Xbox Live coming to Windows phones

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

@aGiantSquirrel yeah dam straight i dont own a xbox but i have a friend who has it and he never told me of any free stuff he got. I show him mine and he even complains how he pays lol

very cool, now if could add this to the iphone...

@grove12345 You used to be able to get a 12 + 1 month (13 months) card for $39. I'm not sure now though. Guess I will have to start checking around for a possible deal on Live membership. The deals are out there from time to time. I had a PS3 slim for 10 days before it broke and trust me the extra 30 to 50 dollars for Live is worth it.

I'm just glad the integration to mobile phones has finally happened, considering it was something Microsoft wanted to do with the XBOX brand when it announced the XBOX360. The new UI reminds me of every phone available now thrown into one option. I see elements of the iPhone, Pre, Android devices and the Sense UI that HTC has loaded of Windows Mobile devices. Getting more is never a bad thing and I think this will deliver on every level. I did however laugh when I saw the phone dialer. I felt as if they showed off a great device and was like, "Oh, it can make phone calls too, look at our poor excuse of a dialer." How do they design an amazing UI and overlook the actual "phone" appeal?

Really guys. Sony fanboys had to come in here, and just bash away instead of talking logic. Ok well i got 360/PS3. And yes XBL is better, well worth the $50 a year, well really $30. Still its better, Dont talk about the 1 free day of Flow, since its one free day of a crappy crappy game. Plus PSN suffers more issues than XBL, or maybe the 360 has better network coding? But ya i do think XBL should have more free stuff since you are paying $50 a year. But i guess some Sony fanboys are right XBL doesnt really offer any free bonuses. Still nothing to bash MS about, plus isnt Sony going to charge for PSN next year?

Ehhhhhhhh

"Xbox live is a good service and it costs money to maintain it. Thats the reason for the fee" I dont buy into this idea that Xbox live is better that so many people have. Last night, I downloaded a FREE complete game off PSN (Flow, fun little game!). That makes the Second game I got for free on PSN. What Full games has live offered for its PAYING memebers for free. Nothing! I can download FREE themes on PS3, not junk themes like you see on the 360 for free(Mcdonalds, Wendys, etc). I mean real ones, good ones based off games. the same ones youll see on the 360 with a price tag next to it. Micrsoft does have "more" content perhaps, but theyll overcharge you to get it because of their screwed up point system. I have a 360 mainly to play its exclusives because Ill tolerate any system if it has good games. However, I am disappointed with the fact that Live offers little free content, especially when you expect to see more free content and special privelages from a service you actually pay money for. Thats my story and Im sticking to it!

File this beside Natal and Avatar Arcade, labeled under 'More Pointless Crap'.

Well the platfrom will be like the Games for Windows which has worked out not so well.

About that rant of mine over dedicated servers - I'm off to play Medal of Honor Allied Assault, online of course, an old game which is still played a lot by some people. I play almost every day, even though I have a PC that can run most recent games at full settings. I like the game. Medal of Honor Allied Assault release date - January 22, 2002 Halo 2 release date - November 9, 2004 The power of dedicated servers. With the way things are going, we'll be forced to buy a new game every once in a while if we want to keep playing online, since games with no dedicated servers end up like Halo 2. I'm not blaming Microsoft - they can't support every single game they release for forever. But the players should have the option to stop playing when they want to.

@parrot_of_adun Who are you to come here and flame? This belongs in a private message not on a public discussion so every can see how you are making yourself look like an idiot. Try buying a 50 dollar GPU and expect it to run Mass Effect2 Bioshock 2 and all the up and coming games without getting fried. Only deal you would get a decent GPU is on Amazon or Ebay. SO really do your research before actually bashing some one.

@wywern271 I didn't say you were laughing. I merely said you (not necessarily you, i mean it in the plural) shouldn't laugh, not that you have or were laughing. I'm not attacking you or anything like that, sorry if it seemed that way. I understand that there are maintenance costs. But PSN (which I consider it to be a good service, though not as good as XBL) is free. Every other platform I know of has a free online service - PC, PS3, Wii, Nintendo DS, PSP, iPhone. Yes, most of these services offer very little compared to XBL (PC because it doesnt have to), but the point remains, they're free. I don't think those $50 are worth it for what extras XBL has to offer over the rest of them. And I think that's a perfectly valid opinion. Yet some people (not necessarily you) can't even respect this opinion of mine.

@DeathLinked, Typical response from a complete idiot abusing the anonymity of the internet. Thanks for your valuable input you tool.

@squidracerX, Thanks for the tip on the fragFX, I will check that out. I actually dont mind FPS on my controllers. The playing field is level, you know, since everyone uses analog sticks on consoles. Some are better at it than others, but I dont feel like it is that much harder to get headshots than when I play Battlefield 2 or 2142 on my PC, and when I play Battlefield BC on 360 or MAG on PS3. I simply mean that I can get a Racing wheel, Flight Stick, "Arcade" joystick controllers, "Game Show" type buzzers for 360 and PS3, but an RTS/FPS type controller is not an option. Imagine how many people would like to plat Command and Conquer, Supreme Commander, and the other big name RTS games the same way they play on PC, which would be possible with a First Party Dedicated controller that Devs could make a control set for.

Video games have come a loooooong way

@ BigBigR First let me say, I'm sorry to say, but in my post when did I laugh at those of you who don't want to pay the $50. Second, you are saying that we shouldn't pay for the Live service, tough everyone would like to have the service for free, a good service requires good mantainance wich can be very costly.

@FoxbatAlpha I'm no hater/fanboy. I'm think of getting an Xbox360 myself, so I can have its exclusives as well. I bought a PS3 because i prefer it's line of exclusives, although there are some on the 360 I'd like to play as well. As for "We pay for XBL because it costs money to run. People have to be employed to put up the content." I don't know how Sony does it with the PSN, but the truth is PSN is free to the consumers. Yes, PSN is, currently, inferior to XBL. Even a Sony employee admited that, and it's true. Microsoft did a great job with XBL. But that doesn't mean PSN is crap. It's useable, and must also cost money to run, and people that put up the content must also be employed. So why is it free? I'd like to know that myself. The thing is, if paying a fee was the norm with online playing, no one would complain. You of course have to pay to have cable service - it's illegal if you don't pay. People know that and don't complain. But it's legal to have a free online service. It's free and legal on the PC, on the PS3, Wii, Nintendo DS, PSP, iPhone, practically every platform. Of course you have to pay your internet provider and the games you play, but the online service itself is free. So I think I have the right to disagree with the fees on XBL. Yes, it's the best service, but I don't think it's worth paying with other free alternatives on the market. That's my opinion of course. You're free to disagree, no need to pay $50 a year to do so. :D

They got rid of HALO 2 online for this. I hate u Micro$oft.

there's got to more to this then just the first paragraph and the facebook app, which most cellphone can do. How about remote play like the PSP.

@wywern271 - "you are most likely making us look like id*ots" Am I? First, Flint247's statement regarding people that disagree with XBL's fees is whats making people look like id*ots, that they're laughable for thinking that it should be free. And like I said in the first place - "If you feel that those $50 are worth the better online service, good for you." Where is this making you seem like id*ots? It's your money, your call, you can do what you want. I respect your decision, whatever it may be. All I'm saying (and I was saying it to Flint247) is that you shouldn't laugh at people that don't think those $50 are worth it. I'm not laughing at you for thinking those $50 are worth it. Why should you laugh at me? Apparently, right now 6 people agree with Flint247, and laugh at people with different opinions. I think they're the ones making people look like id*ots.

BigBigR: I am inclined to agree with you. I don't think XBL should come with a charge, but I see why it is. It comes with a charge because it always has, ever since the very beginning of Xbox Live on the original Xbox, and as long as they have a huge install base who is still willing to pay for it (some unknowingly) than they will not stop charging for it. What incentive do they have? They're doing what Microsoft does best by making big bucks. Having said all that, I'm not unhappy with my yearly subscription to XBL. It's a great service, and I agree with those who say it's lightyears ahead of PSN, because it is. There's just more connectivity, more room for friend interaction and chat, and easier communication between teammates in games. I've never really had any serious problems with it, excluding the occasional bit of lag here and there, but that's not Live's fault. The only thing that I think they could do better is to quit nickel and dime-ing us for EVERYTHING. They could make a lot more content free, and they should, because we pay a yearly or monthly fee for it. The only discounts they really have are for the Deal of the Week, and paying real money for Avatar clothes is just ridiculous. Just about as ridiculous as Sony's @home.

There are alot of haters from Sony here. Since everyone is on the $50 a year crap, it's like this. Think of free PSN as rabit ears getting a few fuzzy channels on your T.V. Think of XBL as 500 channels, On Demand movies etc. Now think how effortless you pay your cable bill every month. You feel as you have to have a cable service. We pay for XBL because it costs money to run. People have to be employed to put up the content. Make the videos for tips on games and upcomng events etc. Now say it out loud $50 Dollars a year. A YEAR! To any full time employed person who doesnt live with mommy, this is not alot of money. XBL for the phone...........I'm gettin that too.

@ BigBigR Man, more like you are "defending" Live users, you are most likely making us look like id*ots, of course everyone would like to get a good service for free, but that's not possible since it need to be constantly mantained and that's not free.

sounds good. but i really dont want it seeing the windows ver(pc) still if if at best compared to xbox version

@BigBigR: Ditto. Mac has three semi-decent FPS games for it (BF2142, Crysis, COD4), and that's why no one plays them. But, those three games run better on a $4,000 mac than a $4000 PC.

@tehepicpwnzor Yes. Macs have a very limited configuration, comparable to the PS3 and 360, which, as I mentioned before, helps alot in optimizing games and, consequently, graphics. One of PCs greatest strengths, it's diversity, is also one of it's biggest weaknesses, at least in regards to this. Still, Macs don't have the huge game library PC owners have available (which is quite ironic given the huge app store Apple has on the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad, the biggest on the market) Macs main purpose isn't gaming, which is why I didn't mention them before.

@downvoters of my previous post Like I said: "If you feel that those $50 are worth the better online service, good for you. Just don't assume everyone thinks or should think like you." I don't think like you. So what are you gonna do? Press that "thumb down" button and make me cry? Could you grow up a little? I'm satisfied with PSN, and I don't think you should pay $50 to get a service that is free on every other platform. Do you get what I'm saying? I'm defending YOU (you who pay those $50) by saying you shouldn't have to pay that. That you should get it for free. You're free to pay if you like, of course. It's your money, not mine. But you shouldn't take it on me for not being willing to pay that myself.

@BigBigR: I want to add that Mac is actually the most powerful gaming system. Games made for mac are made for mac and not anything else, similarly to a PC. But, the mac has about the same tech-specs as a PC. A proper gaming mac costs easily 6 times as much as a PS3, but Crysis Warhead on a mac runs better than literally anything else in the history of gaming.

now people can actually take their avatars along with them and show off to their friends all the worthless crap they bought for them

@Flint247 I know of alot of people that don't mind paying those fees, but here's the thing - If you could have XBL for free, would you pay those fees? I know PSN is lagging behind XBL, but it's free. And, unlike you, I mind paying $50 when the direct competitor, albeit not as good in regards to online services, is free. Now, if you feel that those $50 are worth the better online service, good for you. Just don't assume everyone thinks or should think like you.

Ah, forgot to add that, regarding games, the PC has the huge advantage of modding. While some don't really need that, the fact is that it creates a whole community which actively corrects game flaws and adds new user created content for games even long after their developers have left them. And with dedicated servers (which, as some of you might know, Activision is trying to eradicate, starting with MW2) you get all that modding available in multiplayer, long after the game has been released. Also, since they're dedicated, there's no kill switch for the game makers to press, like Microsoft did with Halo 2. The players decide when to stop playing the game, not the other way around. Sure, it's harder to set up a PC, installing games, DRM, less confortable than on a couch, etc. But there are also advantages. I have a PC and a PS3, and both have weak and strong points.

I laugh everytime someone complains about XBL's fees.

PART 1 @abbnormmal @alexkn64 @ everyone else Fact #1: The PC can indeed have graphic quality superior to both the PS3 and 360, when equiped with high-end components, by using AA, AF and resolutions up to 2560x1600 (1080p is 1920x1080, for those that don't know). Fact #2: Said components (regarding graphic cards) are superior to the ones present on both the 360 and the PS3. Fact #3: There are thousands of different PC configurations, compared to a single configuration on both the PS3 and 360. What does that bring us? Even though you can get a better GPU for the PC than those on the consoles, since games on the PC are made to be able to run on many different systems, the graphics take a hit (unless you have the top of the line super ultra expensive cards). When the graphics don't take a hit, you get games like Crysis. Beautiful graphics, but a killer to most configurations, except top of the line high-end ones (and even those have a bit of a hard time). The consoles, while having inferior GPUs, are of a single configuration, and as such it's alot easier to optimize graphics, which is why even though the GPUs are outdated when compared to those on the PCs, the graphics still rival those on the computer.

PART 2 You CAN get less expensive cards that can output better graphics on the PC, compared to consoles. But the total cost for said PC will always be over $300, although with the graphic card's market today, it won't be all that much more. What I'm trying to say here is that to have superior graphics on the PC you have to pay more for that PC than for a normal console, and the graphics alone might not be worth the extra price. The PC's true strength comes not from the expensive potential to have better graphics, but for the ability to do much more than just simple entertainment. Working, browsing and much more. And THAT is what is truly worth it over the added cost compared to a console. You can't compare a PC with a console. At least not yet. I think both will be merged in the future. I just hope there's still a long way for that to happen. Also, about the 8800GT - Along with the ATI 47xx series, it's the recommended graphic card for Assassin's Creed 2. Yes, it won't be able to run it at max detail at high resolutions or have better graphics than the console version, because of that problem I've already talked about, but it's still alive and kicking.

@ Moloch121 I'm glad you feel that way. Us console gamers don't want you're prejudiced butt* in our community. It's bad enough without stuff* like you. *I wish I was allowed to use a different word.

@Tauu Funniest comment ever..

I agree with Iloveconnie. But Microsoft can't really try to charge people on the PC because 1 we hate that crap leave Xbox Live to the damn children. Two we'll make our owns servers and just mod or hack our own games. Windows Lives is a joke very few games that all suck and noone cares for.

Cool, now you can contact your friends when your 360 RRoDs.

@magicalclick Thanks. Yeah, I try to do the right thing. It's not always the easiest way (in fact, it's almost always harder), but It feels good. :)

It's interesting that the home screen has Facebook, which the user probably already has the app for on their phone in the first place or just use the browser to go to the site.

anyone else sick of everything being touch screen? if it comes with real buttons too then its alright but they really annoy me

Meh

They wont start charging people to play multiplayer games on pc, because PC gaming would cease to exist. Also, no ONE company owns pc gaming, so it can only happen for a certain line of games, if it ever did happen.

The interface looks really nice. It took Microsoft long enough to move over the Zune interface to mobile. The videos on Engadget definitely show that the interface needs some fleshing out, though. It has a lot of delay when opening up contact profiles and going from the home screen to the xbox section, or anywhere else for that matter.

I'll miss the old Windows Mobile, but this overhaul was needed.

this seems bigger to me than Natal. but time will tell with natal. I just think that this is huge because so many people spend so much time on their phones.

Wonder how much longer it will be before they start charging people $50 a year to play games on PCs?

Alright! time to go phone shopping!

another smart idea by MS now they need to add this feature to theire zune and zune HD and this is just thebeginning