive obstacle that cannot easily be overcome.

Grammaton-Cleric

Xbox Live online should be free, period. Using your own internet connection peer-to-peer is not a service. They should be investigated and sued for defrauding the public and also fined heavily.

Why must i pay Microsoft after already paying my internet provider? Why must we purchase XBL in order to access Netflix which itself requires a subscription? The very simple ability of being able to particpate in an online match should be free.

Its one thing to offer aditional features & be charged for those but these features most of us do not care about. Im paying for Partychat, videos, music, facebook, twitter, msn, UFC, etc, all of which i do not use, nor do these features actually have anything to do with gaming.

This is the problem. You are forced to purchase everything, or you get nothing. As i said the simple ability of being able to particpate in an online match should be free. The Gold subscription could be a optional upgrade that came with all the extra fluff.

In terms of gaming Microsoft isnt doing anything different over PSN. They both have your friends list, messaging, invites, chat & such. All an online service needs. The both play the same in online matches. They are essentially the same, the difference being is Microsft charges for what others offer for free.

The same goes for PC. Free, as long as you have paid your internet provider. On top of this XBL is riddled with Advertisemnts, of which i would bet Microsoft makes enough money off of to pay for the entire service. Its a clear rip off.

We've also gotten to a point where we must pay our internet provider, to then pay Microsoft ( XBL = an online pass ), to then pay for EAs ( or any publishers ) online pass ( if bought used ), to then paying for the game itself.

It not about "well if you dont like it dont pay for it", That is obvious. It shouldnt be this way in the 1st place & that is the complaint.

I don't know at what point you decided to get overtly adversarial with me given our history of mutual respect and solid discussion but if this is the direction you want to traverse so be it.

Firstly, I didn't tell you or anyone else to do anything. What I question is the whiny lamentations of people who act like a few bucks per month is some sort of massive financial burden or some unethical paradigm that ruffles their enlightened sensibilities.

Secondly, there are constant sales on XBL renewals. Even MS offers sales from time to time. So paying full price isn't usually necessary.

I'm also curious what false information I'm spreading. One full year of XBL is 59.99, which comes out to 5 dollars per month. Obviously the decision to renew monthly costs more and that is hardly an atypical as most services grant you a discount for agreeing to a longer subscription term. The fact that you are incapable or unwilling to track down these deals yourself is incidental. Most people don't pay per month and plenty of us are nabbing renewal cards on sale.

And please quit playing the victim. MS has been charging for XBL since the beginning. Complaining about it now is the equivalent getting pissed that you purchased cable service but have to pay extra for premium channels. If the model is so repellant to you then you should have never purchased a MS console to begin with.

As to the quality of the service, that's relative. I own a PS3 and prefer XB?s online infrastructure. It's also ironic that you allude to the occasional sale or demo when that is precisely what Sony charges consumers for with PS+.

I don't consider XBL anti-consumer because I feel the price is justified by the content. I like the service and prefer it over Sony's (mostly) free offerings. I certainly don't see how my support of the model is damaging to consumers or the industry and you most definitely haven't demonstrated any connection despite your shrill accusations. (And kudos to your 7 games; my own purchases are more than double that since January so I guess I win the pissing contest that you seem so eager to engage in)

Also, just because you toss around a concept like anti-consumerism doesn't mean you have even the slightest notion of what that actually means. MS hasn't locked you out of anything; you opted to buy a game on a platform you knew charged for full online functionality. You literally have nobody to blame but yourself and no amount of justification changes the intractable reality that despite being immensely offended by the XBL subscription fee you still made the decision to pay them to play your game.

And one last thing: if you want to see a great example of anti-consumerism take a gander at the launch of the PS3. I paid a 200 premium for a Bluray player I didn't want (at the time) merely to play some Sony exclusives. They literally forced the tech on a consumer base at a time when the HDTV penetration was less than 20% of households because they wanted to push their proprietary media through an established brand and in doing so inflated the cost of the console drastically.

And then there is Sony's removal of Other OS, a touted featured taken away on a whim with no recourse for consumers who may have wanted it.

We can also see tendrils of anti-consumerism in Steam, despite all the circle jerking it receives. The user agreement clearly states that if Steam is ever discontinued they have no obligation to provide you with any type of access to the games you have purchased. That isn?t ownership so much as an extended lease.

Ultimately we all have to decide where the line is but frankly, I find yours to be incredibly illogical, especially given that you still opt to pay the fee when it suits you. Maybe you don't realize this yet but you support MS the same as I when you purchased that renewal card or even buy an XB game.

Eloquence isn't required here but merely pedestrian logic: either you pay or you don't.

Grammaton-Cleric

We are getting sidetracked here. My original post corrected you and pointed out that the XBL monthly fee is $10, not $5. Whether or not I choose to pay $10 or my reasoning to pay for it is not the point of discussion here.

"Eloquence isn't required here but merely pedestrian logic: either you pay or you don't."

You have quite masterfully turned the debate into that^. When infact, it is as simple as either you pay $30-$60 a year or $10 a month. << This right here is my entire point. The rest of it... my gaming habits, my decision to play games on Xbox, my dislike for an online pass, you preference for XBL over PSN, your justification for the service.. has nothing to do with the fact that a monthly sub is NOT $3-5 a month.

Funny you gloss over all my points and label em shrill accusations. You win. Just because YOU dont use it to play online doesn't mean everyone else buys it for the same reason you do. You said earlier that MOST people opt to pay $30-$40 for this service. Do you have any figures to back that up? Any surveys? In fact, let's do a poll here and see how many people pay for the service just to play online or how many use it for the premium services you enjoy so much. Your love for this service has made you think everyone buys it for the same reasons you do. Or at least that's what I get from your post. You haven't proved anything as far I am concerned. You seem to be talking on behalf of most XBL owners, yet I dont see any numbers or polls or surveys saying that they pay for this service for the same reasons you do.

But I will still take a stab at proving my point again. You are paying for something that is free everywhere else, and something that SHOULD be free when you pruchase a $60 game. It's kinda like healthcare. It's free everywhere else in the western industrialzed nations. It's considered a citizen's 'right' everywhere except in the U.S. Now you have this section of the population who are up in arms over free healthcare. They cant stand it. They dont want their own tax dollars helping them. It's ridiculous that they fight to PAY for health insurance. Almost as ridiculous as jsutifying or arguing to pay for online mp that is free everywhere else.

Lastly, Sony's wrongs do not make MS right. And if you think Sony charging a premium for Bluray playback is the same as MS withholding online play then there is no point in arguing anymore because I feel like I have hit a brick wall here.

P.SI don't know at what point you decided to get overtly adversarial with me

Right around here:I don't give a damn what you personally do....also flatly laugh in the face of your righteous indignation given that, Had you any real integrity or conviction behind the pedantic, whiny assertions and animosity....

Let's be honest here, you knew damn well that using that kind of dickish tone with me was going to receive an appropriate response. It may work on the newbies here in PGD but if you disrespect me then I will show you no courtesy. The fact that you took an innocous comment such as me setting the record straight that I too buy games on Day 1, and took it mean I was trying to get into pissing contest shows you yourself are more interested in sh*tting on people rather than tackling the issue. That said, I, in fact, rewrote my last reply a couple of times to remove some of the more inflammatory remarks because I simply did not want to stoop down to your level of discourse.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

I don't know at what point you decided to get overtly adversarial with me given our history of mutual respect and solid discussion but if this is the direction you want to traverse so be it.

Firstly, I didn't tell you or anyone else to do anything. What I question is the whiny lamentations of people who act like a few bucks per month is some sort of massive financial burden or some unethical paradigm that ruffles their enlightened sensibilities.

Secondly, there are constant sales on XBL renewals. Even MS offers sales from time to time. So paying full price isn't usually necessary.

I'm also curious what false information I'm spreading. One full year of XBL is 59.99, which comes out to 5 dollars per month. Obviously the decision to renew monthly costs more and that is hardly an atypical as most services grant you a discount for agreeing to a longer subscription term. The fact that you are incapable or unwilling to track down these deals yourself is incidental. Most people don't pay per month and plenty of us are nabbing renewal cards on sale.

And please quit playing the victim. MS has been charging for XBL since the beginning. Complaining about it now is the equivalent getting pissed that you purchased cable service but have to pay extra for premium channels. If the model is so repellant to you then you should have never purchased a MS console to begin with.

As to the quality of the service, that's relative. I own a PS3 and prefer XB?s online infrastructure. It's also ironic that you allude to the occasional sale or demo when that is precisely what Sony charges consumers for with PS+.

I don't consider XBL anti-consumer because I feel the price is justified by the content. I like the service and prefer it over Sony's (mostly) free offerings. I certainly don't see how my support of the model is damaging to consumers or the industry and you most definitely haven't demonstrated any connection despite your shrill accusations. (And kudos to your 7 games; my own purchases are more than double that since January so I guess I win the pissing contest that you seem so eager to engage in)

Also, just because you toss around a concept like anti-consumerism doesn't mean you have even the slightest notion of what that actually means. MS hasn't locked you out of anything; you opted to buy a game on a platform you knew charged for full online functionality. You literally have nobody to blame but yourself and no amount of justification changes the intractable reality that despite being immensely offended by the XBL subscription fee you still made the decision to pay them to play your game.

And one last thing: if you want to see a great example of anti-consumerism take a gander at the launch of the PS3. I paid a 200 premium for a Bluray player I didn't want (at the time) merely to play some Sony exclusives. They literally forced the tech on a consumer base at a time when the HDTV penetration was less than 20% of households because they wanted to push their proprietary media through an established brand and in doing so inflated the cost of the console drastically.

And then there is Sony's removal of Other OS, a touted featured taken away on a whim with no recourse for consumers who may have wanted it.

We can also see tendrils of anti-consumerism in Steam, despite all the circle jerking it receives. The user agreement clearly states that if Steam is ever discontinued they have no obligation to provide you with any type of access to the games you have purchased. That isn?t ownership so much as an extended lease.

Ultimately we all have to decide where the line is but frankly, I find yours to be incredibly illogical, especially given that you still opt to pay the fee when it suits you. Maybe you don't realize this yet but you support MS the same as I when you purchased that renewal card or even buy an XB game.

Eloquence isn't required here but merely pedestrian logic: either you pay or you don't.

S0lidSnake

We are getting sidetracked here. My original post corrected you and pointed out that the XBL monthly fee is $10, not $5. Whether or not I choose to pay $10 or my reasoning to pay for it is not the point of discussion here.

"Eloquence isn't required here but merely pedestrian logic: either you pay or you don't."

You have quite masterfully turned the debate into that^. When infact, it is as simple as either you pay $30-$60 a year or $10 a month. << This right here is my entire point. The rest of it... my gaming habits, my decision to play games on Xbox, my dislike for an online pass, you preference for XBL over PSN, your justification for the service.. has nothing to do with the fact that a monthly sub is NOT $3-5 a month.

Funny you gloss over all my points and label em shrill accusations. You win. Just because YOU dont use it to play online doesn't mean everyone else buys it for the same reason you do. You said earlier that MOST people opt to pay $30-$40 for this service. Do you have any figures to back that up? Any surveys? In fact, let's do a poll here and see how many people pay for the service just to play online or how many use it for the premium services you enjoy so much. Your love for this service has made you think everyone buys it for the same reasons you do. Or at least that's what I get from your post. You haven't proved anything as far I am concerned. You seem to be talking on behalf of most XBL owners, yet I dont see any numbers or polls or surveys saying that they pay for this service for the same reasons you do.

But I will still take a stab at proving my point again. You are paying for something that is free everywhere else, and something that SHOULD be free when you pruchase a $60 game. It's kinda like healthcare. It's free everywhere else in the western industrialzed nations. It's considered a citizen's 'right' everywhere except in the U.S. Now you have this section of the population who are up in arms over free healthcare. They cant stand it. They dont want their own tax dollars helping them. It's ridiculous that they fight to PAY for health insurance. Almost as ridiculous as jsutifying or arguing to pay for online mp that is free everywhere else.

Lastly, Sony's wrongs do not make MS right. And if you think Sony charging a premium for Bluray playback is the same as MS withholding online play then there is no point in arguing anymore because I feel like I have hit a brick wall here.

P.SI don't know at what point you decided to get overtly adversarial with me

Right around here:I don't give a damn what you personally do....also flatly laugh in the face of your righteous indignation given that, Had you any real integrity or conviction behind the pedantic, whiny assertions and animosity....

Let's be honest here, you knew damn well that using that kind of dickish tone with me was going to receive an appropriate response. It may work on the newbies here in PGD but if you disrespect me then I will show you no courtesy. The fact that you took an innocous comment such as me setting the record straight that I too buy games on Day 1, and took it mean I was trying to get into pissing contest shows you yourself are more interested in sh*tting on people rather than tackling the issue. That said, I, in fact, rewrote my last reply a couple of times to remove some of the more inflammatory remarks because I simply did not want to stoop down to your level of discourse.

Not really shocking considering the services already in action on their current hardware. They aren't really reaching above and beyond and I don't expect that to change. Just please, no more dumb friend codes. Just give it up.

Also, put more games on the internet service that are worth playing.

Not really shocking considering the services already in action on their current hardware. They aren't really reaching above and beyond and I don't expect that to change. Just please, no more dumb friend codes. Just give it up.

Also, put more games on the internet service that are worth playing.

starfox15

We are getting sidetracked here. My original post corrected you and pointed out that the XBL monthly fee is $10, not $5. Whether or not I choose to pay $10 or my reasoning to pay for it is not the point of discussion here.

"Eloquence isn't required here but merely pedestrian logic: either you pay or you don't."

You have quite masterfully turned the debate into that^. When infact, it is as simple as either you pay $30-$60 a year or $10 a month. << This right here is my entire point. The rest of it... my gaming habits, my decision to play games on Xbox, my dislike for an online pass, you preference for XBL over PSN, your justification for the service.. has nothing to do with the fact that a monthly sub is NOT $3-5 a month.

Funny you gloss over all my points and label em shrill accusations. You win. Just because YOU dont use it to play online doesn't mean everyone else buys it for the same reason you do. You said earlier that MOST people opt to pay $30-$40 for this service. Do you have any figures to back that up? Any surveys? In fact, let's do a poll here and see how many people pay for the service just to play online or how many use it for the premium services you enjoy so much. Your love for this service has made you think everyone buys it for the same reasons you do. Or at least that's what I get from your post. You haven't proved anything as far I am concerned. You seem to be talking on behalf of most XBL owners, yet I dont see any numbers or polls or surveys saying that they pay for this service for the same reasons you do.

But I will still take a stab at proving my point again. You are paying for something that is free everywhere else, and something that SHOULD be free when you pruchase a $60 game. It's kinda like healthcare. It's free everywhere else in the western industrialzed nations. It's considered a citizen's 'right' everywhere except in the U.S. Now you have this section of the population who are up in arms over free healthcare. They cant stand it. They dont want their own tax dollars helping them. It's ridiculous that they fight to PAY for health insurance. Almost as ridiculous as jsutifying or arguing to pay for online mp that is free everywhere else.

Lastly, Sony's wrongs do not make MS right. And if you think Sony charging a premium for Bluray playback is the same as MS withholding online play then there is no point in arguing anymore because I feel like I have hit a brick wall here.

P.SI don't know at what point you decided to get overtly adversarial with me

Right around here:I don't give a damn what you personally do....also flatly laugh in the face of your righteous indignation given that, Had you any real integrity or conviction behind the pedantic, whiny assertions and animosity....

Let's be honest here, you knew damn well that using that kind of dickish tone with me was going to receive an appropriate response. It may work on the newbies here in PGD but if you disrespect me then I will show you no courtesy. The fact that you took an innocous comment such as me setting the record straight that I too buy games on Day 1, and took it mean I was trying to get into pissing contest shows you yourself are more interested in sh*tting on people rather than tackling the issue. That said, I, in fact, rewrote my last reply a couple of times to remove some of the more inflammatory remarks because I simply did not want to stoop down to your level of discourse.

S0lidSnake

Please don't lecture to me about "stooping down" to my level of discourse when you had the audacity to refer to me as somebody doing detrimental things to this medium because I pay for an XBL subscription. That was a bush-league stab and a piss-ant newb tactic so enough with the passive aggressive nonsense. You deiced on the pitch and tone of this conversation several posts back and despite all your talk of being the bigger man you also opted to take a few more shots in your conclusion.

My response was snarky but it was directly proportional to the bull**** you wrote earlier. That said, anytime you want to return to civility I'm game.

As to the issue at hand, why would anyone pay ten dollars per month when they can get the service for half price or cheaper? While you are entirely correct that I have no statistics, I seriously doubt most people who use XBL do so as sporadically as you. It seems reasonable to assume that most people using the service do so year round and probably know enough to buy a 59.99 dollar membership versus paying double the price for no good reason.

I'm also curious where, specifically, I ever claimed that my own predilections were representative of everyone else? Can you show me a quote that even approaches that notion? Because I was specifically referring to myself as it relates to my wants and needs. I never claimed most people use XBL for the same reasons I do and as a point of clarification I'll state now that I know my usage is quite divergent from the typical user. People who pay for XBL do so for the online functionality; I think that's a given.

Then we come to your ridiculously poor healthcare analogy, where you proceed to compare a social service crucial to the healthy functioning of a populace to a non-essential form of entertainment. As a point of fact I don't think free online functionality is some basic and inalienable right nor do I subscribe to the notion that merely because something started out free it must remain so indefinitely. I like the way MS organizes their online infrastructure and I will gladly pay 5 or even 10 dollars a month to support its continued existence. I'm not some entitled person who expects everything to stay the same and is always looking at some other model as justification for my angst. MS monetized online functionality and they did it well enough that Sony followed suit, albeit in a different manner.

And the Sony and Steam examples merely illustrate that all companies find ways to exploit the consumer. That extra 200-250 dollars I paid for the PS3 is equal to about 4-5 years of paid online functionality through the XBL model.

And that goes back to my earliest point: you and people like you are choosing to make a stand on a relatively small issue, at least as it relates to the monetary value of the product. Even at 10 dollars per month it's hardly some crippling fee and yet people like you act as if you've been raped and left for dead. Worse, you actually pay for the service and then still cry to the heavens about how unfair the practice is even when you have alternative avenues to play many of the same games. Whether you choose to accept it or not, you torpedo the integrity of your own position by paying for XBL in any capacity. It's the equivalent of protesting a Wal-Mart due to unfair labor practices but still shopping there because of price and convenience.

You are entitled to do as you please but if the best argument you can muster against paid online is that "it should be free because its free everywhere else" then you lost this debate before it ever began. And by purchasing a Gold membership, even for a month, you effectively proved that the service is worth the cost.

So if I'm the problem then so are you.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

It's four dollars per month, assuming you can't find a sale on an XBL subscription card.

I really don't get the consistent lamentations about an excellent service that costs less than a Happy Meal. I literally drop more on a single soda at the movies than a month of XBL and yet people act as if the cost is some massive obstacle that cannot easily be overcome.

brucecambell

Xbox Live online should be free, period. Using your own internet connection peer-to-peer is not a service. They should be investigated and sued for defrauding the public and also fined heavily.

Why must i pay Microsoft after already paying my internet provider? Why must we purchase XBL in order to access Netflix which itself requires a subscription? The very simple ability of being able to particpate in an online match should be free.

Its one thing to offer aditional features & be charged for those but these features most of us do not care about. Im paying for Partychat, videos, music, facebook, twitter, msn, UFC, etc, all of which i do not use, nor do these features actually have anything to do with gaming.

This is the problem. You are forced to purchase everything, or you get nothing. As i said the simple ability of being able to particpate in an online match should be free. The Gold subscription could be a optional upgrade that came with all the extra fluff.

In terms of gaming Microsoft isnt doing anything different over PSN. They both have your friends list, messaging, invites, chat & such. All an online service needs. The both play the same in online matches. They are essentially the same, the difference being is Microsft charges for what others offer for free.

The same goes for PC. Free, as long as you have paid your internet provider. On top of this XBL is riddled with Advertisemnts, of which i would bet Microsoft makes enough money off of to pay for the entire service. Its a clear rip off.

We've also gotten to a point where we must pay our internet provider, to then pay Microsoft ( XBL = an online pass ), to then pay for EAs ( or any publishers ) online pass ( if bought used ), to then paying for the game itself.

It not about "well if you dont like it dont pay for it", That is obvious. It shouldnt be this way in the 1st place & that is the complaint.

Merely because something began as free doesn't necessarily mean it will remain so indefinitely.

Consider television: there are still "free" stations but they are paltry offerings. Most of us pay a price for TV and yet that medium began as something entirely free.

There is nothing inherently wrong with MS monetizing online functionality. They discovered a viable revenue source and exploited it and clearly millions of users seem content with paying a few bucks for the service.

And while you are correct that PSN offers the same fundamentals as XBL, I personally find the XBL experience far more cohesive and well-organized. I certainly have no issue dolling out a few bucks to preserve it, though as I have stated earlier that is a personal choice.

I do think your idea of monetizing the ancillary and making the basic functionality available to all is a sound idea but given the current model in place I doubt MS will change it up anytime soon.

And I do believe that paying for a service that one vehemently opposes is nonsensical. Consumers vote with their wallets and anybody who pays for this service sends a clear message of acceptance to MS.

I personally love XBL and happily pay my fees but if you feel that outraged you shouldntt support their console or their online model.

Solid, Gram -- hate to interrupt, but come on. Enough already. This is basically turning into a glorified shouting match. That's no fun to read. Try getting back to civil debate, would ya?

As far as Xbox Live goes, though, let me just say: as someone who doesn't often play online, paying for that privliedge is an annoying prospect. I don't play nearly anough online games -- nor use the services extensively enough -- to justify paying the price for a subscription. I like having the option to use them, though, so I'd probably end up paying anyway. I don't think Microsoft is wrong to ask for a small admission fee (I hear the quality of the service justities that), but it's kinda frustrating that we have no choice but to pay up if we want to use even a faction of online capablity in games.

Granted, I don't have an Xbox yet, but... yeah.

I don't know why people are automatically assuming that the online is going to be a complete sh*tfest like it was on the wii.

If the 3DS is anything to go by they've been improving drastically. (inb4 no1curr bout handhelds)

Shinobishyguy

Well, Nintendo hasn't been one to instill confidence on the online side of things. Though the 3DS sounds like a massive improvement over what they've done before, even if it does still use those infernal friend codes.

Not surprised WiiU online to be free, thing is how seriously Nintendo approaches online functionality in their games with the new console.

As to the issue at hand, why would anyone pay ten dollars per month when they can get the service for half price or cheaper? While you are entirely correct that I have no statistics, I seriously doubt most people who use XBL do so as sporadically as you. It seems reasonable to assume that most people using the service do so year round and probably know enough to buy a 59.99 dollar membership versus paying double the price for no good reason.

I'm also curious where, specifically, I ever claimed that my own predilections were representative of everyone else? Can you show me a quote that even approaches that notion? Because I was specifically referring to myself as it relates to my wants and needs. I never claimed most people use XBL for the same reasons I do and as a point of clarification I'll state now that I know my usage is quite divergent from the typical user. People who pay for XBL do so for the online functionality; I think that's a given.

Then we come to your ridiculously poor healthcare analogy, where you proceed to compare a social service crucial to the healthy functioning of a populace to a non-essential form of entertainment. As a point of fact I don't think free online functionality is some basic and inalienable right nor do I subscribe to the notion that merely because something started out free it must remain so indefinitely. I like the way MS organizes their online infrastructure and I will gladly pay 5 or even 10 dollars a month to support its continued existence. I'm not some entitled person who expects everything to stay the same and is always looking at some other model as justification for my angst. MS monetized online functionality and they did it well enough that Sony followed suit, albeit in a different manner.

And the Sony and Steam examples merely illustrate that all companies find ways to exploit the consumer. That extra 200-250 dollars I paid for the PS3 is equal to about 4-5 years of paid online functionality through the XBL model.

And that goes back to my earliest point: you and people like you are choosing to make a stand on a relatively small issue, at least as it relates to the monetary value of the product. Even at 10 dollars per month it's hardly some crippling fee and yet people like you act as if you've been raped and left for dead. Worse, you actually pay for the service and then still cry to the heavens about how unfair the practice is even when you have alternative avenues to play many of the same games. Whether you choose to accept it or not, you torpedo the integrity of your own position by paying for XBL in any capacity. It's the equivalent of protesting a Wal-Mart due to unfair labor practices but still shopping there because of price and convenience.

You are entitled to do as you please but if the best argument you can muster against paid online is that "it should be free because its free everywhere else" then you lost this debate before it ever began. And by purchasing a Gold membership, even for a month, you effectively proved that the service is worth the cost.

So if I'm the problem then so are you.

Grammaton-Cleric

lol It is a small issue. I mean we are on a video game forum after all.

The Sony analogy doesn't work for me because Sony was offering you something for those extra $200 that the competition did not. No 360 console came with a HD-DVD or bluray player, but every Sony console came with free online. So when you say that Sony shoved the bluray down your throat, I agree, they did, but it's a feature missing from other consoles. MS is charging premium for a feature that is available for free everywhere else. The Steam example applies to every digital distributer out there, including Sony, MS and even Apple.

I dont understand why you keep bringing up the fact that since I paid for it, so I am part of the problem. I paid for it because I had no choice but to. My ME1&2 saves were on the 360 and Gears and Halo were all exclusives. Your walmart analogy is flawed because Walmart doesn't sell something exclusive. It sells the same sh*t people can buy everywhere else albeit for a cheaper price. So people still have a choice. I can't play Halo or Gears on the PS3 or PC. So if I want use the main feature of my Halo game, the multiplayer, I have to pay MS and MS only. A better example supporting your argument would be me going to AT&T to buy a phone exclusive to them and then complaining about any premium AT&T charges. So I guess do I see your point there. I should've known what I was getting into.

And that brings us back to my original point, I certainly did know what I was getting into. I knew that I would never pay $30-$40 a year just so I can play one 360 game online a year. So a month sub at $10 is my cheapest option. Im sure you will agree that paying $10 vs $40 upront is an easier pill to swallow. Conversely, and this is my getting sidetracked here, if Xbox Gold offered free games and massive discounts like PS+ does then I wouldn't mind paying for a year's sub. Right now the only thing I need it for is the online pass, but that's just me, I can't speak for everyone else. The only way we can guage the popularity of XBL is by creating a poll asking users whether or not they would still pay for XBL Gold if the online pass was included in Silver.

The main crux of my health care analogy was that health care is something that should be free, but was monetized and now there is no going back. There is a good chance Sony will also charge for their online pass next gen, and the blame will be on MS for monetizing it in the first place. Like someone else said in this post, it's ridiculous that we pay our ISP a fee to access online, pay $300 to buy a console from MS, then pay $60 to buy a game from the publisher, then have to pay ANOTHER fee to MS just so we can access the online portion of our $60 game. You seem to think there is nothing wrong with that. That our right to access the content that we paid for in our original $60 purchase is not a right at all. Yes, maybe it's not directly comparable to something like healthcare, but it's a right of a consumer nonetheless.

Lastly, I want to talk a bit about the MS's online infrastructure. I'd like to know exactly what they do that's so great. I mean if they offered dedicated servers for every game then yes, I would give it to you, that's an example of a fantastic infrastructure. The only thing in that infrastructure that makes it great is that it's unified, but so is PSN. And the only exclusive feature they have is Party Chat. Which isn't a big deal considering all PS games support voice chats and most have Squad only or Party only channels. Hell, there are more PS games that have dedicated servers than 360. They still dont have an internet browser or text chat though I hear Internet Explorer is coming soon. It can't be the constant barage of ads when you turn on your 360. I am geniunely curious because maybe I am missing out on some cool features.

@Solid the other thing to consider is publishers take XBL more seriously than PSN ( I believe MW2 or MW1 being hacked couldn't be fixed or devs didn't bother on PSN) MS pays for time exclusive content CoD map packs , earlier demos (look at RE6 demo) . Console updates really fast unlike PSN, demos download much faster as well.

Its not just the ability to play online, its those other things as well. I don't play online much and I think the recent additions such as ESPN, UFC benefit me immensely. I only have basic cable $20 a month, but thanks to XBL I can watch the NBA playoffs on HD on ESPN when I don't have access to it on my cable box. Now if I wanted that channel and on HD, my monthly cable subscription alone will surpass what I pay a year on XBL. I've watched the Euro games on HD and didn't have to rely on a DVR which is additional $$. Tonight I will be able to order the UFC PPV fight thanks to XBL ( I don't have a cable box ).

I know most gamers don't care and its understandable, but like others mentioned theres deals going on where you can pay $30-$40 on yearly XBL subscription cards. I hate bringing this but going just once to Dunkin Donuts to buy coffee & bagel with cheese probably cost more than a months subscription if you buy XBL cards on sale.

PC online is free and perhaps better, but this is consoles we're talking about and Sony's been doing a good job for a free service and its been forcing MS to step it up. As for Nintendo, yeah what there is to say...

Lastly would I like XBL to be free ? Sure, I'd love too but I think the small price to pay is worth it for me IMO. Now if MS decides to start charging $10-$15 a month than I go elsewhere, but the recent additions they've added to the service is great for me and save me an enormous amount of $$, so XBL is a bargain for me.

Come on guys, everyone knows XBL is a scam, we don't need lengthy debates as to whether or not its worth it.

As for the topic at hand, I'm glad Nintendo is doing this because having two out of the three consoles with paid subscitpions leaves Sony in a position to join the party and avoid a lot of crisiticm because "everyones doing it". This way at least, there is some pressure on the PS4 to continue the free to play model. Imagine being a multi console owner and having three annual $60 dollar subscription fees just to access online play. If all three services were up to snuff to "justify" the purchase, what do you do? Thats bonkers.

lol It is a small issue. I mean we are on a video game forum after all.

The Sony analogy doesn't work for me because Sony was offering you something for those extra $200 that the competition did not. No 360 console came with a HD-DVD or bluray player, but every Sony console came with free online. So when you say that Sony shoved the bluray down your throat, I agree, they did, but it's a feature missing from other consoles. MS is charging premium for a feature that is available for free everywhere else. The Steam example applies to every digital distributer out there, including Sony, MS and even Apple.

I dont understand why you keep bringing up the fact that since I paid for it, so I am part of the problem. I paid for it because I had no choice but to. My ME1&2 saves were on the 360 and Gears and Halo were all exclusives. Your walmart analogy is flawed because Walmart doesn't sell something exclusive. It sells the same sh*t people can buy everywhere else albeit for a cheaper price. So people still have a choice. I can't play Halo or Gears on the PS3 or PC. So if I want use the main feature of my Halo game, the multiplayer, I have to pay MS and MS only. A better example supporting your argument would be me going to AT&T to buy a phone exclusive to them and then complaining about any premium AT&T charges. So I guess do I see your point there. I should've known what I was getting into.

And that brings us back to my original point, I certainly did know what I was getting into. I knew that I would never pay $30-$40 a year just so I can play one 360 game online a year. So a month sub at $10 is my cheapest option. Im sure you will agree that paying $10 vs $40 upront is an easier pill to swallow. Conversely, and this is my getting sidetracked here, if Xbox Gold offered free games and massive discounts like PS+ does then I wouldn't mind paying for a year's sub. Right now the only thing I need it for is the online pass, but that's just me, I can't speak for everyone else. The only way we can guage the popularity of XBL is by creating a poll asking users whether or not they would still pay for XBL Gold if the online pass was included in Silver.

The main crux of my health care analogy was that health care is something that should be free, but was monetized and now there is no going back. There is a good chance Sony will also charge for their online pass next gen, and the blame will be on MS for monetizing it in the first place. Like someone else said in this post, it's ridiculous that we pay our ISP a fee to access online, pay $300 to buy a console from MS, then pay $60 to buy a game from the publisher, then have to pay ANOTHER fee to MS just so we can access the online portion of our $60 game. You seem to think there is nothing wrong with that. That our right to access the content that we paid for in our original $60 purchase is not a right at all. Yes, maybe it's not directly comparable to something like healthcare, but it's a right of a consumer nonetheless.

Lastly, I want to talk a bit about the MS's online infrastructure. I'd like to know exactly what they do that's so great. I mean if they offered dedicated servers for every game then yes, I would give it to you, that's an example of a fantastic infrastructure. The only thing in that infrastructure that makes it great is that it's unified, but so is PSN. And the only exclusive feature they have is Party Chat. Which isn't a big deal considering all PS games support voice chats and most have Squad only or Party only channels. Hell, there are more PS games that have dedicated servers than 360. They still dont have an internet browser or text chat though I hear Internet Explorer is coming soon. It can't be the constant barage of ads when you turn on your 360. I am geniunely curious because maybe I am missing out on some cool features.

S0lidSnake

The Sony analogy merely illustrates that all companies engage in practices that you could label anti-consumer and when examining these practices I don't consider MS's online pricing model any worse than Sony deciding to prematurely foist Bluray onto anyone who wanted their system.

What I don't understand is how you can claim you don't have a choice when you clearly can opt not to support MS in any fashion as it relates to gaming. True it requires sacrifice but given the level of frustration (and it is clearly a sore point for many people) why not simply cease using their products? By purchasing the XB360, software and online functionality, you are directly supporting a model you purport to loathe. I'm not making that statement as an insult to your integrity but rather pointing out the obvious and I make this point because, in an earlier post, you fingered people like me as the reason MS continues to utilize this model.

That's true enough but I have plenty of company.

And I don't fault you one iota for the manner in which you use the service. For your needs the ten dollar renewal probably makes the most logistical and financial sense. My point is that paying ten dollars is the default and most expensive way to access the service and for most of us there are far cheaper solutions. Anybody using the service on a regular basis need only pay about five bucks per month.

As to consumer rights, this goes back to the argument of context and understanding who you are buying from. Anybody who opts to purchase an XB game knows they will have to pay for a Gold membership to access the online component. That is the model in place and again, those angered by it should opt to not support MS in any fashion because you cannot fault a company once you are cognizant of their policies and still choose to utilize their wares. XBL did not come about in the middle of this console generation; it's always been here and it has always required a fee to use.

As to the quality of XBL, I think in the earlier days it was heads and shoulders above the PSN but over the years I believe Sony has achieved relative parity with XBL. I don?t think the issue is you missing something but rather my own preference for the service and the console. I own both but I use my PS3 primarily for exclusives while my XB360 is my primary console for everything else. I prefer the way it is organized but in terms of features I think both services are equally good.

I pay because of personal preference and because I don't consider five or even ten dollars much of an expenditure. I think XBL was an innovative concept when it was first unveiled and it's never bothered me when shelling out a few bucks for it. Perhaps, if Sony can get their bearings next gen in terms of market share, they will force MS to reconsider their model and Gold will become more like PS+ and put the issue to bed for all time.

@Solid the other thing to consider is publishers take XBL more seriously than PSN ( I believe MW2 or MW1 being hacked couldn't be fixed or devs didn't bother on PSN) MS pays for time exclusive content CoD map packs , earlier demos (look at RE6 demo) . Console updates really fast unlike PSN, demos download much faster as well.

Its not just the ability to play online, its those other things as well. I don't play online much and I think the recent additions such as ESPN, UFC benefit me immensely. I only have basic cable $20 a month, but thanks to XBL I can watch the NBA playoffs on HD on ESPN when I don't have access to it on my cable box. Now if I wanted that channel and on HD, my monthly cable subscription alone will surpass what I pay a year on XBL. I've watched the Euro games on HD and didn't have to rely on a DVR which is additional $$. Tonight I will be able to order the UFC PPV fight thanks to XBL ( I don't have a cable box ).

I know most gamers don't care and its understandable, but like others mentioned theres deals going on where you can pay $30-$40 on yearly XBL subscription cards. I hate bringing this but going just once to Dunkin Donuts to buy coffee & bagel with cheese probably cost more than a months subscription if you buy XBL cards on sale.

PC online is free and perhaps better, but this is consoles we're talking about and Sony's been doing a good job for a free service and its been forcing MS to step it up. As for Nintendo, yeah what there is to say...

Lastly would I like XBL to be free ? Sure, I'd love too but I think the small price to pay is worth it for me IMO. Now if MS decides to start charging $10-$15 a month than I go elsewhere, but the recent additions they've added to the service is great for me and save me an enormous amount of $$, so XBL is a bargain for me.

D3s7rUc71oN

Well, I didn't know you could watch ESPN on XBL by having only a basic cable service. That's actually pretty cool. I figured these services were always paid services like the MLB package on PSN and Netflix.

What I don't understand is how you can claim you don't have a choice when you clearly can opt not to support MS in any fashion as it relates to gaming. True it requires sacrifice but given the level of frustration (and it is clearly a sore point for many people) why not simply cease using their products? By purchasing the XB360, software and online functionality, you are directly supporting a model you purport to loathe. I'm not making that statement as an insult to your integrity but rather pointing out the obvious and I make this point because, in an earlier post, you fingered people like me as the reason MS continues to utilize this model.

Grammaton-Cleric

I suppose I still continue to pay up because I like video games. Sometimes you have to suck it up and thats precisely what I did. Horde 2.0 in Gears 3 was a thing of beauty and so was ME3 coop. If playing these games mean I have to pay a premium then I will do so.... for better or worse.

Of course its free, thats exactly how it should be.

Too bad i cant buy one at launch. Microsoft made me broke after paying for XBL all these years. Now if only i hadnt been paying for XBL, all the money i would have saved would have been enough to purchase any next gen console ( or current gen console as its Nintendo )

Microsft should take note here. In the future i wont be buying any console that charges for online.

brucecambell