360 users getting shafted by Microsoft????

Avatar image for kaycon11
Kaycon11

128

Forum Posts

751

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#1  Edited By Kaycon11

I am kinda mad about this and I want to know what you guys think. Ok, as lots of you might know, this past week the Games For Windows Live service has been moved from a $50 subscription to free, not only that but people who purchased a subscription and never used it on the 360 get refunded. Why in the hell do the 360 users get shafted like this, Why do 360 users have to pay $50 a year to play games online when PC gamers can already play 99% of games for free with no subscription, I don't understand.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I love PC games and I plan on getting a new PC next year but right now I am more of a console gamer and I just don't get why they make people pay $50 a year to play games online, on a damn Peer to Peer service, not even on dedicated servers...

So pretty much, do you think 360 users are getting shafted by MS($)????

Avatar image for the_dude
The_Dude

827

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#2  Edited By The_Dude

Because online PC gaming was free when it first started, online console gaming is still somewhat new, and since microsoft were really the pioneers of it they must have figured..."well shit we might as well make a buck off of this thing"
Pretty much there was no standard for free online gaming, so why not charge for it if they can.

Avatar image for rowr
Rowr

5861

Forum Posts

249

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

#3  Edited By Rowr

I think you will find xbox users arent getting shafted, rather PC gamers getting unshafted.

Avatar image for riddler
Riddler

1601

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#4  Edited By Riddler

cause PC games WERE ALWAYS free. GFW with a payment wouldve never worked.

and live wont be free until MS has any real competition from sony or nintendo. nintendo's will never happen and PSN is a pathetic joke, SO DEAL WITH IT.

Avatar image for jamesf
JamesF

1546

Forum Posts

1337

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 3

#5  Edited By JamesF

Xbox Live on 360 is far superior to XBL on PC. they don't get movie downloads or anything like that. PC gamers were getting shafted before and now they're not getting shafted. I'm not upset in the slightest.

Avatar image for lightyagami245
LightYagami245

1161

Forum Posts

870

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 10

#6  Edited By LightYagami245
Kaycon11 said:
"I am kinda mad about this and I want to know what you guys think. Ok, as lots of you might know, this past week the Games For Windows Live service has been moved from a $50 subscription to free, not only that but people who purchased a subscription and never used it on the 360 get refunded. Why in the hell do the 360 users get shafted like this, Why do 360 users have to pay $50 a year to play games online when PC gamers can already play 99% of games for free with no subscription, I don't understand.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I love PC games and I plan on getting a new PC next year but right now I am more of a console gamer and I just don't get why they make people pay $50 a year to play games online, on a damn Peer to Peer service, not even on dedicated servers...

So pretty much, do you think 360 users are getting shafted by MS($)????
"
I think someone made a topic about this before, and someone who posted in it said something like this:

"For Games For Windows, players can make games on other servers, while for Live, we're all on MS's server".

Something like that.
Avatar image for mscortana
MsCortana

445

Forum Posts

40

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

#7  Edited By MsCortana

Well, I don't feel as if I'm getting the "shaft" as you put it.  I'm pleased with the service I get for live, hence me paying 50 bucks a year for it.  If I thought the service was inadequate or I was being treated unfairly, I just wouldn't utilize such a service. :D

Avatar image for ssbabel
SSbabel

1216

Forum Posts

7596

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 8

#8  Edited By SSbabel

Because they're trying to make a base with there line of games for windows games, if they charge they wont get the sales they're looking for.

Avatar image for nibbz
Nibbz

233

Forum Posts

87

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#9  Edited By Nibbz

Games for Windows Live sucks. XBOX Live doesn't. I really don't care about paying $50 a YEAR. Its easy to manage and it keeps XBL from becoming the shithole that is PSN and Wii Network.

Avatar image for antipro
AnTiPRO

105

Forum Posts

198

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#10  Edited By AnTiPRO

It's just 50 bucks....not alot of money for the services offered.

Avatar image for epic_pets
epic_pets

1345

Forum Posts

30

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11  Edited By epic_pets

It comes with alot of stuff, we could say that we are shaffting microsoft

Avatar image for bennyishere
Bennyishere

1746

Forum Posts

3044

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 5

#12  Edited By Bennyishere

I'll survive.

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
SpaceInsomniac

6353

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#13  Edited By SpaceInsomniac

I don't feel we're shafted because of this, I feel 360 users are shafted because of another issue.  PC users have ALWAYS had free online, and suggesting anything else on an open platform is silly.  360 currently offers a better online experience than PS3, so you get what you pay for.  I hope one day PS3 catches up and surpasses Xbox Live, because that would force MS to either make their system even better--which they're already doing with the dashboard update--or stop charging for live.

Why I personally feel we're getting shafted is MS not allowing mod support.  I can play an Uno game and be subjected to tits and ass and wangs, I can use the headset and hear people call me all sorts of awful things, but goodness forbid we have a level share feature in N+, because someone might write dirty words in blocks, or draw a penis.  It's bullshit, and Microsoft just want to make sure the only way you can get added content for your game is to buy what they're selling.

Hopefully, if titles like Little Big Planet are a huge success, MS will have no choice but to do the right thing and allow user made content. If not, I think they could be making a big mistake.

Avatar image for brukaoru
brukaoru

5135

Forum Posts

12346

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#14  Edited By brukaoru
LightYagami245 said:
I think someone made a topic about this before, and someone who posted in it said something like this:

"For Games For Windows, players can make games on other servers, while for Live, we're all on MS's server".

Something like that.
"
As far as I know, most 360 games do run on Microsoft's servers, but there are some games that run on the developer's servers.

As much money as Microsoft is losing with the plague of the Red Ring of Death on the 360s, I can't see them lowering the cost of Xbox Live anytime soon. The cost of the RRODs and the addition of letting users use their servers for free would be very costly for them. Perhaps in the next generation console from Microsoft we will see a new pricing scheme, but I doubt Xbox Live will be lowered in this generation.
Avatar image for merforga
Merforga

322

Forum Posts

3345

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

#15  Edited By Merforga

Game for Windows Live all suck, so charging even a penny for them is a ripoff.  Because of the outrageous $50 price tag, nobody played them.  Now that they're free, Microsoft hopes to increase PC gaming.  As for the 360, get a job like most of us, then you can cry me a river, build me a bridge, and get the hell over it.

Avatar image for dualreaver
DualReaver

3790

Forum Posts

83

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

#16  Edited By DualReaver

No we didn't get shafted.
Seriously is 50 dollars a year that much to ask for?

Avatar image for carlos
Carlos

508

Forum Posts

1181

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#17  Edited By Carlos

I like live as it is, if 50$ its gonna keep it nice, I'm up for it

Avatar image for deactivated-58efb53e06a03
deactivated-58efb53e06a03

1365

Forum Posts

3153

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

Carlos said:
"I like live as it is, if 50$ its gonna keep it nice, I'm up for it
"
I agree, look at all the features and polish Live has compared to PSN. And with the new Dashboard Update this fall, I personally think we'll be getting almost our moneys worth... except for those stupid avatars.
Avatar image for cb
CB

136

Forum Posts

155

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#19  Edited By CB

Also MS is ready and available to help out with games so they meet their online multiplayer needs. Sony, not so much for 3rd parties.

Avatar image for mutenmiller
MutenMiller

238

Forum Posts

481

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

#20  Edited By MutenMiller

I think it's alright because the fee is so nominal, it's almost like you're paying nothing at all.
That said, I'd imagine at some point it does have to go free, especially considering the fact that the PSN is slowly catching up with a lot of the features... except charging for Qore, which is just absolutely insane.

Avatar image for kaycon11
Kaycon11

128

Forum Posts

751

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#21  Edited By Kaycon11

ya, but I'm a high school student right now and I make very little money working part time, And I don't like paying $50 a year for online service, and I know what most of you might say, "If you don't like it, don't buy it", but I came from a PC gaming background in the late 90's and early 2000's, but I also had a PS2 and some sports games and socom and it was all free, that happened before xbox live, so IMO, MS is in no way pioneering online gaming on the consoles with the xbox or 360, I just think MS is being M$.

Avatar image for wolverine
Wolverine

4642

Forum Posts

3776

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#22  Edited By Wolverine

Its only $50 and plus online play in games have always been free on PC. The quality of online games on 360 are great and I would much rather pay $50 a year then have to deal with a free service like PSN or Wii 24 connect because online games on PS3 and Wii are missing so many features.

Avatar image for blindeffekt
BlindEffekt

920

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By BlindEffekt

Who cares? Steam is where its at on pc anyway, games for windows live is a waste of time. Hence its free.

Avatar image for iam3green
iam3green

14368

Forum Posts

350

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By iam3green

yes i think so. pc games that have been out for a couple years still have people playing them. but games on consoles don't.

Avatar image for darkido07
DARKIDO07

926

Forum Posts

256

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

#25  Edited By DARKIDO07

I'm so sick of people crying over the price of Xbox Live, its a great service and if you can't afford to pay for it, you probably shouldn't own a Xbox 360 in the first place. X_X

Avatar image for monopolized
Monopolized

560

Forum Posts

1901

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#26  Edited By Monopolized

its 72.50 here..

Avatar image for blu_magic
Blu_Magic

2026

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27  Edited By Blu_Magic

$50 isn't so bad. Sure, I'd prefer it if it was free but I'm not going whine about paying for a great service.

Avatar image for shocker
Shocker

2324

Forum Posts

2001

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#28  Edited By Shocker

They charge because they know people will still buy it. And it is worth it in my opinion.

Avatar image for monopolized
Monopolized

560

Forum Posts

1901

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#29  Edited By Monopolized
BlindEffekt said:
"Who cares? Steam is where its at on pc anyway, games for windows live is a waste of time. Hence its free.
"

Steam is free too what's your point

Avatar image for lightyagami245
LightYagami245

1161

Forum Posts

870

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 10

#30  Edited By LightYagami245
Blu_Magic said:
"$50 isn't so bad. Sure, I'd prefer it if it was free but I'm not going whine about paying for a great service.
"
I agree.

You get more than what you paid for.
Avatar image for will1lucky
Will1Lucky

412

Forum Posts

2378

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Will1Lucky

There really was no point in charging $50 a year so PC gamers could get the full use out of say 1-5 games a year.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.