Microsoft Explains XBL Price Hike

I've yet to ever pay for Gold on either my account or my wife's. I've always just punched in the free codes that come with games, snag them from friends who already have live and don't need them too.

As much as I hate the price hike, I'll just wait for the sales, just like I do with MS points.
 
I figured it out. With a new OS every two years, you are simply subscribing to their OS. You get the updates too!
 
I figured it out. With a new OS every two years, you are simply subscribing to their OS. You get the updates too!

But the difference is, that is a product they make and sell. The ability to connect to other gamers using a product someone else makes and sells, that you pay someone else for, with software that yet another party makes and sells you, isn't comparable.

Basically youre paying for nothing. With the other example youre paying for an OS.
 
Complete Marketing BS..

Difference between free and pay? The ability to play online. The rest of the "features" of gold are crap that most users would likely never pay for. Live ceased being worth $50 a year, years ago much less worth more. Glad I canned my live membership, will never do that again.

I dont even play online games on XBL and i have gold.. why? for netflix which we use daily.. so much for your brilliant theory :rolleyes:
 
XBL is the main reason I bought a PS3 over the 360 besides the blu-ray playback. PSN may not be perfect, but they ain't charging for stuff I've been getting on the PC free for years.

That price hike is the nail in the coffin. I was pondering buying a 360 for kinect, Now I'm thinking not....:p
 
Think I'm done with live, it wasn't worth $50 the first time I paid it and the value has definitely not increased since. Shoddy service + limited content + high prices on said content = No. This year on XBL will be my last, definitely.
 
The average Joe might believe that BS, but I sure don't....
 
I sometimes ponder the immense nerd rage ensued if Bobby Kotick pressed his doomsday button and raised World of Warcraft subscriptions. Say, $15 to $18-20.
 
Really ? How long will you have your xbox, 5 years? For just the cost of the crap subscription over that time I can build a gamming PC. 500$..... easy. You can use the $ saved on actually buying the console for a video card/CPU upgrade in a few years. All of your games will be cheaper, especially when they go on sale (On Steam for example.) Unlike your xbox, your new gamming pc can stream porn, telecommute and schedule your next DMV appointment. At the same time even.



Uhhh...what? Its $50 a year MAX...50x5 = $250. $500 if you included the price of the console. Your arguement is moot...and really freakin retarded. Who keeps the SAME hardware in thier gaming PC for 5 years? Most of us don't. I went 3 years before upgrading this time around and my last PC (which cost me 1400 or so to build) was a total POS compared to what would be "average" now.

I loath the subcribsion for gold as much as everyone else...but some others said...if you don't like it don't buy it.
 
They know most of their paid subscribers have become attached to their virtual achievements, so why not milk the shit out of them, especially now as the service (on the current console at least) is probably approaching EOL?

People who are getting screwed now are the ones who voluntarily tolerated the abuse initially by accepting to pay for a peer-to-peer service, which also screwed others by setting a precedent for others (like Sony) to emulate the successful charging of gamers for nothing (some demos and an auto-update functionality that should be available to all).
 
"So Ballmer said, 'How am I going to afford that yacht now?', and I was all like 'We'll just raise Xbox Live subscriber fees and you can build TWO yachts' and then Ballmer's all like 'Now you're talking!"
 
Something tells me you don't loath it as much as others (including myself) simply because your willing to bend over and pay for it:p

True, I do pay for XBL. $50 (Even 60) a year is hardly anything.... Im not so poor that I cannot afford $4-5 a month. Doesn't mean I especially like paying for something I get for free on my PS3. However, most of my friends and my brother all have (only) 360s...I prefer to play online with them than random dipshits. Even with these subscription fee's, console gaming is far cheaper than building + upgrading a decent gaming PC over the same amount of time. (even tho I do maintain a PC). However if you cannot afford the $60 a year (however, if you actually can't afford this you have much bigger problems than playing online games on the 360) or just simply refuse to pay for it, I can see your (and sympathize with) your point.
 
still don't think xbl should be charged in the first place
keep telling everyone that but they all come up with excuses to justify why it's being charged and why they're glad to pay it... while i just go and play online for free on my pc
^THIS

I dont even play online games on XBL and i have gold.. why? for netflix which we use daily.. so much for your brilliant theory :rolleyes:

The same netflix that I get on my PC ? So you are paying for internet access, a netflix account, and XBL right? When I only pay for the internet and netflix. Hows that make sense?
 
There is no reason for the hike other then they're greedy. I canceled my live forever. Everything it does.. I can do free on my PS3 or PC.
 
GFWL was initially $50 per year for a POS service, and it's been free for awhile now... because nobody would pay $50 per year for that garbage. (It's still a POS service.) I guarantee that if the console kiddies stop paying for XBL, it'll be free as well.
 
^THIS



The same netflix that I get on my PC ? So you are paying for internet access, a netflix account, and XBL right? When I only pay for the internet and netflix. Hows that make sense?

Most people like to watch movies in a home entertainment setup....or at least a big TV...on a couch. To go along with that...most people do not have a HTPC, nor is it feasible to move their PC into the living room just to watch Netflix on it. Granted, Netflix is on PS3 with no added cost.
 
Even with these subscription fee's, console gaming is far cheaper than building + upgrading a decent gaming PC over the same amount of time. (even tho I do maintain a PC).

Uh yeah okay....you have a PC anyway, but to simply stick a decent GPU (which still craps over any console) in it costs more than a console + accessories + higher priced games + live subscription?
 
Most people like to watch movies in a home entertainment setup....or at least a big TV...on a couch. To go along with that...most people do not have a HTPC, nor is it feasible to move their PC into the living room just to watch Netflix on it. Granted, Netflix is on PS3 with no added cost.

http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/coolstuff/3-Ways-To-Stream-Netflix-Movies-From-Your-PC-to-TV

http://www.handymanhowto.com/2009/04/19/how-to-watch-netflix-instantly-on-your-hdtv-part-1/
 
Bandwidth usage goes up with more users. Plus, acquiring new material to put on Xbox Live isn't free either.


Why does this not apply to Steam then? Also Steam has terrific sales on content all the time, Live requires content owners to pay for bandwidth, not sure steam does.
 
As soon at 9AM rolls around I'm turning off my XBL account.

I havent played games on there in about a year anyway, no point in paying for streaming Netflix when I have it on the PS3 and Wii for free.
 
So I just ended my service renewal with XBL. What is SO stupid is that the guy on the phone offered me the service for 40% discount or $36. Obviously they are overcharging for this service since they can offer it for such a discount.
 
Although I can hardly believe I'm *defending* M$ here, I think some of you have no freaking conception of how hard it is to provide a global client / server system supporting multiple millions of accounts, and able to handle over a million simultaneous connections adequately.

They provide a free option for those who can't or won't pay, and if you're moaning about the price now, just imagine how much you'd bitch if they actually charged commercial rates based on your data transfer
 
Although I can hardly believe I'm *defending* M$ here, I think some of you have no freaking conception of how hard it is to provide a global client / server system supporting multiple millions of accounts, and able to handle over a million simultaneous connections adequately.

They provide a free option for those who can't or won't pay, and if you're moaning about the price now, just imagine how much you'd bitch if they actually charged commercial rates based on your data transfer

The problem is, why does MS charge for this service when I can play for FREE via my PS3 and my PC?

The two talking points the CS guy had for me was, Kinect and ESPN channel on the Dashboard. Both of which I have zero interest in. Again, PS3 is FREE (for now at least) and PC is FREE to play.
 
Now in 2002, it was strictly multiplayer gaming. Now we get those Call of Duty map packs before anybody else does. We’ve got Gears and Halo, of course, as exclusives. We continue to get exclusives on the service as well. And we’ve gone from 400,000 members in our first year to 25 million. So during that time, we’ve definitely got to fund it, and we want to add more and more and more.
.

So lets do the math...

400,000 x 60 = 24,000,000 per year. Respectable.

25,000,000 x 100 (rounded up to 100) = 2,400,000,000 JFC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sensationalist, I know not everyone has a pay membership but uh dang even if only 10% of members have a gold membership that is:

2,500,000 X 100 = 250,000,000

That is one-quarter of a billion dollars a year. Instead of :

2,500,000 X 60 = 150,000,000

So they decided to raise about an extra 100 million a year off the service.

Glad I don't even have an xbox or PS3.
 
source said:
Now we get those Call of Duty map packs before anybody else does
They're charging us more because they're giving us the chance to pay them for DLC before anybody else.

That makes absolutely no sense. On a side-note, god, I hate DLC. I will never pay for maps. Ever.
 
>> The problem is, why does MS charge for this service when I can play for FREE via my PS3 and my PC?

In both cases, just because it's free to you at point of use, doesn't mean someone isn't paying. Imagine if Sony tried to charge $50 / year for PSN, after charging their customers what they have for the consoles. Free PSN is a good marketing tactic to get more people to buy a PS3, in order to play online, for FREE!!! (except for the £200 + what you pay for the games you want to play online). Yeah, free

Sony bear the costs because they have to. Make no mistake, if they thought they'd make more money by charging for PSN, it would go paid tomorrow. It's much the same on the PC. You've already paid for online when you buy a game. For games with a big MP component, you sure aren't getting a lot of SP content, are you? I've seen a lot of whinging elsewhere about full price games with about 20 hours, max, of SP content, more or less forcing you to play MP to get anything like value for your money

Blizzard paid the costs for battle.net for years, as an investment, and learned a lot about managing high volume services, one of the reasons WoW is so successful. One of the biggest gripes with MMOs, especially ones that ultimately fail, is the suckiness of the connections. An otherwise-great game, ruined by lack of solid online paly is a sad thing
 
I did not read they article, but did they include the words "because we can" in there?
 
I bought 3 years for $70 when this was announced so I'm set for a while. If you pay full retail you either don't care about saving money or are an idiot. Is it ridiculous to pay? Probably. Is it worth it for me personally so that I can play with my console only friends? Yes.
 
I use Xbox Live to play a grand total of two games. I should be able to get a cheaper package without all the "extras".
 
I started using Live when it launched for the XBox, but I finally let my subscription die back in March. I was using it more for Netflix than gaming, and with the service being free on PS3 there isn't any Live Gold value for me anymore. $49.99(not counting any deals obviously) isn't a big hit to the wallet, but is too much for multiplayer. A price increase is ridiculous, especially at this point in time with a shitty economy and the PS3 closing the gap on the 360.
 
Although I can hardly believe I'm *defending* M$ here, I think some of you have no freaking conception of how hard it is to provide a global client / server system supporting multiple millions of accounts, and able to handle over a million simultaneous connections adequately.

They provide a free option for those who can't or won't pay, and if you're moaning about the price now, just imagine how much you'd bitch if they actually charged commercial rates based on your data transfer

The data transfer is negligible per account.

See Steam, which also has more users.
 
>> The problem is, why does MS charge for this service when I can play for FREE via my PS3 and my PC?

In both cases, just because it's free to you at point of use, doesn't mean someone isn't paying. Imagine if Sony tried to charge $50 / year for PSN, after charging their customers what they have for the consoles. Free PSN is a good marketing tactic to get more people to buy a PS3, in order to play online, for FREE!!! (except for the £200 + what you pay for the games you want to play online). Yeah, free

So take Netflix for example. I can get that service for free (assuming I have a Netflix account) running off my PS3, Wii or my PC. I have to PAY MS to gain access to it via my XBL Gold account. So I am already paying for the service via Netflix, all that MS is doing is creating an interface for me to get the video. Netflix was a big selling point for MS, now it lost that thanks to the PS3 and Wii getting free to stream with no disc requirements.

Tacking on ESPN and saying thats a great service that I now need to pay for is just lame. Sony has a paid service and they actually provide some neat bonuses to being a PSN paid subscriber rather than oh, if you want the multiplayer functionality of your purchase you need to shell out X dollars for it.

PSN Plus Features:
http://us.playstation.com/corporate/about/press-release/playstation-plus-announcement.html

XBL Gold Features:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/Live/JoinLIVE/Home

Pretty lame when you compare the two. Adding ESPN isnt going to win over my money if I was going to pick a service to subscribe to.
 
I wish the Xbox would just die so that game studios (and even MS) can go back to focusing on the PC.
 
I wish the Xbox would just die so that game studios (and even MS) can go back to focusing on the PC.

Right because the struggle to have a video card / PC good enough to play the latest PC game is much more consumer friendly than $60 per year.
 
I just cancelled. Received my notice that my subscription was going to expire.

They surely do make it a pain in the ass to drop it. Much like another poster, after I told the rep I was dropping because of the price hike, they offered me a year for $36.00.

The service isn't worth the cost to me. I'm sure it is to many others, but I find myself PC gaming more now anyway.
 
Right because the struggle to have a video card / PC good enough to play the latest PC game is much more consumer friendly than $60 per year.

If you play PC games at the same settings as a console, you spend very little. If you are [H], you spend as much as it takes :)
 
Right because the struggle to have a video card / PC good enough to play the latest PC game is much more consumer friendly than $60 per year.

If you play PC games at the same settings as a console, you spend very little. If you are [H], you spend as much as it takes :)

True, but I find myself in the position of not having played a ton of games that I wanted to in the past, and finding them now so cheap online that I have a lot of content to catch up on - with no system requirement issues. By the time I play them all, I'll need a new computer anyway.;)
 
Back
Top