Why Does MS Charge For XBL

Because they know the same people that happily march along to the Windows hardware cycle will do the same to paying for online multiplayer which is free for almost literally every other genre on almost every other system ever made. Thats why.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="skrat_01"] I'd call smart business a model that actually has some sort of intelligent idea behind it, instead of something so dated and easy to put in. Live Gold is effective, I won't disagree with you there. It's not smart; there really isn't much intelligence behind the model - if it was a new media style of business model however, not something as easy as a subscription fee, then I would agree. Otherwise you could lump many subscription services in the same category. skrat_01

I think "wrong" is the right word. You cant deny its smart. You can call it stupid if MS loses a significant percentage of its user base next gen because of this dirty tactic. But right now its working.

Because if MS offered that fine, fine fully integrated service for free, Sony & Nintendo market share would be a fraction of what it is now and the D.O.J. would step in saying MS created a monopoly in the VG console business. :twisted:

I'm thinking because 360 gamers are willing to pay for the premium service, oh and the fact ya can't play on line without it. :P

Because they know the same people that happily march along to the Windows hardware cycle will do the same to paying for online multiplayer which is free for almost literally every other genre on almost every other system ever made. Thats why.

Aidenfury19

you mean additions of their Windows software?

that scenario seems pretty fair when you realize they have teams of coders working on that for ~3 years. they pay wages to, possibly hundreds of people without seeing any returns on the program they are making until it goes to retail.

and they do offer great discounts to students. it's not like they never try to promote anything good. for all we know, it might not be affordable to sell their software for $35 like Apple, who sees immediate returns because of their 'hardware premium name'

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"]If Gamespot charged very few people would pay for it. Now, let's say a lot of people would pay, then yes, it would be very smart.skrat_01

I think "wrong" is the right word. You cant deny its smart. You can call it stupid if MS loses a significant percentage of its user base next gen because of this dirty tactic. But right now its working.

erglesmergle

I think "wrong" is the right word. You cant deny its smart. You can call it stupid if MS loses a significant percentage of its user base next gen because of this dirty tactic. But right now its working.

If it works and it's easy to put in, it's not dumb.The_RedLion

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"]If it works and it's easy to put in, it's not dumb.skrat_01

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="The_RedLion"]If it works and it's easy to put in, it's not dumb.The_RedLion

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]If it separates millions of potential users who you could profit from, diving your own internally developed market - It's certainly not smart.skrat_01

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"]

Because they know the same people that happily march along to the Windows hardware cycle will do the same to paying for online multiplayer which is free for almost literally every other genre on almost every other system ever made. Thats why.

HavocV3

you mean additions of their Windows software?

that scenario seems pretty fair when you realize they have teams of coders working on that for ~3 years. they pay wages to, possibly hundreds of people without seeing any returns on the program they are making until it goes to retail.

and they do offer great discounts to students. it's not like they never try to promote anything good. for all we know, it might not be affordable to sell their software for $35 like Apple, who sees immediate returns because of their 'hardware premium name'

Windows is ridiculously overpriced. It takes them a ludicruously short period of time to make in profit whatever they put into coding the next version of Windows, especially since most times these different versions are just marginal upgrades.Heck, ever compared their marketing budget to their R&D budget? If anything, you're paying for their bloated marketing budget.

The only reason they can charge $300+ for the non-OEM versions is because they have the benefit of a monopoly. It's the same deal with XBL, thus the comparison.

You can't honestly tell me that most of those currently paying for Live would do so if they could play online without it. It's forcing people to pay more than the cost of the fricking hardware over the lifespan of a console for something that should be a baseline feature and it's scummy as hell.

Ah but as I said, effectiveness doesn't necessarily equate to smart ;)skrat_01

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]Ah but as I said, effectiveness doesn't necessarily equate to smart ;)The_RedLion

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]Ah but as I said, effectiveness doesn't necessarily equate to smart ;)skrat_01

Oh skrat, my bad. Thought fuse was the subscription here. Well i meant the plus or total access GS there.

Valve succeeding does not change anything. Valve being smart (or even smarter), does not stop Live from being smart.

The_RedLion

because it was first and by far the best online console gaming system.

steam is for pc gamers. sony has had a chance to force ms to lower or drop the fees but they wanted a share of the online sub pie and offered 2 paying subs to ps3 owners. when none buys psn+ fails to get ppl to pay greedy sony will be forced to charge to play online next gen.....

14 people trying to justify xD :lol:

14 people trying to justify xD :lol:

hd5870corei7

More people tried to justify for PSN plus! :lol:

[QUOTE="hd5870corei7"]

14 people trying to justify xD :lol:

xhawk27

More people tried to justify for PSN plus! :lol:

PSN + is optional and not needed to play your games online. The $60 a year is not optional if you want to play your games online :lol:

[QUOTE="xhawk27"]

[QUOTE="hd5870corei7"]

14 people trying to justify xD :lol:

loadedboon

More people tried to justify for PSN plus! :lol:

PSN + is optional and not needed to play your games online. The $60 a year is not optional if you want to play your games online :lol:

Because people are willing to pay for it... and justify the cost as "worthwhile."

[QUOTE="loadedboon"]

[QUOTE="xhawk27"]

More people tried to justify for PSN plus! :lol:

MFDOOM1983

PSN + is optional and not needed to play your games online. The $60 a year is not optional if you want to play your games online :lol:

Well have fun playing your games online on the 360 if you don't pay the forced amount of money.

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"]

[QUOTE="loadedboon"]

PSN + is optional and not needed to play your games online. The $60 a year is not optional if you want to play your games online :lol:

loadedboon

Well have fun playing your games online on the 360 if you don't pay the forced amount of money.

[QUOTE="The_RedLion"][QUOTE="skrat_01"]Ah but as I said, effectiveness doesn't necessarily equate to smart ;)skrat_01

Are you saying smart = honest successful business model? Because honest does not always equal smart.

because people pay

because they are able to.

If Sony could do the same, they would be. With the exception of an early google, no large for-profit company has ever cared about anything other than making the most money possible.

steam is not a competitor of XBox Live, so they cant be compared its like comparing a boat to a car, xbox live is after PSN and Wiis online...and Xbox live is winning, thats all that matters, PLUS XBox Live isnt even the same as steam.

[QUOTE="EdenProxy"][QUOTE="CRUSHER88"]It has nothing to do with an army of fanboys. They started charging for XBL back on original Xbox when gamecube and PS2 didn't have a proper online service going. When you manage to get millions of people to pay annually for XBL for the original, why would you bother making it free with the transition into the next generation. CRUSHER88

Thats why they will continue to charge for online + their making a billion a year from it.

The problem is if other companies realize how much more money they could make everyone will charge for online too. Also Microsoft might try to keep raising the price if the profit is higher or the same.

The poll got glitched yesterday so I made a new one. Is XBL $50 (soon to be $60) material or just a way for MS to cash in.

erglesmergle

Answer: Because people will take the hit and say "Please sir can I have another" Personally I think Pay to Play access like Xbox Live will eventually be crushed underfoot because of services like Steam being free and being better than what people are paying for. It's just a matter of time before PC and Consoles colide so close together that charging for online will be like standing in two identicle lines, one costs $20.00 to stand in, and the other is $0.00. The only difference is that there is no difference.Jynxzor

I see a future where Steam isnt free, few websites are free, prices go up for everything. mostly because people will demand more and more, thus why Facebook, Youtube, Hulu, Addictinggames, Ign, Sports sites and more have a price option...I said youtube because they are charging for movies soon.

Why do designers charge more for their clothes?

Why do they charge for bottled water?

Why does Sony make expensive TV sets?

Why does Apple charge what they charge for their macs?

It's business. You don't like the price you go somewhere else. You aren't always going to like what someone charges for their goods. There's no sense being immature about it.

Valve succeeding does not change anything. Valve being smart (or even smarter), does not stop Live from being smart.

Why do designers charge more for their clothes?

Why do they charge for bottled water?

Why does Sony make expensive TV sets?

Why does Apple charge what they charge for their macs?

It's business. You don't like the price you go somewhere else. You aren't always going to like what someone charges for their goods. There's no sense being immature about it.

heretrix

Business = getting ripped off?

You have to have XBL Gold to have full access for the rest of the game, which has probably the most replay value.

They need to include online on XBL Silver and its almost 2011 and every other gaming system has free online gaming.

This is your logic: "I just bought a box of pizza but i have to pay per slice" < That's proper business right?

I agree with the poll because people will pay for it MS knows this. Wish sony would try something like this and force everyone to pay the only reason they havne't done so is becaus they know there fanbase aint gonna go for that. MS fanbase seem loyal to the teeth which aint bad. Sony fanbase seem like if you something critical they will disown you.

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

Why do designers charge more for their clothes?

Why do they charge for bottled water?

Why does Sony make expensive TV sets?

Why does Apple charge what they charge for their macs?

It's business. You don't like the price you go somewhere else. You aren't always going to like what someone charges for their goods. There's no sense being immature about it.

Keiji993

Business = getting ripped off?

You have to have XBL Gold to have full access for the rest of the game, which has probably the most replay value.

They need to include online on XBL Silver and its almost 2011 and every other gaming system has free online gaming.

This is your logic: "I just bought a box of pizza but i have to pay per slice" < That's proper business right?

You have just proven you don't know a damn thing about my logic. My logic is "I don't like it I won't spend my cash on it" You can charge me 100 dollars a minute for internet access, as it is your right to charge whatever you want for your product, but i sure as hell ain't gonna buy it. But I'm not gonna cry about it either. I'll just laugh in your face and tell you to go to hell.

For example, I know lots of people who spend upwards to 80 bucks for a designer T-shirt. Are you telling me that just because there are cheaper T-shirts out there that the designer doesn't have a right to sell their shirts and that they should be cheaper because you might want one?

That's incredibly silly. Just don't buy the shirt.

Because XBL fans want a great service. Hulu Plus on PS3 is exclusive through the end of the year IF you subscribe to the enhanced PSN plan. Effectively making PSN the same cost as LIVE. This year, it's Hulu. Next year you will need to pay to access some other limited-time offer. So if I had a playstation, I'd be paying just as much. And still have lesser quality...TBoogy

Considering Hulu Plus itself is a paid service (for $10 a month) Sony is actually saving you a good deal there, assuming you're interested in it. That isn't counting all the freebies and discounts. If you're the type of person who PSN Plus appeals to, chances are pretty good you're actually saving money by subscribing to it.

The same really can't be said for XBL Gold.

To make money...doy!

dommeus