• 82 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Colourful_Hippie (4486 posts) -

Yeah I don't really like the guy much and I'm not alone in saying that but let's not start the party around whether or not he's great (even though I technically did just that with the thread title, oops). The guy wrote a great article that sums up my feelings on Xbox Live Gold and just how much bullshit it is now when compared to other services like PSN. MS can't simply rely on saying that you're paying for better when Sony has finally caught up and is offering more than enough perks for their own premium service that just makes Microsoft look like a bunch of assholes with how they are placing stuff behind a paywall that shouldn't be there in the first place.

My only reason for keeping Gold is for multiplayer, it's pretty ridiculous that that's my only reason now. I don't care about the other perks because the 360 is no longer my primary gaming device. I love Gears's multiplayer and to a certain extent, Halo's, that I'm still hesitant in pulling the trigger on canceling my Gold despite not even playing enough multiplayer to justify the cost. All I know is that MS is going to pay for their hubris if they think they can pull this shit again with their next console.

Anyways go ahead and read what he wrote here

#2 Posted by Ben_H (3427 posts) -

Cancelled my Gold subscription a while ago. It just isn't worth it. It is ridiculous to have to pay money just to play multiplayer.

#3 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4486 posts) -

@Ben_H: You're right, maybe once the new consoles roll around I'll decide to drop the Gold. I'm not going to get the next Xbox anytime soon.

#4 Posted by CornBREDX (5965 posts) -

I feel like it's a system they had in place when this console cycle started and next console MS puts out will work differently (more than likely similar to what PS is doing). 
I suspect multiplayer will no longer be behind a pay wall. 
 
They won't win the next console generation if they don't.  
 
I can only guess, so take that for what it's worth, but when this generation started they just kind of grandfathered in the old system from the original XBOX. I think next time they'll have to be more forward thinking than that due to how much digital media has caught on.

#5 Edited by Roger778 (960 posts) -

I read the article on Gamespot, and I'm not bothered at all with X-Box Live. I only use it to download DLC for my games.

Now, I did try a little multiplayer for Mass Effect 3, and I did like it. But I'm not a fan of that type of gaming. I prefer Single-player games.

#6 Posted by flasaltine (1702 posts) -

Now go watch the "What gamer are you?" dating videos to lose all of your faith in GameSpot again.

#7 Posted by Giantstalker (1725 posts) -

I remember thinking Xbox Live fees (these days, Gold) was complete bullshit back on the original Xbox, as I had been playing online - at no additional cost - for many years with various PC games.

Happy to see more people coming around to this opinion of Microsoft's online service.

It's not that I'm cheap, or can't pay, it's just that nobody should be charging extra for that kind of basic functionality.

#8 Posted by StarvingGamer (8546 posts) -

This thread is like rewarding a child for not wetting their pants.

#9 Posted by BaconGames (3566 posts) -

@StarvingGamer said:

This thread is like rewarding a child for not wetting their pants.

Man, that sounds like a sweet place to be.

#10 Posted by Demoskinos (15131 posts) -

Is it bullshit? Yeah. Am I going to continue to give them money? Yeah. Are they going to continue to charging money? As long as suckers keep paying.

#11 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

For a while I honestly didn't know there were other 'perks' for a Gold subscription other than playing online

#12 Posted by themangalist (1747 posts) -

Aww comon, man's okay.

#13 Posted by Warfare (1642 posts) -

@Demoskinos said:

Is it bullshit? Yeah. Am I going to continue to give them money? Yeah. Are they going to continue to charging money? As long as suckers keep paying.

#14 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4486 posts) -

@Giantstalker said:

I remember thinking Xbox Live fees (these days, Gold) was complete bullshit back on the original Xbox, as I had been playing online - at no additional cost - for many years with various PC games.

Happy to see more people coming around to this opinion of Microsoft's online service.

It's not that I'm cheap, or can't pay, it's just that nobody should be charging extra for that kind of basic functionality.

In the beginning their service was of a standard that the price of admission was justified and Sony's PSN was weak out of the gate and took a while to catch up. Now Gold is just highway robbery.

@Demoskinos said:

Is it bullshit? Yeah. Am I going to continue to give them money? Yeah. Are they going to continue to charging money? As long as suckers keep paying.

For sure, I think I'll be able to fool myself into still paying for one last year because I doubt I'll hold onto Gold when the new consoles arrive.

@themangalist said:

Aww comon, man's okay.

Nah.

#15 Posted by RE_Player1 (7526 posts) -

I bought an Xbox 360 in September to play the odd game that isn't on PC or PS3. Have never and will never pay for Gold. I was amazed that Netflix and other services are locked behind the Gold paywall. Fuck you Microsoft.

#16 Posted by Demoskinos (15131 posts) -

@Colourful_Hippie: That is just the sad cycle. Back when XBL was really the preimire place to play online games on consoles it made sense now a ton of people built their friends list around Xbox and since that is where everyone's friends are they pony up. Also, Microsoft still has that one trump card of Halo and I happen to have played a TOOOOOOOON of Halo. So they kinda got me by the balls.

#17 Edited by Flabbergastrate (275 posts) -

At this point, I feel like the only thing that separates the 360's online infrastructure from their console competitors is their speed. Updates and download speeds are generally faster on the 360, while the download system on PS3 is often frequent and tedious. I have at assume that these faster speeds are in part possible because people are (sort of) paying into them. The MS server guys can continue validating needing faster speeds by saying "if we're as slow as PSN, people may consider whether our service really is more valuable."

The obvious counterpoint, is, of course, that you can take advantage of those speeds without paying at all, and it's ludicrous to think that MS would ever restrict their download speeds to favor Gold members (I mean, they could, but it'd be stupid). So Gold members are paying into a pool, of sorts, where faster download speeds and more consistent servers are paid by some people but benefit everyone. To keep this up, MS has to keep charging for Gold. Now that the competition (PS3, not necessarily Wii/U just yet) in terms of features, MS has a harder time justifying that $60, but they have to keep charging for it.

It's a weird corner to paint yourself into, but there they are. And in case anyone thinks I'm defending MS, I'm not. I think Gold is bullshit, and I only renewed last year because it was $30 and was tax-deductible (I reviewed a couple 360 games for money the year I bought it). My theory could be entirely off the mark (I'm not an expert), but that's why I think they're still charging for it. That said, I largely agree with the article.

#18 Posted by warxsnake (2650 posts) -

Holy shit how did he find the time to stop hating military games and write this article??

#19 Edited by Colourful_Hippie (4486 posts) -

@msavo: It's not even worth giving the time of day. That Netflix app went from best to shit after the "metro" dashboard redesign.

@Demoskinos said:

@Colourful_Hippie: That is just the sad cycle. Back when XBL was really the preimire place to play online games on consoles it made sense now a ton of people built their friends list around Xbox and since that is where everyone's friends are they pony up. Also, Microsoft still has that one trump card of Halo and I happen to have played a TOOOOOOOON of Halo. So they kinda got me by the balls.

I got lucky and most of my friends made the switch to PC when I did too. Also I just don't play multiplayer games as much as I used due to increasing lack of free time. As for Halo yeah I get that, I'm the same way with Gears. I'm too good and continue to have fun to not want to retire the MP ever.

@Flabbergastrate: At some point you're paying for a well maintained service sure but that price is where it is because people continue to pay the price of admission. You have to admit that it took a special kind of arrogance to show just how much you care about people picking apart your service by actually raising the price instead of lowering it. You gotta give them props for that.

@warxsnake said:

Holy shit how did he find the time to stop hating military games and write this article??

He was outlining the article while Ryan was yelling at him for his bullshit Vita defense in that one Gamespot feature.

(I'll stop now)

#20 Posted by PandaBear (1384 posts) -

Another article about Xbox Live Gold not being worth the money compared to PSN?!?! INCREDIBLE!!!

On a side note, iPhone games like Angry Birds make a lot of money!!! Motion controls don't work so great!!! Publisher's hate second hand games!!! Japanese development isn't what it used to be!!! Micro-transactions are no good, sometimes!!! On disc DLC is stupid!!! MORE NEWS SOON PEOPLE!!! HOLD ON!!!

#21 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4486 posts) -

@PandaBear: But McShea wrote. I gotta find something redeeming in the guy and I just did despite how little that facet is.

#22 Posted by MiniPato (2751 posts) -

@PandaBear said:

Another article about Xbox Live Gold not being worth the money compared to PSN?!?! INCREDIBLE!!!

On a side note, iPhone games like Angry Birds make a lot of money!!! Motion controls don't work so great!!! Publisher's hate second hand games!!! Japanese development isn't what it used to be!!! Micro-transactions are no good, sometimes!!! On disc DLC is stupid!!! MORE NEWS SOON PEOPLE!!! HOLD ON!!!

This just in: Anonymous internet person makes snarky, sarcastic comment on a forum.

#23 Posted by ManMadeGod (1585 posts) -

This shouldn't be news to anyone. I let my gold account lapse last month and I refuse to switch back. It's kinda shocking how limited the 360 is without gold: you can't even use the web browser. I also can't send messages from my Windows Phone despite having XBL built into it.

#24 Posted by byterunner (319 posts) -

@PandaBear said:

Another article about Xbox Live Gold not being worth the money compared to PSN?!?! INCREDIBLE!!!

On a side note, iPhone games like Angry Birds make a lot of money!!! Motion controls don't work so great!!! Publisher's hate second hand games!!! Japanese development isn't what it used to be!!! Micro-transactions are no good, sometimes!!! On disc DLC is stupid!!! MORE NEWS SOON PEOPLE!!! HOLD ON!!!

#25 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1926 posts) -

I think MS is in for an unexpected awakening next generation. For almost the entire generation, my large group of friends and I were always on Xbox. I also have a PS3, but I am the only one of my group, so I only used it for exclusives. We were almost always in an Xbox Live party, even when were all playing different games.

However, over the past year and a half, we have all upgraded our PCs and most of us (including myself) let gold lapse and have no plans to renew it. We play all the games we can on PC, and now spend our time in Skype calls rather than xbox live parties. We have opening talked as a group about going with the PS4 over the Xbox when the next gen begins, with the two main factors being lack of xbox exclusives and the price of xbox live.

If my group of friends is any indication, people are getting fed up with paying for gold and MS is going to lose a huge market share when people are in a position to choose Playstation or Xbox for their gaming of the next 5-7 years.

#26 Posted by GunstarRed (5448 posts) -

It has become quite frustrating that you're paying for Gold and Live takes an age to load up and when it finally does you're presented with a ridiculous amount of ads... But when I want to download something, get into an online game or use vastly superior apps to the PS3 counterparts I really don't mind paying the £35 or whatever it costs.

PS+ IS great and is a good service for people that don't buy every game and some of the offers are amazing (especially if you have a Vita), without the service I wouldn't have played a ton of games I enjoyed, but had no intention of buying. But downloads are... so... s l o w... Like insanely slow and other than some of the bigger games like Uncharted and Killzone I still have a bunch of trouble trying to get into some online games on PSN. (although this is something that is way, way better than when I first got the system)

On top of that the TV services are useless, just sending you to sites using the almost broken web browser. I have far more frustrations using the PS3 than the 360 and if it costs the price of a game to do so I will pretty happily pay it.

#27 Posted by Aterons (198 posts) -

I always saw consoles as a "waste of money" kinda thing, paying more for a platform that gets out-dates faster and is almost un-upgradeable as opposed to buying the PC equivalent cheaper or with better specs at the same price ( and yes, OS is a cost as well but there are free OSs and as "bad" as it makes you pirating a MS OS is "fine" with them, even if they detect it they don't take any actions against you or the pirated OS ).

So as far as I am concerned you might as well charge for something like X-box live because said person that bought the console didn't care for the money=value thing in the first place.

#28 Posted by Jothel (936 posts) -

Can't believe no one has made the "McShea makes me McSigh" joke yet. I know it's terrible but still

#29 Posted by WarlordPayne (705 posts) -

@Aterons said:

I always saw consoles as a "waste of money" kinda thing, paying more for a platform that gets out-dates faster and is almost un-upgradeable as opposed to buying the PC equivalent cheaper or with better specs at the same price ( and yes, OS is a cost as well but there are free OSs and as "bad" as it makes you pirating a MS OS is "fine" with them, even if they detect it they don't take any actions against you or the pirated OS ).

So as far as I am concerned you might as well charge for something like X-box live because said person that bought the console didn't care for the money=value thing in the first place.

Are you saying that consoles cost more and go out of date faster than PCs? Are you high?

#30 Posted by Vexxan (4612 posts) -

The only Xbox Live Gold I've ever had were those free weeks/months you usually get when you buy the big AAA games on day one.

#31 Posted by Daiphyer (1350 posts) -

I had the same feeling towards him, but ever since I started listening to Gamespot's Gameplay, I have come around on him. Dude's alright.

#32 Posted by Simplexity (1382 posts) -

@Flacracker said:

Now go watch the "What gamer are you?" dating videos to lose all of your faith in GameSpot again.

Holy shit I just watched part 1 of that, unbelievable that they get paid for that shit.

#33 Posted by FourWude (2245 posts) -

Tom McShea is awesome. He called out the military bullshit in modern gaming for what it is. Butthurt fanboys couldn't deal with it.

#34 Posted by Cold_Wolven (2293 posts) -

It's been well over a year since I had a subscription to Gold and I'm all the better for it. I don't play multiplayer games and what Sony is doing by giving away free games and discounts with their PS+ service just just appeals to me more.

#35 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1926 posts) -

@Aterons said:

I always saw consoles as a "waste of money" kinda thing, paying more for a platform that gets out-dates faster and is almost un-upgradeable as opposed to buying the PC equivalent cheaper or with better specs at the same price ( and yes, OS is a cost as well but there are free OSs and as "bad" as it makes you pirating a MS OS is "fine" with them, even if they detect it they don't take any actions against you or the pirated OS ).

So as far as I am concerned you might as well charge for something like X-box live because said person that bought the console didn't care for the money=value thing in the first place.

What??????

The $400 Xbox I bought in 2005 still plays all the new games. If you were to make a $400 PC in 2005, it wouldn't play any games then, let alone now. I love my gaming PC, but it sure as hell cost more than a console and it certainly won't be up to date for the next 5-7 years. There are plenty of reasons to build a gaming PC, but the reasons you just gave are the exact opposite of true.

#36 Posted by Ramone (2976 posts) -

@Simplexity said:

@Flacracker said:

Now go watch the "What gamer are you?" dating videos to lose all of your faith in GameSpot again.

Holy shit I just watched part 1 of that, unbelievable that they get paid for that shit.

Remember that geek guide thing in Wired that Ryan and Jeff hated? This is basically that but in handy video form.

#37 Posted by believer258 (12176 posts) -

My Live ran out sometime in the first half of this year, a little while into summer break. I've thought about buying it again a couple of times, but each time a bigger and bigger part of me just goes "...no, it's too much money for a service that is free elsewhere".

And that's one of the big reasons I wanted to switch to PC. I do have the 14 day trial that came with Halo 4 activated right now, but I've barely used it. I just am not going back. Sorry, MS.

#38 Posted by Sanity (1944 posts) -

Yea, i hardly ever use my 360 anymore just because its crazy to me that i have to pay to use the internet im already paying for to play and use the games and services im also already paying for. Microsoft better ditch gold or up the benefits otherwise im not getting there next console.

#39 Edited by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

@Colourful_Hippie said:

My only reason for keeping Gold is for multiplayer, it's pretty ridiculous that that's my only reason now. I don't care about the other perks because the 360 is no longer my primary gaming device. I love Gears's multiplayer and to a certain extent, Halo's, that I'm still hesitant in pulling the trigger on canceling my Gold despite not even playing enough multiplayer to justify the cost. All I know is that MS is going to pay for their hubris if they think they can pull this shit again with their next console.

You sure about that? Another Gears, Halo or whatever system-seller they will have and you will probably continue to pay for MP. And so will millions of others.

They have gamers by the balls. At the beginning of the generation MS will invest big time to secure themselves a few supremely awesome IPs and then they let people pay to play them MP for the whole of the generation. Pretty smart.

edit: The last sentence of McShea's article is evidence of how fucked we are: "Although my resolve weakens whenever a new Halo is released, I recognize that Gold is an exploitive business practice that should disappear into the ether when the next generation arrives."

In short: people know it's bullshit but they will continue to pay for it because they absolutely have to play exclusive game x. What do you think MS is gonna do?

#40 Posted by Maajin (1086 posts) -

@CptBedlam said:

You sure about that? Another Gears, Halo or whatever system-seller they will have and you will probably continue to pay for MP. And so will millions of others.

Nah, that was the kind of hubris that made Sony charge $600 bucks for the PS3! It's the new Playstation after all, they can do anything and people will still buy it! Except they won't.

#41 Edited by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

@Maajin said:

@CptBedlam said:

You sure about that? Another Gears, Halo or whatever system-seller they will have and you will probably continue to pay for MP. And so will millions of others.

Nah, that was the kind of hubris that made Sony charge $600 bucks for the PS3! It's the new Playstation after all, they can do anything and people will still buy it! Except they won't.

The 360 wasn't 800$ but people paid as much for it after all those years of XBL gold subscriptions. I think MS can again count on gamers not doing the math. Those follow-up costs are forgotten as soon as MS wows everyone with their next big IP (Samaritan MP, maybe?).

The only thing that'd get MS into trouble would be Sony having stronger IPs. I don't see that happening anytime soon. I'm talking about mainstream appeal btw, personally I dislike Halo and I'm not huge into Gears either.

#42 Posted by Maajin (1086 posts) -

@CptBedlam said:

@Maajin said:

@CptBedlam said:

You sure about that? Another Gears, Halo or whatever system-seller they will have and you will probably continue to pay for MP. And so will millions of others.

Nah, that was the kind of hubris that made Sony charge $600 bucks for the PS3! It's the new Playstation after all, they can do anything and people will still buy it! Except they won't.

The 360 wasn't 800$ but people paid as much for it after all those years of XBL gold subscriptions. I think MS can again count on gamers not doing the math. Those follow-up costs are forgotten as soon as MS wows everyone with their next big IP (Samaritan MP, maybe?).

I don't think people are as faithful to a console brand as you think. Case and point: the success of the 360 versus the PS3. Sony had gamers, as you said, by the balls with the PS2. That did not matter at all when Microsoft came earlier with a cheaper console and good games. If Microsoft takes the sucess of the next console for granted like Sony did, that will probably happen again.

#43 Edited by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

@Maajin said:

@CptBedlam said:

@Maajin said:

@CptBedlam said:

You sure about that? Another Gears, Halo or whatever system-seller they will have and you will probably continue to pay for MP. And so will millions of others.

Nah, that was the kind of hubris that made Sony charge $600 bucks for the PS3! It's the new Playstation after all, they can do anything and people will still buy it! Except they won't.

The 360 wasn't 800$ but people paid as much for it after all those years of XBL gold subscriptions. I think MS can again count on gamers not doing the math. Those follow-up costs are forgotten as soon as MS wows everyone with their next big IP (Samaritan MP, maybe?).

I don't think people are as faithful to a console brand as you think. Case and point: the success of the 360 versus the PS3. Sony had gamers, as you said, by the balls with the PS2. That did not matter at all when Microsoft came earlier with a cheaper console and good games. If Microsoft takes the sucess of the next console for granted like Sony did, that will probably happen again.

I really hope you're right and I'm wrong. But I have not a lot of faith in gamers in general when it comes to stuff like that.

#44 Posted by Superfriend (1584 posts) -

Gold isn´t worth it anymore. I didn´t renew about a year ago and haven´t looked back. The 2 weeks of live that came with Halo 4 were okay, but they had weird issues during launch, the matchmaking kinda didn´t work sometimes and the dashboard is still shit.

Remember all the ambition they had with XBL? Live broadcasting stuff in PGR3, the live quizshow events (I loved those), the great filesharing system and custom maps in Halo Reach.. yeah, well they flushed all that down the toilet and replaced it with.. lemme think. Internet Explorer? And Netflix, which is in every TV nowadays. I´m sorry but whoever is in charge over at Microsoft doesn´t have the slightest idea of what they are doing.

At this point, I expect this fabled "next generation" xbox to be a new kinect with netflix strapped to it that can display games at 1080p.. but just barely at sub 30 frames per second. But don´t worry, as Microsoft will buy exclusive rights to Minecraft 2 or whatever it will be called and the shitheads will flock to it and continue to pay for a service that is a joke.

#45 Posted by GetEveryone (4458 posts) -

More worryingly, I've just checked my bank statements and have been charged for XBL every month for a while now.

I've been a free member for months now.

#46 Edited by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -
#47 Posted by Superfriend (1584 posts) -

@CptBedlam said:

@Maajin: @Superfriend: @Colourful_Hippie: And so it begins... Blizzard's Titan is apparently coming to the next xbox. It's gonna be interesting to see how MS and Blizzard will handle the subscription fees.

Huh, interesting. Sounds like Starcraft MMO or something to me. But this is also a rumor started by someone on NeoGaf, so I take it with a grain of salt. Given Blizzards track record for console development (at least more recenty) I´d say they will "evaluate the possibility" of this being on console for the next 3-4 years and then proceed to not release or even fully realize it.

#48 Posted by BaneFireLord (2956 posts) -

There's Norway they're going to still be charging for multiplayer on the 720, right guys? Guys?

#49 Posted by BaneFireLord (2956 posts) -

*No way Fucking autocorrect.

#50 Edited by CptBedlam (4457 posts) -

@Superfriend: Given how MS usually operates, I'd say it's possible they bought themselves a year or two of Titan-exclusivity and Blizzard will have to deliver in time (roughly) if such a deal is in place.

edit: Okay, when I think about it... not really. Blizzard can't weaken their own Battle.Net platform like that.