So I've been against Xbox Live Gold for a really long time. Not against it as a concept, mind you, but against it as a product. A monetized service. In my opinion, Xbox Live Gold is a ripoff, and that those who choose to defend the service are being tricked and hypnotized by a very carefully executed marketing effort and brand management team. There was a very strong sentiment at first that Xbox Live Gold was "the only way Microsoft could turn a profit" on the Xbox and therefore it was okay, because you were supporting the first baby steps in to online console multiplayer. There are those out there for whom paying for Xbox Live Gold makes them feel good, thinking that the service gives them a perch in which they can look down their noses at the "commoners" stuck with Xbox Live Silver. They see it as buying a ticket in to a special club for the elite few that can afford it. I've spoken to these deranged individuals, often by airing these very complaints. It was surreal, to say the least.
 
All of that stuff sort of made me kind of annoyed. I never really considered myself much of a PC gamer, but here I am with both Steam and Xfire on the PC, two pieces of software that not only match Xbox Live feature-for-feature, but greatly surpass it. Xbox Live Gold has never been exposed as a greater sham as when Microsoft had the great idea of transferring the service to the PC, the very den of these two pieces of software. " Games for Windows Live Gold" offered all of the functionality of its console sibling on the PC for the same subscription fee and it fell flat on its face. Why would you pay for that? You wouldn't, that's why. In light of that, it's hard not to imagine Microsoft is holding Xbox Live hostage and is demanding a ransom in exchange. The only reason anybody started paying for Xbox Live Gold is because there is no Steam. There is no Xfire. There is no choice. And like some sort of stockholm syndrome, now people are starting to think that's okay. They say to themselves, "That's the way it is."
 
So I lived a comfortable life without Xbox Live Gold. I could never justify the cost. Sure, it's only $0.03 a day or whatever, but it's not as though my Xbox 360 has a coin slot on it. You have to play by Microsoft's rules, buy the time in pre-determined chunks. When faced with the opportunity to spend $50 on temporary access to service I should be getting for free or spending $50 on something that's going to last me "a life time", I have always chosen door number 2. Bigger fish to fry, and all of that. Ironically, for a person who was fine not having Xbox Live Gold, I have found myself with a subscription to the service that does not expire until April 2011, acquired legally and free of charge. 
 
It will be interesting to see if, in a year's time, I too will have developed a sympathy towards Xbox Live Gold. In the mean time, I will continue to play the BLUR Multiplayer Beta.

 In my opinion, Xbox Live Gold is a ripoff, and that those who choose to defend the service are being tricked and hypnotized by a very carefully executed marketing effort and brand management team

" @BlazeHedgehog said:

 In my opinion, Xbox Live Gold is a ripoff, and that those who choose to defend the service are being tricked and hypnotized by a very carefully executed marketing effort and brand management team

What's wrong with wanting to play awesome games like Bad Company 2 online and chat with friends? "

 
Technically, nothing is wrong with wanting that stuff, but having to pay for it is another story, especially when you consider BC2 on the PS3 and PC has voice chat and online multiplayer free of charge. "

It's worth it. If you can afford an Xbox, you can afford $50 a year for some bonus fun. In some cases it's not even bonus fun, multiplayer is becoming the main draw to a lot of games.

Elite few? What are you retarded? It's 50 bucks a months, fuckin' who's that cheap? It's a good centralized online service that neither Nintendo or Sony can seem to match in quality. You can't compare these services to PC because consoles are a contained experience, there is no competition within a console. The PC is it's own beast, you can't compare something open like that to a console.  
 
For all the good times I've had online with my xbox compared to my wii or my PS3, I'd happily pay for live. It's proven to improve the quality of service, so why not?

" @BlazeHedgehog:   xbox live gold is way better than the alternative. Just look at how online is implemented in many ps3 games or EA games.  Unreliable latency, poor support, individual per-game or per developer logins, regional lockouts, offensively intrusive online drm and worst of all you never know when the company hosting the servers or the matchmaking service will decide to close down and leave you unable to play your game online at all.  Xbox live gold standardizes the online experience and provides stable matchmaking servers which continue to exist even if a game's publisher goes bankrupt.  There is value in this. There is expense associated with this.  Sony is proof of that.  Even though free online multiplayer is one of their greatest gaming selling points over the 360, they are looking for ways to monetize the service. This is because they are losing a ton of money.  If you dont like it, don't get it. But please don't presume that you are smarter than everyone else that pays. You aren't.  You just dont value quality online console multiplayer as much.  That's fine, but it doesn't make you a better person. "

I know more people who spend the monthly fee on cigarettes EVERY DAY. I know what a ripoff is... and Xbox Live isn't a ripoff.

" What's wrong with wanting to play awesome games like Bad Company 2 online and chat with friends? "

I bet the additional electricity your PC consumes over a Xbox 360 or PS3 ends up costing you over $50 a year. 

" I bet the additional electricity your PC consumes over a Xbox 360 or PS3 ends up costing you over $50 a year.  "

Hate to break it to you, but... you don't deserve anything. If Microsoft wants to charge for their service, they have that right. It's just up to you whether or not you find that it's worth it. Many people have found that $50 a year is completely reasonable.

Online gaming is a service, not a right. It's also an absurdly inexpensive service which amounts to about four bucks a month on the Xbox 360.

XBL is not a scam for the people who, for one reason or another, only have access to Xbox online gaming. Gaming on modern PCs is far and away a more expensive venture than on the Xbox. Yes, you can social network much better on a PC. We all know this, but not everyone has the know how or the money to play that way. But they might have the money for Xbox gaming. 
 
That many multiplatform games sell better on the Xbox than the PS3 also makes a huge difference. Who gives a flying you-know-what about an extra 50 bucks spent a year when none of your friends bought Battlefield for the Playstation? No one, that's who. 
 
Now I have several PC games through Steam. It requires that I play L4D on very low resolution settings because my computer has the factory standard graphics card. I'm not willing to shell out the money for an upgrade, so I deal with the low resolution and I don't care. But pretty much everyone I know in a similar situation would just go for a console version instead. And many Valve games, as great as they all are, do not see the light of day on the PS3.
 
So what are we left with? Xbox Live is successful because multiplatform games sell better for it and it has the best actual service of the consoles. And then, playing on the PC requires a good computer, where a good graphics card can cost the same as a few yearsworth of XBL gaming! People argue all the time about Xbox vs PS3 and Xbox vs PC in terms of dollar value, but only in relative terms. In absolute terms, Microsoft's system was inarguably the lowest in price for several years as it built an install base. That's what really matters in this business.
 
Silver Account Commoners that cannot afford XBL cannot afford the competition. Why do you think that XBL is infamous for its younger audience? Because XBL is accessible and affordable.

Because Microsoft has the system locked down. That's literally all there is to it. As long as they can profit off it, they will.

" @BlazeHedgehog:   xbox live gold is way better than the alternative. Just look at how online is implemented in many ps3 games or EA games.  Unreliable latency, poor support, individual per-game or per developer logins, regional lockouts, offensively intrusive online drm and worst of all you never know when the company hosting the servers or the matchmaking service will decide to close down and leave you unable to play your game online at all. 

" I bet the additional electricity your PC consumes over a Xbox 360 or PS3 ends up costing you over $50 a year.  "

" Hate to break it to you, but... you don't deserve anything. If Microsoft wants to charge for their service, they have that right. It's just up to you whether or not you find that it's worth it. Many people have found that $50 a year is completely reasonable. "

XBL is not a scam for the people who, for one reason or another, only have access to Xbox online gaming. Gaming on modern PCs is far and away a more expensive venture than on the Xbox. Yes, you can social network much better on a PC. We all know this, but not everyone has the know how or the money to play that way. But they might have the money for Xbox gaming.
 

That many multiplatform games sell better on the Xbox than the PS3 also makes a huge difference. Who gives a flying you-know-what about an extra 50 bucks spent a year when none of your friends bought Battlefield for the Playstation? No one, that's who.

" @BlazeHedgehog: You talk about the other services like they are equal, they aren't (Aside from the PC) I am sorry but I own both consoles and PSN doesn't hold a candle to XBL, now true Microsoft is starting to piss me off a little bit with the Ads (which I should NOT HAVE as a gold member) but I still am WAY more willing to play a game online with my Box than my Playset. and really dude its 4 bucks a month who cares, if they jack it up than I will complain but right now I find the price fair. "

 
@Evilsbane said:

" @BlazeHedgehog: You talk about the other services like they are equal, they aren't (Aside from the PC) I am sorry but I own both consoles and PSN doesn't hold a candle to XBL, now true Microsoft is starting to piss me off a little bit with the Ads (which I should NOT HAVE as a gold member) but I still am WAY more willing to play a game online with my Box than my Playset. and really dude its 4 bucks a month who cares, if they jack it up than I will complain but right now I find the price fair. "

The thing is, PSN has adopted the features that matter. If you play Modern Warfare 2 on the PS3, it has the exact same lobby as it does on the 360. Sure, it may not have Microsoft's "TrueSkill" Matchmaking, but it's hard to define in tangible terms what "TrueSkill" even does beyond nebulous and vague claims. And what important features PSN lacks compared to XBL are most likely going to be added in the near future - Sony has said as much.  "

 @BlazeHedgehog said:

Figure you paid, what? At least $300-$400 for your Xbox 360. That's about the same cost it would take to maintain a gaming PC, if you upgrade once every four years. A not-quite-bleeding-edge-but-still-awesome graphics card will run you about $150-$200. Processors run about the same. RAM has been dirt cheap for a while. And you don't even have to upgrade all at once, either. One year, it's a new graphics card. The next, maybe you buy more RAM. A year after that, a new processor.  A lot of PCs nowadays have HDTV hookups, too, so if playing on your couch is an issue...
 

 

I've heard all of these arguments before. There's no way you're getting around the higher expense of the personal computer. In absolute terms, you will spend more money on a gaming capable PC than an Xbox over any period of time. It is a necessity for the perks that come with it. And there is a significant threshold of people who have enough for the Xbox, but not a gaming capable PC. These people will buy Xbox live and still save money. A $150 graphics card is three years of XBL. I'm not one of those people who's going trying to prove the superiority of any platform, but in entirely objective terms the computer costs more money. The computer is also less user friendly than a console. Again, this is not necessarily bad, but it does justify why some people would not use it for games over an easier to use alternative.
 

This is going to sound a lot nastier than I mean it to, but sheep mentality is not something to be trumpeting. "My friends are doing it, so I have to do it too!" is a road that can potentially lead to many bad destinations. 

 
Sheep follow without a reason to. Paying for an online service so that you can play with your friends, as opposed to using a different (free) service that they are not using because they do not have that particular platform or any games for it, is an entirely reasonable notion. Playing multiplayer with random people is not as fun as playing with friends. I am willing to put up with low res L4D on my computer because that's what my friends got it for. In fact, I only got Left 4 Dead period because my friends got it. I wanted to play with them explicitly, and I didn't really care about the game otherwise. 
 
EDIT: quoting format is so unintuitive

I've heard all of these arguments before. There's no way you're getting around the higher expense of the personal computer. In absolute terms, you will spend more money on a gaming capable PC than an Xbox over any period of time. It is a necessity for the perks that come with it. And there is a significant threshold of people who have enough for the Xbox, but not a gaming capable PC. These people will buy Xbox live and still save money. A $150 graphics card is three years of XBL. I'm not one of those people who's going trying to prove the superiority of any platform, but in entirely objective terms the computer costs more money. The computer is also less user friendly than a console. Again, this is not necessarily bad, but it does justify why some people would not use it for games over an easier to use alternative. 

I am getting around the high expense of a personal computer, though. They're only expensive if you buy them pre-built. A top of the line, pre-built gaming PC will typically run you over $1,000 when you could custom-build the same setup yourself for $400-$500 - the same price as a game console. Do you understand what I am saying, here? For the same price as the Xbox Hardware, you could have PC Hardware with all the same features (and more). And it's not like doing car repairs, either, where you have 10,000 moving parts. Pretty much every PC component has a very specially-shaped slot that it plugs in to. It's almost impossible to "hook it up wrong", especially if you follow the instructions. Keeping a gaming PC up to date from then on actually ends up being less expensive than a gaming console overall, too, because when everybody else is dropping $500 on the third Xbox, you're dropping $200 on a new video card. So not only are you saving the cost of Xbox Live Gold, but you're saving on the cost of the hardware itself.
 
As for being "less user friendly", that's a pretty bad excuse. If you want to choose to be ignorant, that's fine, I guess, but it's not difficult to use a computer. You don't have to be a genius to know how to troubleshoot a problem. There's definitely a benefit to being able to just stick the disc in the tray and go, but it's hardly what should be considered a "deal breaker". I could flip it around and say that there are certain elements of console interfaces that are a little too simple.
 
@Famov said: 

Sheep follow without a reason to. Paying for an online service so that you can play with your friends, as opposed to using a different (free) service that they are not using because they do not have that particular platform or any games for it, is an entirely reasonable notion.

Maybe, but again, this touches on what my blog said - about not having a choice. The decision was already made for you. Doesn't that suck? Doesn't it bother you that you have no control over the situation? You have to pay XBL Gold, because everybody pays, and "that's the way it is". It's like a river running down a mountain. I've been "voting with my dollars" for years, and it doesn't matter. You think of the movie industry, and how many bad movies come out of it every year - and people go see them, because they get swept up in the marketing zeitgeist. You cannot watch a movie trailer these days and be absolutely certain that the movie they're trying to sell you is the same movie you'll see in theaters. The populace at large is easily fooled - and before you know it, there's nothing you can do to change your course. The river is already flowing, and nobody wants to go against the current.
 
But that doesn't make it right.
 
@Supermarius said:

Further, while sony is providing free online support, its an anchor around their neck.  It costs them money they cant recoup and that is why they are scrambling to find ways to charge for aspects of the online.

" @Ashuku: I'm more comparing pc online to xbla.  Man, there are alot of pc games which i would like to play more online but their matching services have closed down, like the old westwood rtses. 

 Also im aware of the the hacked solutions for old westwood games, but im pretty sure that those are not gereally allowed by ea so im wary to get too into them. "

I think the main difference for a lot of people with xbox live is a generational gap . Not generalizing too much, but kids these days only know xbox live. I played PC games online for close to a decade before ever playing on xbox live. It's not like that anymore.

" @Famov said:

I've heard all of these arguments before. There's no way you're getting around the higher expense of the personal computer. In absolute terms, you will spend more money on a gaming capable PC than an Xbox over any period of time. It is a necessity for the perks that come with it. And there is a significant threshold of people who have enough for the Xbox, but not a gaming capable PC. These people will buy Xbox live and still save money. A $150 graphics card is three years of XBL. I'm not one of those people who's going trying to prove the superiority of any platform, but in entirely objective terms the computer costs more money. The computer is also less user friendly than a console. Again, this is not necessarily bad, but it does justify why some people would not use it for games over an easier to use alternative. 

I am getting around the high expense of a personal computer, though. They're only expensive if you buy them pre-built. A top of the line, pre-built gaming PC will typically run you over $1,000 when you could custom-build the same setup yourself for $400-$500 - the same price as a game console. Do you understand what I am saying, here? For the same price as the Xbox Hardware, you could have PC Hardware with all the same features (and more). And it's not like doing car repairs, either, where you have 10,000 moving parts. Pretty much every PC component has a very specially-shaped slot that it plugs in to. It's almost impossible to "hook it up wrong", especially if you follow the instructions. Keeping a gaming PC up to date from then on actually ends up being less expensive than a gaming console overall, too, because when everybody else is dropping $500 on the third Xbox, you're dropping $200 on a new video card. So not only are you saving the cost of Xbox Live Gold, but you're saving on the cost of the hardware itself.
 
As for being "less user friendly", that's a pretty bad excuse. If you want to choose to be ignorant, that's fine, I guess, but it's not difficult to use a computer. You don't have to be a genius to know how to troubleshoot a problem. There's definitely a benefit to being able to just stick the disc in the tray and go, but it's hardly what should be considered a "deal breaker". I could flip it around and say that there are certain elements of console interfaces that are a little too simple.
 
@Famov said: 

Sheep follow without a reason to. Paying for an online service so that you can play with your friends, as opposed to using a different (free) service that they are not using because they do not have that particular platform or any games for it, is an entirely reasonable notion.

Maybe, but again, this touches on what my blog said - about not having a choice. The decision was already made for you. Doesn't that suck? Doesn't it bother you that you have no control over the situation? You have to pay XBL Gold, because everybody pays, and "that's the way it is". It's like a river running down a mountain. I've been "voting with my dollars" for years, and it doesn't matter. You think of the movie industry, and how many bad movies come out of it every year - and people go see them, because they get swept up in the marketing zeitgeist. You cannot watch a movie trailer these days and be absolutely certain that the movie they're trying to sell you is the same movie you'll see in theaters. The populace at large is easily fooled - and before you know it, there's nothing you can do to change your course. The river is already flowing, and nobody wants to go against the current.
 
But that doesn't make it right. 

"

God, I really hate the GB quote system. Let's hope I did this right. 
 
The first thing I wish to make clear here is that I am not describing myself when I'm making these arguments. I am describing the motivations of people who purchase XBL and why it is entirely reasonable for them to do so. 
 
A custom built gaming capable PC for 400-500 dollars total? That's a bold claim. It also seems, to me, to contradict your previous numbers. Did you not claim that, using your lower bound numbers, a processor and graphics card can cost 150 dollars each? Do you really wish to claim that  the rest of the computer will cost only 100-200 more dollars? And this isn't even getting into the possibility that a monitor and mouse/keyboard may need to be purchased. These numbers do not add up, when the lowest cost Xbox costs 200 dollars. An elite will cost 300 dollars. Even with an elite and three years of XBL, you spent 450 dollars. If you can convince me that a PC will cost around that much in that time frame, I will be very impressed. But I wouldn't be surprised if the lowest reasonable price would be anywhere from 50-100 percent higher than the numbers you gave.
 
Furthermore, my comment about user friendliness is entirely valid. It is easy for people who are tech savvy to misunderstand just how little most people know about computers. Were my sister, for example, to be a prospective buyer of a gaming machine, how would she ever learn how to put a computer together? She doesn't understand why the computer has internet access. She doesn't understand where programs are on a computer. She got duped by a virus to let it 'scan' the old family computer for viruses. (Where she was to pick up something like that is another question.) Unless she pays the Geek Squad ($$$) or something, she's never getting a custom computer together. Even I would need some help (I bookmarked Geno's recent thread for the future possibility that I may want access to it). You are correct in asserting that simplicity and a streamlined interface has its own downfalls. By design, the 360 environment is less powerful than the PC. That's the nature of simplicity vs customization.
 
Lastly, there is a choice. If their friends have one platform and not the other, that will likely be a factor of their decision making process. 
 
My entire point is that there is a completely reasonable justification for playing an Xbox over a PC, depending entirely on the circumstances of each situation. This is the real reason why there is no objective best platform: the answer changes due to a huge range of factors. Whether it be the game library, the price of the platform, the online service, the customizability of the platform, etc. And then there are more personal reasons: Individual knowledge of technology, what the potential buyer's friends have, whether the buyer has an HDTV, whether the buyer has an internet connection at all, etc.

 
My rabid Nintendo fanboyism/brand loyalty can even be justified. If I want Nintendo games, which I do, how can I play them? On the current Nintendo platform. It doesn't much matter what I think of the console's latest gimmick, as my purchase is justified by my desire to play quality Nintendo games, and this is my only opportunity to play those games. There may have been videogame consoles in the past where it would require extraordinary circumstances to justify their purchase (3D0, CDI), but I do not believe that this applies to the personal computer or any of the currently available consoles.