Should Xbox Live Be Free?

Over at the 1UP studios they discuss the latest pricing bundles and SKU's offered by Microsoft and Sony as we head into the holiday period of 2007. The predominant discussion point, however, was the pricing of Xbox Live; does is it harm the 360's value?

Talking point starts at 2hours and 1min into the podcast.

[Chabbs0]

probably, but if millions of people are willing to pay for it then theyve made the right decision, and a whole load of money!

[highps3]

360 is basically the next Windows. Offers huge dreams and promises but at the end of the day it becomes a complete mess.

Microsoft will NEVER drop that fee, because it makes you get emotionally attached to your account. What guy/girl is going to just cancel there 50,000+ gamerscore account?

On the flip side, how easy is it to cancel your PSN account? Dont know why you would but if you had to you wouldnt feel bad, have doubts etc.

The fee is what keeps you on the 360. Come time for next consoles are people just going to close there LIVE accounts? Or will they feel swayed more towards M$ just because of there achievements?

[Silver360]

The MS board of directors won't allow investment in something that is given away for free. MS currently invests 220 million a year in improving xboxlive. The reason IE sucks is because it is a free application and MS directors won't invest in it unless they have to and then only so much. So as long as Live brings in money it will continue to improve. So free live = no improvements.

[ReBurn]

@1.1 - Cancel a 50,000+ gamerscore account? Gamerscore doesn't have anything to do with whether you pay for Xbox Live or not. Apparently you don't know much about how Xbox Live works.

The only thing the fee goes toward from a single consumer standpoint is online play. The benefit for everyone is that the platform and infrastructure remain solid. I have a 360 and a PS3 and Xbox Live is the better platform to me.

[Lyberator]

I agree with Sliver. I have no problem paying as long as they continue to do the two annual updates every year to add more features and improve it.

I would like dedicated servers for the money I pay though. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't psn have dedicated servers? Kudos to sony for making them free.

[xplosneer]

I'll give you that, personally I like PSN better over my friends Xbox Live account, I just don't get the organization scheme, but alright, I respect your opinion. And yes people you don't need Xbox Gold for gamerscore, Silver supports it was well.

[NewZealander]

i think its fully worth it, just look at the ammount of content xbox live offers! and the effort of all those who put their hours in maintaining XBL and the updates shouldnt go un-notice

being a MS service ive got to say its scarey how well it works, and it just keeps getting better, i always like to check in and see whats new before booting up halo 3 and kicking @ss online

if you are too cheep to pay for the service then dont get it, i pay for what i want and for the price of a game i dont mind paying for a year sub to XBL

[ry-guy]

Gamescore is not dependent on if you have Live or not. You automatically get gamescore points regardless. The only way you can share and make public your score is with a Live membership.

Edit:
Madgamer,

So sorry but Xbox Live was a last generation development. Home hasn't even delivered yet. How is there any relation between the two?

[MADGameR]

X Box fanatics better thank SONY! Its the only way X Box Live can counter Home for PS3.

[Meus Renaissance]

I agree with Shane's point. As PlayStation 3 becomes more of a better value, Microsoft will have a hard time justifying the additional $50 price tag for Xbox Live especially as they need to be competitive from a pricing point of view aswell as a gaming point of view. The $50 fee for Live is derogative and should be scrapped. They market Halo 3 and Gears of War; but imagine what they could achieve by saying "play against millions worldwide on these games for FREE".

Instead, charge for the WiFi adapter for $50.

[Crazy Larry]

if a gamer can't afford 14 cents a day for a GREAT online service, then they have much bigger issues to worry about. I mean, how many of us spend $50 in a WEEK just to out to eat?? Sure, free is always a good thing, but why gripe about such a little fee??

[CrazzyMan]

i think you can, but should you PAY for oxygen, if it means to be free?

[Snukadaman]

Let me ask you..if psn starts charging will you pay?...there are 2 things that will eventually happen...1..psn gets better and eventually they start charging for the infrastructure...or 2..xbox live becomes free. sony looks at xbox live and you bet they see potential too charge....It is only a matter of time and how much better can sony make their psn experience. If you notice all the best games on psn have dedicated servers. While that may be the best alternative they will shut them down eventually..it is not economically sound too have them running forever. While I dislike paying for xbox live , I see no other alternative with playing with others besides system link. I have relatives on xbox live i play with alot. I just think its naive that people think psn will be free forever. As soon as they get their online in order it will be a matter of time.

[green_ghost5]

That was a retarded comparison. How in the hell could you charge a person for oxygen? what are they gonna do build a huge dome to cover the world, and then make their money back by charging you 20 cents per day? Ridiculous. I have to agree with crazy larry, I mean c'mon it's 50 dollars a year, if your going to complain about it, then don't go out and spend 60 dollars on a game........or 400 dollars for a console.

[ry-guy]

Bubble for you for pointing out a faulty analogy.

Xbox Live is a service that is high in quality and high in demand. I agree with the above that PSN will eventually be charged. There is no way to maintain those servers over a prolonged period of time off of software sales. Eventually you run dry on funds. I'm sure PSN will begin charging for their service but they will no do so until they have something people can look at and agree is a sound investment.

[reaperxciv]

it is already free, but you have an option to pay for it

[Meus Renaissance]

Hence, it is not free.

[Panthers]

i feel it should be the other way around with the silver and gold. Silver should be able to play, but none of the features. Gold should get all of the features.

Gold is paying for a feature that is free on PS3. It should be that you pay for the features that are not free. And since Xbox is P2P or whatever (no dedicated servers) then playing online should definently be free.

[felman87]

Looks like someone needs to look up the definition of free online multiplayer. I've been playing for free on my PC and now MS wants me to pay for it?

[skagrerrrr]

if you know how to work it, you can get it Free for as long as you want.

[Rasulis]

Felman you may be playing for free but someone is eating the cost and it's the server administrator. I know this because I drop 30 bucks a month for a server. The only difference is I don't lock down my server then charge people a buck a month to play on it, but don't fool yourself when you think online play on the PC is free. It's only free because their are people who love online games enough to eat the cost at the satisfaction of knowing they don't have to deal with griefers and cheaters in their own server.

Servers and people to run the servers cost money. Sony fans are fooling themselves if they believe Sony will keep throwing money into the incinerator known as PSN. The only way this will happen is if they can run it solely off online purchases, but first they need a very large consumer base to do so.

The only way live will ever be free is if they run it completely off of micro transactions, but I don't know if they could make enough money off of that to maintain it at the quality they do now. I think Sony will start charging before Microsoft stops.

[Hagaf22]

50 dollars a year makes it a constant payment on a system ive already bought but if its free, then it just got alot cheaper...

[QuackPot]

Just bought my xbox 360 yesterday and xbox live wasn't a consideration for me - just the games(so far Halo 3 is a little disappointing).

And damn, it's one noisey sonofab1tch.

I'm mainly a SP gamer and I don't fancy net playing with a lot of NA racists; yes, sweeping generalization but but you must admit, there are alot of them on XBL.

Anyhows, the fact that Microsoft is charging - a mediocre amount at that - while Sony doesn't just shows how Microsoft will squeeze every nickel and dime outta ya.

I'll stick to PSN if I need any free online MP.

[mesh1]

quack pot u dotn have a 360 stop lieing bu ti aggree with u their are to many racist ON THE INTERNET AND ON XBOX LIVE THEIR FAMLIYS SHUD BE WIPED OUT

[QuackPot]

Was always going to buy an xbox 360 for the great games on it.

I was planning to wait til the quality improved and the price dropped significantly.

But I just got sick of waiting because I wanted to play the great game exclusives. Have Bioshock all ready to go but have to finish Halo 3 first - my favourite shooter - but that may change if things don't pick up soon.

But fret not, I will always favour Sony as they delivered with the Ps1, Ps2 & Ps3.

And c'mon, guys. Admit it. The 360's noisey as hell and it's damn annoying.

[Seraphim]

I have to agree. And as a Single Player gamer who only jumps online maybe a few times a year I just can't justify or see the reason in paying to play online [XBL]. Then again, I don't see the reason behind charging for icons either. Those should be available to all 360 owners for FREE. Especially if you're paying $50 a year for an "Online Service" and Online Gaming. Seems to me that XBL is hardly even a service and nothing more than a cash cow in place to line MS's pockets. While it's a good strategy from a business standpoint it's short changing the consumers; ripping them off if you will. Rambles on... I think XBL Gold should be free to all 360 Owners. We already pay an ISP alot of money monthly for internet access. And if online gaming is the future, or an aspect of gaming then it should be included in the price of the console and games, not an additional fee to play the games we buy on the consoles we buy [online]... Aside from the software on PS this is one point I've always found beneficial in owning a PS as my primary console. If by chance there was a game I wanted to play online I could play it anytime for any amount of time for FREE. And because I do rarely get online this is very convenient for me...

And Halo 3, yeah, disappointing. Just another "Good" title in the series imho. While it's certainly a good game it pails in comparison to Bioshock.

[QuackPot]

.

[ThaGeNeCySt]

If you only play online a few times a year, then there's no reason for you to be an xbox live gold member... join with silver, have all the perks of gold except playing online with other people and problem solved.. no fee.

[Shankle]

But then he never gets to play online at all, which is the best and most important part of online gaming.

[Seraphim]

I do have a Silver Account... And I've been tempted to pay the $50 for XBL Gold lately just to have it... But the fact of the matter is I don't game online often, if ever in any given year. The only exception to this was the 2 years I played FFXI like a crack addict at times only sleeping for 6 hours in 6 days... But the point is, having it there, and free is GREAT because on the rare occasion there is something I want to play online for a couple days, a week, or a couple weeks I can. There's a lot of gamers out there who, like me, would take some of these games online [even if it is only for a couple days] but don't because the fee just isn't worth it. Also, Gold Members do get other perks on occasion that Silver members don't. Case in point the recently released Halo 3 exclusives for Gold members. Also it's kinda unfair to include online achievements in games if you're going to charge $50 a year to play that game online. I only got like half the Halo 3 achievements because the other half are acquired via online play only... Not very cOOl at all...

QuackPot: OO Bubbles!? Yah!! ty

[Dareaver1]

you can pay for live on a monthly basis. I think it is $8 dollars a month. So those few times you do want to play online. There you go, an easy and affordable alternative. Though i still don't understand, why paying $50 a year is such a need for complaint. That's a steal to me. That money goes into making live better. And there has to be a profit, but that's reality. Everyone is out to make a profit.

What do you think is going to happen to PSN Home. It's either going to be riddled with Ads, or they might have to start charging. Nothing in this world is free. Plus, it's just $50 dollars for a year, if you are an online gamer, if not just do the monthly thing and go back to silver when you get your fill if Online gaming isn't really your thing. They always give you a month free to test it out. I don't really get it. Look at World of Warcraft, there are fees, and look how successful it is. Maybe the money is going into production and other costs that help the developers continue to make a great product.

[SoulBrotha3292]

i would love that but it is already free cuz siver edition if u want 2 do more things u go 4 gold

[Bladestar]

Lots of fanboys do not understand what xbox live really is... Xbox live is more than playing online. The only different between the gold and the silver account is multiplayer...

Achivements, Demos, game videos, gamescore, private chat, messaging, MSN messenger, video chat... all that is free for anyone to use...
Many of these features are not even available on the PS3... for example, achivements, gamerscore... non-existant on PSN...

How about the Demos? A silver account xbox live user gets more demos than a PSN user... true or not?

I'm all for having xbox live for free... but at what expense? If microsoft has to sacrify many of the features PSN had to sacrified in order to give the service for free than... NO...

Take Demos for example... why Demos are not available as fast and as much on PSN compared to xbox live?

When PSN offers all the features and content that Xbox live offers.. then I think Xbox live should be free... If microsoft would to be free.. then just like PSN users we will have no right to demand anything...

And this has nothing to do with xbox live being out first.. because even now... we see lots of demos that are only released on the xbox live and not PSN... it seems as Sony do not allow developers to publish demos at will... but they are the one who deside which demos are released... do developers have to host their own Servers to host demos the way they have to host their own servers for multiplayer?

"Instead, charge for the WiFi adapter for $50. " Wifi!? no way... I own a wifi adapter for the xbox 360... I hate it... just like I hate wifi for my laptop.. wifi will never be faster and more stable than wire... everyone knows that... I stream video and use Media Center from my computer to my Xbox 360... no way I will be using wifi... that's why I have network jacks all over my house... and use only wifi for laptops, PDAs, etc... But not for gaming.. never will...

Before xbox live can be free... PSN or the wii network must be the same or better... that's why so many of us are willing to pay for it... PSN service is a reminder of xbox live would be if it would be free... Hardly any demos, developers have to add their own servers.. which means not every game will have online... no cross game friendlist, no game invites... pretty much a service just like PC gamers have... each game have to implement their own features...

A service as unified as xbox live cost lots of money to maintain. who's going to pay for that? The games? sure... that's what many people say... what happen when developers are no longer making money on the game... or lets say Resistance 2 or 3 come out? will developers keep paying for the maintaince of the server even when they are not making money to maintain it? Money must come from somewhere... this is why Many original xbox gamers still play their old games on the original xbox online... because the service do not depends on if the console is still in production.. or if the game is selling...
You sell all those PS3 games you can play online today? 2-3 years from now they will all be offline...
On the PC word gamers are allowed to host their own servers.. keeping the online element of a game live for a long time even if no longer supporter by the company that made the game... PSN on the other hand... developers host their own games... once they stop making money of the game.. they shut it down...

I can pickup a 4 year old original xbox game today and play online...
you don't want to pay for xbox live... $1 a week for this advantage? Fine.. don't.. get a PS3 and play the game on PSN until the developers shut it down... but leave the service the way it is for those who are willing to pay... If microsoft makes it free like PSN.. there are no guarantees...

That's why I'm not to happy about EA games... EA host their own server... (Yes! did you know that!? Xbox live allows developers to host their servers TOOO!) EA knocks their servers 2-3 years later on most of their games... but those that use xbox live network.. are still there.

[bung tickler]

very good post, also one more thing paying for multiplayer does it keep people from making 4328953987 different accounts and it keeps people accountable for their actions. if you cheat/hack you get banned and that sucks cuz it cost a lot of time and money to get your scores and stats to where they are. if you don't have that fee (small as it is) then people feel no real commitment to their account and have no regret about doing things they shouldn't be. thats why M$ charges for the online play to make the community better as a whole. it helps to keep out a lots of the losers/griefers out there.

EDIT: to the people that dont agree, why? this is 100% true. if i have to pay $4 a month to not have to deal with as many loser cheaters/hacker you bet your ass i will, and so do millions of other people.

and at meus below, if its free you will still have millions of people with multiple accounts boosting scores and cheating, much moreso than live has i promise that.

[Jay da 2KBalla]

Bladestar I think that was the best post I've seen to date on this site. I agree 100%. Good sh!t.

[Meus Renaissance]

So what happens when the PSN becomes more unified than it is now? How will you then justify the price when Home (which will have most of the Live features) and 2.0 will be free anyway?

[socomnick]

well its not like xbox live is not gonna be updated and the psn is gonna catch up Microsoft is always adding new additions to xbox live.

[Primetimebt]

Bladestar don't you ever give up? First off the only server that may get turned off 5-8 years down the road are the ranked server. It doesn't mean the unranked servers which are peer to peer like xbox live will get shut off. If you still playing RFOM 5-8 years down the road it pretty much means you're maxed rank, or you just couldn't afford a new game in last 5-8 years.

[CastlevaniaXX]

Bladestar,your so absolutely right.i agree with you 100%.i would rather pay $50 a year for a quality unified gaming service than some free half-ass gaming network any day.i was playing street fighter anniversary for original xbox on xbox live just a few weeks ago for the first time,and i was shocked that the game's server is still up & running with & was able to challenge other gamers.its cool that you can pull out your favorite xbox games and still go online after 2-3 years from their original release.try that with your old ps2 games.microsoft's prime goal for xbox 360 is"unification"..bri nging everyone closer together for the ultimate gaming experiance.that's why they're doing the "games for windows live " & "cross-platform".now when you combine the console gaming world(xbox 360) with the PC gaming world,you get the best of online gaming.sony has yet to create a unique online gaming experiance for millions who forked up $600 for a ps3.and this "Home Network" thing they are working on is nothing but a 3D version of myspace,which is gonna cost them billions to develop.and you think they gonna implement it on the ps3 all for FREE?c'mon folks,something's gotta give. xbox live gamertag CastlevaniaXX

[Robeezy]

If you have a decent job $50 is nothing for a whole year, i mean seriously, if you complain about that you are one cheap ass person. The value of Xbox live far outweighs 50 dollars. A percentage of the money Microsoft makes off this money is reinvested into the network to allow for new features and make it more solid overall. Its called good business guys, something Sony should take note of. I've had Xbox live since the day it came out and have never regretted it.

[Valik21]

Because you consider only the things that favor the Live over the PSN, i will remind you the things that you forgot to mention.
The PSN is only 10 months old versus the 6 years of xbox live, but it already have a lot of options and services for free, the updates are coming very fast bringing new stuff and options more than the Live do, and it's all free, look at the launch PSN and look at it now, there is a huge difference, the Live didn't do such a progress in features and content in the same amount of time, and the trend is going on, the upgrade 2.0 is close and also the Home release, so for now, Xbox Live is superior in content due to it's lifetime existence, but i think that the things will change very soon if Sony continue the upgrades with this speed

[XboxOZ360]

Excellent, well thought out and presented post.

I've had a year with Xboxlve, and a few years without, and now don't have it . . .

Why, simply because I play very little online. Yet, I do use and download many demos, game and industry video/docs etc, as well as purchase the odd thing here an dthere from MarketPlace. This isn't reliant on me having XboxLive Gold. I get it all on Silver.

One thing many gamers seem to forget, is that services provided by any business cost money to deliver. Not only from MS, but from each developer and publsiher related to any game on the service. If they are to stay in business, then they also need to get a return for the investment, and the work and resources they put into such things as Demos, Themes and the production of Game Videos etc etc etc.

Gamers seem to want evrything for nothing, yet aren't willing to put anything up in exchange for it. If you want a good service, that's continually upgraded, then expect to pay for it. Good god, it cost around a $US1.10+- per week to have Gold . . what is everyone complaining about. For that money, and the service you get, then that $US1.10+- is money well spent.

Currently there's close to 10 million Xboxlive members and growing . . . (MS said they will eclipse their estimated figures by a decent margin well before christmas) . . . the PSN service has a MUCH much smaller online userbase in comparison. And given recent statements from Sony, when Home was pushed back to Spring '08 (at this time), statingthat, the implementation of their Live online service is proving much complicated than they first invisaged.

ALl of which mean higher costs for them to impliment, and they can't continue to throw money down the sink, just to gain users online without any return. Once their numbers reach even half of what XboxLive currently is, their (dedicated developers servers) servers will have a very difficult time in dealing with the huge numbers, as well as producing games. They'll have to make a choice whether to continue pooring money into something that gets them no return, of funnel funds into more games, which give them a much higher return.

If you were in business, what would you do . . be in it to make a profit, or loose money as well as your shirt in the process . . .

[xplosneer]

Exactly, he won't, but that's his point, is how long it will take for the PSN to catch up demo and feature wise. Gamerscore and achievements come with home so I'm told with the form of trophies, but demos? Who knows?

[hfaze]

"If you have a decent job $50 is nothing for a whole year, i mean seriously, if you complain about that you are one cheap ass person. The value of Xbox live far outweighs 50 dollars."

Considering that most if not all of the "value" you are talking about is available for FREE with an Xbox Live Silver membership, then what is really worth the money about a Gold membership?

Silver members have access to all of the same demos, downloadable content, updates, etc. The only thing you pay $50/year for is for online gaming, which is 100% peer to peer on XBox Live...

So, honestly... What is the value of paying $50/year for peer to peer only online gaming?

[HeavyweightInTheGame]

I mean, I'm not s broke b@stard so the the 50 bucks a year is worth it in my opinion for a great online service. The cost of producing and maintaining servers and keeping the network steady is not cheap. I think it works out to something like 4 bucks a month. Thats less than the price of you getting a combo at McDonalds.

[nurayi]

a valid point, if they actually provided servers for different games. Most games are hosted peer to peer. The only game I've heard of that has confirmed to be using their own servers is MoH:Airborne I believe (so they can get the player max up around 30 per room I think).

All other games are run peer to peer, and the only thing in actuality you pay for is the friend invites and the chat rooms. People have been circumventing Live since its release, and if your still paying then your just a jaded consumer that doesnt want to think or do research for themselves. Here is the program that allows you to play online w/o xbox live: http://www.teamxlink.co.uk/

This whole page is full of people trying to rationalize paying for it. Sure you can think about it like $1 a week, or whatever, but that is also the price of a game for the console that you wont be buying each year. Fact is, its the price of a game, that your spending on a service that should (and could) be free, and has been historically free for years on PC (with more features mind you). It adds up and you could have had 2 free games by now if there was no xbox live for the last year.

I purchased xbox live once, and will never do it again. just use xlink. When the need arises for free software, people deliver, thank god everyone isnt content to pay $50 a year for a service that is free if you do a little looking.

I see the word lemming thrown around on this site quite often. but for me nothing embodies it more than some of the responses I read in this story. Its like meeting someone who swears up and down the mcdonalds is the best restaurant ever, it becomes painfully obvious for most that the person has not eaten at another restaurant for comparison. The only way it is going to be free is if there is a general outcry from the community, or if enough people swich to the free alternative, MS might notice. I think the possibility of either is very slim.

(btw kai:xlink also lets you play ad-hoc only psp games, even if your not in adhoc range of whoever you want to play with)

[HeavyweightInTheGame]

Well, I mean it does cost money for quality. The fact that you pay allows MS to continue providing good online service for its consumers. Okay since it doesn't use servers, we can keep them out of tbis. But XBL offers the best online experience at the moment. Money is needed for that. People say that PS3 is quality for money. That same saying can be said for XBL. It's just that the stuff being released on XBL is really good stuff. Now why is PSN not getting stuff thats as good? Probably they aren't getting enough finances from consumers to support PSN as much as XBL can with it's payed support.

[Snukadaman]

While your idea might be free ..theres not close too 6 million people going through all those hoops too play ...no thanks...ill still continue paying for xbox live and enjoy it.

[Bloodmask]

I do wish that Xboxlive was free, as I'm sure anybody would. But I don't think it would be a good trade off. I feel that a lot of the money that Microsoft has made from Xboxlive has been put back into it over the years. It has been in the making for over 5 years now. The amount of content that is out now is far superior than what it was on the Original Xbox.

[Seraphim]

and every ounce of content available also costs a fee. While Live has become better over the years I'd chalk that up to nothing more than improvements that would have been made regardless of whether or not there was a cover charge for the Live "Service" which is hardly even a service...

[DEADEND]

I really think with time MS will have no choice but to offer XBL for free, it really needs to be free anyway.

[sak500]

Although we still have idiots spoiling the online experience but if it becomes free God help us. I'd rather pay for service and not have to deal with every tom d!ck and harry in multiplayer games.

BTW bring back exclusive d/ls for gold members. We should have atleast a few days where we can d/l some blockbuster games without waiting for 12 hours to finish the d/l.

[nosmok]

Nice post bladestar btw.
Also.. yes have all 3 consoles. MS will lower the price within the next 6 months I do not think it will ever be free. because like it was said previously if you leave it down to the games companies then they will pick and choose which multiplayer games they choose to support. I have seen this at first hand many many times on MMORPGs where companies pull out and my £50 disc is now useless.
Sometimes I want to be able to pull out and play a old game online with mates. Xbox Live Guarentees that.

but regarding wifi.

Microsoft is going to bring out a 802.11n wifi card - thus leaving the wifi connection of PS3 standing. as it is a addon.. not builtin.

Whats the difference between 802.11g and 802.11n?

An 802.11n client has real world throughput that clocks in at 160 Mbps or faster—seven times faster than older 802.11g networks.

Distance and location (including walls). At 300 feet, 802.11g performance plummets to 1 Mbps. 802.11n networks operate at up to 70 Mbps—70 times faster than 802.11g.

Multiple devices.
The key to this speed is MIMO (multiple input/multiple output) which uses multiple antennas to send and receive digital data in multiple simultaneous radio streams, thus multiplying total performance.

The bottom line: with 802.11n, you can share data, photos and music among multiple devices in the home faster and at greater distances than ever before

[DrPirate]

Awesome post.

Just want to say I don't play videogames 300 feet away from my router :P but it's nice to know.

I didn't know all that information on Wireless-N, Wireless G. Thanks alot man. Bubbles.

[tfur]

I was under the impression that 802.11n draft was not slated for full implementation until late 2008. I know Apple uses it, but you need their airport.

You will still need to get a new wireless switch to support this spec.

The PS3 has already had an upgrade to the wifi on the 40g. I would assume further upgrades will happen.

Unrelated:

Many PS3 users use the wireless for connectivity between the PS3 and the PSP.

PS3 games that use dedicated servers, also have the option for p2p.

As a gamer, I will always go for free and NO lag. Instead of paying for lag.

And, online (silver/gold) without multiplayer, is hardly "online."

[Premonition]

I already see it coming, theres no way to deny once MS announces xbox live will finally be free, these same people who say they dont care about paying and that it offers good service because you pay will cause the news to hit over 2000 degrees and saying "HA YES TAKE THAT PSN TAKE THAT SONY GUYS". Free isnt a bad thing but to act like it is shows your a lame person, I see nothing wrong with the PSN, as long as I can play with my clan member with hardly any lag what so ever, im good and as long as sony improves it and keeps it free im good, so you can write bible on how xbox live is good not to be free but we all know where it will end up once it is free.

[The Snake]

I expect that what you predict would happen, and it would be hypocritical. But how would this be any different from the hypocrisy shown by the PS3 fanboys who mocked MS for limited backwards compatibility and then change their line to "who needs BC" now that Sony releases a non BC capable console?

[DrPirate]

I didn't bother reading the other comments, just want to say:

Yes. If X-Box Live was Free, I would buy a 360 on the same day.

Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes.

Let me add: I'm a poor cheap bastard university student.

[Bloodmask]

who can't pay $50, but could magicly pay $350. Isn't that a catch 22??
A contradiction??

[DrPirate]

Yeah, because if I spent the 279 (I'd get the core), its an investment knowing I'd be able to play every game that comes out (fully featured, with multiplayer), fully knowing there would be no recurring payments.

It's the same reason I don't pay for MMORPG's, or pay for any other subscription based services. I would sacrifice the additional payments because, in the long-term, it would be made up for. If I own a 360 for 5 years, 5 times 50 = 250, I end up saving money every year after that.

[Relin]

If you don't know what a catch-22 is, don't use it in a sentence.

I don't care how hard people wanna justify the cost for an Xbox Live Gold membership, because it will still be a gigantic ripoff. There's no excuse for a company as wealthy as Microsoft can't take on the expenses of XBL themselves, instead of placing it on the user.

Take their Visual Studio Express software (excellent programming tools free for download): tons of great features, community support, solid interface... essentially, using many of the same design principles M$ has become known for, including XBL. Every year, a new version of the software comes out, completely free, with new features, improved features, and fixed features with no cost to the average user.

While I understand that the VSExpress software is likely funded by the full Visual Studio editions (grossly overpriced, but good tools nonetheless), the differences between the two are staggering in comparison. Put Silver and Gold memberships next to one another and you get one small feature: online play. Justify the cost all you want, but Gold members should get a crap-ton more than just that for how much they're paying.

I'm in the same boat as #13: poor college student. If M$ were to stop ripping of XBL members on both sides of the Gold/Silver divide, I'd have the proper motivation to buy one (finally). It has nothing to do with finances for me, it's a matter of principle.

[AllroundGamer]

that's the only reason i'm not playing xbox360 games online, its not a money problem, i just don't understand why i should pay for online gaming, when on every other system its free...

[Rasulis]

I'm sorry to inform you kids who haven't been playing online games since the original doom, it's was never free, it isn't free now, and it will never be free. Someone is always eating the cost of running a server and supplying the bandwidth. It's not like servers are magical things that just appear. The only difference in this case is Microsoft is moving the cost onto the customers where currently Sony is eating the cost of PSN. Like I've said I expect Sony to charge for PSN before Microsoft makes Live free.

Unlike PSN live gives complete support to developers who want to put in online functionality. They also give hosting and support the small third party XBL game companies. They do turn a profit, as it's a business, but they also improve XBL and provide a stable platform for game companies to develop on.

[Jesse]

It should be free, sure it a great online set-up but lets not get greedy. The cost of running XBOX LIVE should be made up through selling silly little arcade games and added game features that clearly cost little to nothing to create and advertising through-out the main menu of xbox live.

[Jones Miller]

is a cash cow! That´s why it´ll never bee free. Too many people are already accustomed to pay the fees including myself.

[lynx1halo]

Its so ridiculous that people continue to let microsoft rape them....you already have to pay for the gaming console, and your internet sevice, and the game, and the TV and the wireless adapter, bigger HD, HDVD Drive ...you are already a multimillion dollar company...as is sony...and yet they provide this same service for free
PS3 innovator.....Xbroke360 imitator

[Whoooop]

DUHH!!... but 360 fans doesn't seem to mind paying for it, so no big deal.

[dork]

no, stop whining. If you cant pay 50 dollars a year, than go play the PS3 online and see why you pay money to play online.

Xbox live is the best console online service out there, so Stop being poor

[DrPirate]

I'll stop being poor after I graduate and get a job.

As it stands, 50$ for online that I can only play once a couple of months is not worth it.

[Jones Miller]

Some people have less money to spend and if you can´t get that through your thick skull (you probably can´t) you deserve to be p*ssed up and down your sour face. Poverty is a well known problem also in America you dumb*ss!!!

[achira]

you pay money for lag. we play for free on dedicated servers. so you are the idiot.

[Marceles]

LOL achira...made me spit my drink out, best comment on this thread

[Azurite]

Yes.

[jack who]

no.....50$ a year is notthing.

yall need to get a job.

[DrPirate]

Let me finish paying off my student debts first.

Speak for yourself.

[Jones Miller]

Incredible how it´s even necessary that I have to repeat myself you f*ck!

[jack who]

@ DrPirate

get a job

[Bizmal]

Give me $50 a year for nothing since it does not matter. You're lame.

[green_ghost5]

Apparently a lot of you don't have a job! Your all just a bunch of bum's!
@ Miller, sure yeah some people don't have that money, well then WTF are they doing paying 400 for a console and 65 for games, if they can't afford 50 a yr. Your the one with the thick skull. BTW go get a job, and quit your crying.

[TheMART]

No please not. It holds back the morons that want to go only f*cking around online because its free. Let them buy a PS3 instead and go have their share of fun on PSN instead.

I don't mind paying for a service that's 10.000 times better then PSN

[Captain Tuttle]

But it's all about value. PS3 fanboys will tell you what a great value the PS3 is at $600 or whatever it costs now and I don't doubt it...the PS3 has alot of features. Xbox Live is an excellent value for $1 a week...you get ALOT of features. I would love to see Live free but not if it meant a drop in features or quality.

[BLACKJACK VII]

Exactly. It would be great if XBL was free... But we've already seen what that means.... if XBL was free say goodbye to all those demos, videos, & content we get every week, ......for $1.

If XBL was free it would = PSN........ which SUCKS.

Thanks but no thanks. I'd rather pay $4 a month for a real online service.

[lynx1halo]

it doesnt matter if its free or not because theres nothing but a bunch of LITTLE A$$ KIDS playing on live anyways...and their moms pay for their membership
PS3 innovator.......Xbroke360 imitator

[HeavyweightInTheGame]

I don't quite understand your post. How is PS3 innovator and Xbox imitator? Last time I checked, between the two, Xbox was first online and was very innovative in the features provided for the online service. PSN seems to be playing catch-up in this department and is desperately trying hard to become like XBL. So for the online service:

Xbox innovator, Playstation imitator.

Don't deny it. PSN sucks right now. Besides being free, tell me one thing that PSN does that Live doesn't.

[Ahmadinejad]

Free always means compromises in service and expansion, it is not realistically possible to make a service free and keep the same quality casue u dont have the money income, what the hell is £40 a year anyways, most nigths out cost more than taht. it is probably one of the best £40 i spend all year around. dont make it free, keep it good

[zonetrooper5]

Sigh...Lynx1halo just get off the site now, you are already annoying me and you have only been on the site for a tiny amount of time. PSN and XBL are really not the same, XBL costs £2 something a month, that is cheap and I willing to pay for it.

I didn't get the HD-DVD drive or bigger Hard drive as I don't need them. I only bought the WI-FI adapter because my router is now downstairs next to the modem.

[gdguide]

I've been telling people to factor in the price of Live for a longggggg time. I mean not all of us are young enough to have mom and dad pony up and pay for Live. The fact is if you own a 360 for the life of the console and play online, you will have paid another $200 at least. For those who actually pay the bills, we do notice. Kids seem to not notice, and don't care.

[lynx1halo]

factor in the life of the 360 console LOL a good 2-3 weeks at best...best $50 bucks i ever spent says the classic tool

[Robeezy]

I do pay my own bills, i have a entry level job and i just bought a house. $50 dollars is not a lot of money a year, neither is $200 dollars over the entire life of the console. Gaming is not exactly a cheap hobby, get used to it.

[caffman]

if you are not going to add anything to this other than flaming please, do us all a favour and shut the fluck up.
bubbles from you twat

[AnalFace]

For all that lag it should be free!

[Meus Renaissance]

This argument is not about debating whether or not $50 is worth what you get for Xbox Live. Ofcourse it is and I can understand that; however what the debate is regardless of what you get for Live - the fundamental aspect of it is online gaming, and when the PSN allows friends to join each others' sessions - then how would Xbox Live customers feel about that?

Because as it stands now, they're getting a service that is better than anything else out there that is free or not. However, what happens if the fundamental aspects of that service are matched and offered for free?

Xbox Live's main selling point is that is unified. You can talk to people no matter what game they are playing and you can join them no matter what you are doing. But in time it won't be the only service that can do that. If Microsoft upgraded its service to support dedicated servers and exclusive demo's and things of that nature - then yes it would be worth the money.

I swear I've barely experienced any lag on PSN, playing Motorstorm, Resistance and Warhawk and I had experience lag frequently on Live. The quality between the services, if anything, right now I'd lean more to the PSN because the developers offer dedicated servers. The difference is that there are not enough services (Demo's arrive later, no Movie downloads, No Unified friends list etc) on the PSN and this is why Live is seen as better.

[Jones Miller]

bubbles 4 U

[DrPirate]

Hey Meus, it's called PC.

On PC, you can use X-Fire, Ventrilo/Teamspeak, Steam, etc,etc.

Tons of free tools combined can be used to achieve the "live" experience, for free.

PC gamers also get dedicated servers, more demos then any other platform, fully featured internet browsing, free online flash games, and a multitude of X-Box 360 games.

[Blitzed]

I never paid for LIVE and was always a single player (other than the odd online at friends etc.), I just never got into it. Chating and all that was never appealing to me ethier. PSN being free is what allowed me to give on-line more of a try. Now I'm playing online all the time. I'm sure for many those services offered through Live are invaluable, I do however expect that Sony will answer with many of the same (similar) features in HOME.

Just to add to those who say "I would never play online through WiFi". I do (PSN), probabally over 150ft from my router. I have never experienced even the slightest lag, and have only been cut off twice.
For me, the lack of lag is the most important feature of any online experience.

[Ri0tSquad]

I don't see my self going back to gold any time soon.

I couldn't agree with you more Menus. When I played online on my 360 I'll search for a match and just start playing, when I'm playing on the ps3 I do the same exact thing. Even if xbox live is more unified, I can see the PS3 getting an update that will give us similar features(in-game xmb). May not be tomorrow but it will be here one day.

[mesh1]

haha i though it was free i forgot about the xbox live charge as its £30 for i year if some cant afford that and can buy a 360 hahha

[gololo]

People say that XBox live is free...yes it is but if you want to play online then you have to go gold...and I don't agree with that, maybe it should be the other way around...let mp for free and if you want videos, demos and everything else then make people pay. So, we (gold members) are paying for multiplayer options that are already free in the PC and PS2/PS3, so why should we pay to play MP games in 360? Why is so different than PC and PS3? Is not like MS have dedicated servers for games, they have P2P architecture, so why are paying? I know PS3 and PC offer dedicated servers....and it is still free!!! So, Gold Members, we are paying so the cheap ass Silver Members that are allowed to d/l demos, videos and everything else....those are the only servers that Live runs (where you d/l stuff)...so in my opinion make MP access to Live FREE!!! If people want to d/l videos, demos and whatever, charge them since it's not fair the us,,Gold members, are paying just to play MP games....something that it has always been FREE in other consoles/pc!!!

[americanGTA]

ps3 and wii is free, so should 360

[Jrome]

It should be free, in this case money is not an option. It really comes down to...Gears of War $50 a year for online on 360...better quality Gears of War...free a year on PC? Why pay for a luxury...that every other console and PC would otherwise give you for free?

That $50 could be used to buy another game...controller..you name it.
That's one of the reasons I stopped playing live.

[lynx1halo]

this is the one and only time ive ever heard the consumers say.......NO THX ID RATHER PAY FOR SOMETHING THAN HAVE IT FREE......U GUYS ARE THE DEFENITION OF TOOLS

[BLACKJACK VII]

Really ? How was that PSN coverage of E3 ? How many Demos does PSN have available for download compared to XBL which has over a hundred ? How's that friends list & private chat with your buddies ? We'll just skip movie trailers & downladable HD new releases all togethor....

For HALF the cost of a gaming magazine in a month I get more content than you get on PSN in 6+ months..... FACT.

[Qayin]

live should be free no matter how you spin it. When PSN gets cross media bar in game and home how will you justify it then? then crossmedia bar in game on psp free. And every body saying more demos come on your not paying for the demos. and i think once cross media bar in game comes it will push the features past xbl. OH and the reason its taking so long for downloadable movies is because it would take away from bluray sales so there timing that very carefully.

[Guitarded]

You've been on this site for 5 hours and have already lost a bubble! Welcome to my ignore list. Now go away!

[Galvatron]

$50 a year, you're a poor money manager, and don't need your system.

[Meus Renaissance]

My man, I can afford a 50inch Plasma TV right now yet I play on a 28" SDTV. Ofcourse I can afford alot of things but does that mean I should pay for it?

And why would I pay for it when I can get something similar for free? This is the essence of the discussion.

[Galvatron]

on PSN? I have both a PS3 and 360, and I WOULD NOT pay for PSN. Thank God it's free. PSN is terrible. Live was better the first day it was Online than PSN is now. There are all of 3 games that are even worth playing on PSN.

[Meus Renaissance]

I just wrote above that I play on PSN. I used to pay for Live and the positives that it has left with me is that I miss being able to join the game sessions of friends.

However in terms of actual gameplay, I've rarely ever experienced lag on the PSN. Motorstorm, Resistance and Warhawk (especially those two considering the amount of players on screen) run close to perfect for me. And it's free.

My argument about the price is = just because you have the sum in your bank doesn't mean you can spend it whenever. Not everyone is rich like you my friend. If I had money that I could buy a 50inch TV with, I'd rather spend that money on a e.g. 32inch screen and put the rest into savings or furniture my house. Your argument of "just because you can" doesn't mean you should.

You could afford Live costing more couldn't you? Does that mean they should or even that you would? How about if it was $100, would you not complain even though you could afford it?

[Galvatron]

Nobody wants to pay more. What the hall kinda crap is that? Anyway... name ONE recurring bill you pay that costs you less than $50 per year. Whatcha got? Hmm? Car tag renewal? Newspaper? Wow... Now, you're probably not going to complain about the tv, phone and Internet bills that are SUBSTANTIALLY more than Live.

[Meus Renaissance]

I always look for what I'm willing to pay. It depends on what I need. Let me give you an example. I'm a 16 year old whose parents just bought him a new Xbox 360 and has enough money to buy 3 games upcoming 2008.

I also want to play online. But it cost nearly the same as an entire game. I have no choice because I want to play online meaning I now have only money for two games.

My friend has PSN with Home (lets just say its out) and he can join games of his friends and so on. Yet its free for him and thus he can get more games than I.

That's an example of someone without an income. Lets give an example of those who do have an income. Two men go into a game store and one buys a 360 and a PS3 (with the Home functions and unified service).

He calls his friend and asks him what he thinks of the 360, but he finds out that he hasn't played online because he has to pay for it. He tells his buddy "why is that? mine is free and its pretty much the same as your service".

This is the jist of my point. Although Live, currently is value for what you get, the service will fundamentally be matched and be offered for free soon on a rival platform. How can anyone, therefore, not see the problem with this from a competitive point of view? The argument is not if you can afford it, ofcourse people can afford $50 dollars a year, I spend that much on take away every month and the Pizza doesn't last me a year sadly, but the point is why pay for something when you can get it for free elsewhere?

EDIT: I am Meus, not Moot. PSN does not have these features but will do with the anticipated 2.0 firmware and Home aswell. That has been my point. Live and PSN will then become comparable except one is free, the other is not.

[Galvatron]

PSN does NOT have all the features Live does. Therefore, the services are NOT comparable.

Don't you know what "moot" means? I wasn't calling you "moot", WTF?

[beavis4play]

if you pay $50 a year for something you can get for free then you don't deserve to have money. what an idiot.

[green_ghost5]

@ meus, WTF you just said I can afford a 50" plasma.......then you say MY PARENTS bought me an xbox 360, and I have enough for three games until 2008, not to mention your 16.......So why did you lie and say that you can afford a plasma? what a joke. I'm 23, I'm an EKG tech and I make 17 dollars an hour. I can't afford a Plasma, why would you even want a plasma for gaming anyway? I have a Samsung 37 inch LCD 720p........I also live in my own apartment, and have to make payments my Scion TC, I also tune me car. I can afford LIVE very easily. You are a kid with no responibilities, who can not afford a 50 inch plasma!!!!! Pherhaps your mommy and daddy can.

[Drano]

Hmmm... next time you want to play "Smart Ass", make sure you read his post properly or you'll look like an moron... yeah, just like this.

Jump Beyond.

[HeartlesskizZ]

gamers will soon stop wanting to pay extra for online gaming when everyone already pays to the Internet providers. so is hard not to like something free.

[Cat]

lol, i marvel that you got two disagrees for essentially saying that free is good.

i already don't want to be paying for xbl, i have enough bills and gaming is expensive enough. and they have ads, those ads should be paying for my xbl.

[HeartlesskizZ]

that is what im saying but it seems people here don't care to know the facts

[Meus Renaissance]

Called me the other day and asked me to complete this survey. At the end, they asked me a question of how Live could be improved? And I started to articulate my sentence carefully yet the guy on the phone cut in and said "...you want it to be Free then?" and I said absolutely. I guess he gets that answer alot from people.

[power of Green]

Leave XBL the way it is Xbox gamers spend hundreds of dollars on games every few months I doubt $50 a year and the promise of top notch upgrades is going to bother anybody. Are PS3 fans still paying for demos?.

[Meus Renaissance]

Demo's are free. They have always been free on the Network. And what top-notch upgrades have Microsoft promised for Live?

EDIT: Maybe Sony have decided to charge YOU for demo's on the PSN lol.

[Ri0tSquad]

We have been getting at least 2 demos + a psn game every store update. Please explain these "top notch upgrades" xbox live has been getting. Everything is free (demos, videos, playing online) besides full psn games like Warhawk or Tekken5DR. What? You guys have it twisted we don't pay for demos.

EDIT: XBox live gold has many features but seriously why do you still gets ads on the dashboard if your gold? It doesn't make any sense if your paying top dollar for a service that sends McDonald ads to you.

[BLACKJACK VII]

What ? You don't pay for Demos on PS3 do you ? I don't recall that.....

I hope PSN continues to get better & better... that will only push XBL & make both services even better for Gamers.

[gololo]

no we don't pay for them....but we do get games with dedicated servers and no lag...and by the way...those of you that bought Crackdown just to play Halo 3 beta...now you guys are the suckers that paid $60 for a mediocre game just to play Halo3 beta (not even a demo)...lol
As a last word, I can't believe people are complaining about making something free...in what world do we live in??? I love to get free stuff...from an OS (Linux) to OpenOffice (yep much better, lighter weight, and FREE rival to MS Office)...but no, those of you that love MS are like:
"No Billy....let me give you money to access Multiplayer gaming which is free on PC and other consoles...no no accept these $50, you deserve it!"
PS I do pay for LIVE lol...so yes I'm giving money to Billy willing just for the fact that I want to play GeOW and WE 2007 online!!!

[Fighter]

You should do your research unless you don't have brains in your head. All PS3 demos, trailers and online are free. They only charge for PSN games like Super Stardust HD, Warhawk, everyday, shooter etc.

You made the stupidest comment ever: "Leave XBL the way it is Xbox gamers spend hundreds of dollars on games every few months I doubt $50 a year and the promise of top notch upgrades is going to bother anybody"
That $50 could be going towards another game purchase. What top notch upgrades can you name that have come recently?

[DBandit]

Great article. I have an 360 and a PS3 and I believe they both have great things to offer. On your point of hosting games. If you've ever played Warhawk on the PS3 you would know you have the ability to host your own games. I'm hoping this will be the trend when it comes to gaming on either system. There would be nothing worst then realizing the the developer decides to shutdown their hosting servers.

[Fighter]

A lot of Xbox owners seem alright paying for Live and there is no problem with charging your customers if you provide a good online service.

However, People should be able to play for free online without paying for Live. I even hear that many lags exist on Live and there are less or none dedicated servers. Don't forget that MS makes money off their content too. They take a portion of every item sold on Live and charge you for Live.

[Charlie2688]

This reminds I have to pay for Live again in December >.>

[AngryTypingGuy]

In a perfect world, Xbox live would be free, but what can you do? Bladestar is right, it offers so much more than the competition, and it does cost money to run. It only comes to a few bucks a month and is well worth it.

I don't know how long it will take for PSN to catch up, but once it does, then Xbox live should be free.

[gololo]

does it offer THAT much more??? I mean, do you sit in front of your TV and download videos/movies from the 360 (sequentially cuz it can't be done in parallel) and then watch a 1 min trailer...and then start again??? If you do that I feel sorry for you...if I want to d/l videos/music/movies whatever....i go to my computer start ALL my downloads at the same time...way faster than the PS3/360. Also, if I want to play any game MP I can do it for free in the PC/PS3 for FREE!!! So you are telling me that I should pay (the way Ive done it) to play MP games online??? That's why Live should be Free...MP gaming should be part of the Silver membership that is all...make MP part of the Silver account and I'll be happy

[aaquib5]

Sony is able to offer the core of online for free - gameplay. Microsoft does the same on PC. All these extra things like Achievements, gamerscore, etc. are luxuries and not everyone wants them. However, if someone goes online, they want to PLAY online. I don't care if I can private chat with my buddy. I care about if I can kick his arse in Halo.

Some of you bring up the fact that it is a maintained, low lag service. In case you haven't noticed, so is the PSN. But Sony offers absolutely no to very little lag due to dedicated servers, something that Microsoft has never offered in any game. It's surprising, because you'd think the people who pay get a better, maintained experience, yet it's the other way around!

Now, some of you will bring up the fact that PS3 is really expensive and it costs Microsoft a lot of money for the service. Don't you think they earn enough? For example, some Devil May Cry 4 wallpapers went out a few weeks ago. Sony offered them on the PS Store for free, while Microsoft charged you points for them. Next, gamer pictures. PS3 offers over 210 gamer pictures, while Microsoft charges around 20 points EACH. Microsoft squeezes every cent for something as simple as a picture, which can be obtained for free on the PC or PS3. Not to mention the millions they earn from TV shows, Movies, expansions, etc. Microsoft can afford it, they just want more.

As soon as Sony implements the XMB in game, it's over. It's the only advantage Microsoft has over PSN. Sony offers less lag online gameplay, free backgrounds and over 210 avatars, tons of demos, open system where any headset or any keyboard/mouse can be used. I dont know a single person who's going to buy a 360 over PS3 over "gamerscore", and that's a feature coming to PSN soon too!

[Galvatron]

are CRAP! I'd rather pay for the good LICENSED ones I get on Live. Have fun with the smileys on PSN.

[xplosneer]

You are seriously telling me that you would pay 200 MS points for something you look at maybe 2 minutes a day?

[jack who]

that 4$ u spend every day on coffee save 50 cent out of it n xbl is all yours

[Atomic Rage]

XBL less than a dollor a week get over it or get off the service.and maybe trying to get a JOB

[jack who]

J

O

B

G

E

T

O

N

E

[Drano]

Prostitution ain't a job.

I'm sorry for you.

Jump Beyond.

[power of Green]

The XBL Attach Rate is stellar ther is no point to these type of news posts. Bladstar hit it on the head and many agree thats why Sony fans are more vocal about what "we" have to pay for more than us 360 owners.

#39.3 That was a Question...

[gololo]

do you pay when you play PC multiplayer PC games? (unless you are playing WoW or the likes) NO...so there is your answer

[Neurotoxin]

I would gladly pay for PSN if it would make it reliable, I have had my ps3 for 1 week and mine still will not log onto the Playstation network for more than 5 mins before i`m booted even with It In the DMZ.

So i think if your paying for a quality of service on xbox live, then the money is well spent.

[tfur]

It's your internet connection. I never heard of people being booted off the network.

The system will boot you off the network, when your ISP connection goes down. Since you are talking DMZ, you are probably using a consumer router. Upgrade your router firmware. There are some models (i think linksys or dlink) that have issues with freezing under load.

Go to the Playstation network forums for advice...

[Synex]

Ya it's your connection. Mine is the same way when I'm home, but here in my dorm I have never been booted off.

[Boink]

but if they gave away say 6 months to a year free when you buy a premium or higher it would help them drastically.

is their fee worth it? I believe so, but try and convince someone it's worth it without them having the ability to try it out for a while is hard.

[power of Green]

You people can fight and reply with links and attacks all you wan't people know XBL is a service. People forgot to mention the Video marketplace and all the free stuff we get all the time.

[Ri0tSquad]

video marketplace---->free stuff----->game/movie trailers
And if its a free map then it probaly couldn't fit on a dvd9 w/ the game o_0
Now why would you pay for that?

[Salvadore]

$50 for a year is relatively cheap if compared to WOW or other P2P games. At the sametime, Sony is closing the gap between the services and MS has to somehow justify their pricetag on their service. Live is a unified service where one can send, voice-chat and send invitations no matter what game you're playing and this is probably the biggest advantage the service has over PSN.

[mikeslemonade]

Besides the annoying xbox fanboys, the online not being free is the reason why won't get a 360.

[Vespertine]

So many people complain about the "high price". It's $50 a year, that isn't that much. I think the service is fine and I think it's good that Microsoft charges people for it. It's an amazing service and no it shouldn't be free.

[Atomic Rage]

i agree blackout less than 1 dollor a week if any of you out there smoke you waste $5.00 a day to get lung cancer for that same $5.00 ive been playing xbl for 5 weeks just think about it

and get a JOB

[TheExecutive]

they make you pay for p2p servers... nuff said

[Bits-N-Kibbles]

I would have a 360 instead of a PS3, or both

[snoop_dizzle]

free would be cool, but i gladly pay for a decent unified freindlist that you can basically check at anytime in basically any game.

xbl does have lag, though i guess i cant really complain becasue i have friends online who have great connections and host games all the time.

However if psn does implement this stuff in the next update, well then i would agree. Xbl does need to be free.

[TheMART]

Those guys saying that 50 bucks a year is a lot... Just buy one game less in a year and you'll be having more fun of the others enjoying online with your FRIENDS

because PSN just doesn't give you the instant jump in, talking, chatting, co-op, multiplayer fun that XBL gives you. It just doesn't. One can say how lag free PSN would be, how it does certain games well, the main thing is: XBL is binding people, communities

THATS WHAT IS IMPORTANT. If you don't get that... PSN is like the kid that stands on his own in the corner of the football field. Once in a while he gets the ball, or strange kids play with him.

XBL is like your real life groups of friends, with one group you play football outside, with the other you go hang out drink a beer, with others you're chasing chicks. Now that's XBL, it's like life, but then digital.

[Devr]

Playstation Home is going to be like that too. Just even bigger. And that's going to be free...

[tfur]

Yep... I have done pickup games out of HOME. Its really cool...

You talk about games, gather people together, and then just go... its fun to see how people represent themselves with avatars.

The biggest issue is the API. Sony has to furnish a standard API for game developers to follow. Currently, each game company does it their own way. They are working on a standard hook API from HOME to game. Not a big deal, it will be here soon.

The other cool thing will be in inclusion of a web interface into HOME/PSN.

[Drano]

You make it sound like PS3 owners don't have any friends... I actually prefer to see them in person, that's all. Not you?

_____________________________ ______________________________

This debate is going nowhere. Not a single XBox360 user is going to say "Yeah, I've been 50$ bucks for Xbox Live for two years and I love it." while a handful of people get these services for "free" (Internet Fees aside) just about... everywhere else. Those Xbox Live Fees feed an "elitism" based on the fact that you feel that you're part of something. Just like people training at Clubs instead of doing push-ups and stuff (which can, with a little bit of will, give the exact same results) in their living rooms feel like they're part of something "private", they "pay" to be part of something "great", "gold membership".

"I have the cash to pay for something [slightly] better than what you have."

But yeah, I pay 50 bucks less than you to get it for free elsewhere. Xbox Live is great at one thing : forging a solid user base by making them feel that they're part of some "elitist" service. That's your way of seeing things. But not a lot of people like this way of seeing things, actually.

This isn't a big price, but it doesn't make a big difference either. You're not wrong per se for paying for your subscription... but please understand that not everybody is willing to do that. American way : create "needs", there's a lot of profit to be made. This is where Microsoft make their money, giving low-cost "Xbox360-exclusive" content for a "low Xbox360-exclusive price". Guys, you could get those services for free, admit it : less performance... but you could put that tiny amount of money elsewhere.

Xbox360 games always (or almost) have one thing in common : the real game is played on the Live. That's where the fee comes into play... this is where Microsoft makes it's money. No new content, just something that was "unusual" a couple of years ago for console gaming, you pay for it even if it has become normal.

The price you pay isn't for Online Play, it's for a couple of extras that, in the mind of many people, isn't even worth 50 bucks a year. Do what you want, if you're willing to pay, do it. But these kind of things aren't going to attract many new users to the consoles.

Jump Beyond

(These comments aside, I don't mind paying 40$ for two-months of World of Warcraft. So I'm not THAT cheap.)

[Blitzed]

"XBL is binding people, communities. Now that's XBL, it's like life, but then digital."

I am tempted to go find your post way back dissing HOME saying that you didn't get a console for social networking but rather to play games (or something like that). However I am too lazy to prove you are a hypocrite.

[power of Green]

You really think PSN is closing the gap?, MSFT's XBL will be on its Next Evolution by the time Sony catchs up to where XBL is now. How much more can the PS3 take adding things that taxes its memory?.

We'll see in a few weeks it should be huge judging by how MSFT is being so hushed mouth about leaked info on the fall update(wouldn't blame them Sony has an eye out for others inovations).

[xplosneer]

I hope you realize that, like Xbox 360's ones, PS3 can have updates that reduce the amount of memory the OS takes. Wasn't Xbox 360 once at 90~ RAM for OS and it's now down to 32? Well the PS dev kit 1.8 reduced the OS memory to 64MB RAM. (It's not been implemented but it was distributed)

[BaMYouRDeaD]

I'd like it to be free, that would save me $50 a year.

But I doubt MS would make it free.

[Vespertine]

$50 a year isn't a lot of money really. And plus, with the money we pay, I'm sure Microsoft uses it to improve the service even more. I'm looking forward to the next update.

[kss]

the mart dude why do hate sony so much i mean even if the ps3 isnt doing so good and you dont like it still sony gave us great gaming moments for the past decade and that is reason enough to like it

[caffman]

Germany produced some of the greatest composers in history. By your reckoning we should admire what happened in WW1 and WW2!

[brothersimon]

I don't think so, I like to pay as I know they'll provide a great service.. otherwise if it's free it might be a crap experiance like PSN

I'm happy paying every year.

[ceedubya9]

Make Live Silver just the basic, bare-bones package with online play, kind of like gaming on PSN. Gold can still be subscription based, but with some extra perks for making that yearly payement. I'm sure that Microsoft won't loose too many subscriptions as long as they show current buyers the value of staying on compared to going with the silver version. That way, at least they can compete with the free model that Sony and Nintendo (to an extent) offer, and have a higher end choice for those that want more from their online experience other than playing games.

[PimpHandHappy]

........

[MikeGdaGod]

no $50 is nothing but why pay just to play with your friends? that concept is something i can't buy into.

you guys can talk about about what PSN doesn't have and what Live does have but you forget something............

PSN = lag free
Live = OMG

cross game chat is the only thing Live has over PSN and thats not worth $50 to me

EDIT:
@Blackout..........

all i mean is that at least you should be able to play with other people for free. if they wanna charge you for something, it should be something else besides playing online. maybe because it's this way on PSN that i can't get over it from Live. i just can't agree with paying to play with others when it's such a big part of MS gameplan. it's a no-brainer to me.

your telling me i have to pay to play with Bladestar and RoundPegg.........ummmmmmmm no thanks

[Vespertine]

What do you mean "just to play with your friends"? You can play with any one over Xbox Live.

[sandip787]

i think the principle more than the actual cost for a lot of people, including me.
right now, no matter what camp you are in, you have to say that live offers much more than psn. but the day 2.0 and home (which i dont think anyone has commented on) arrives, then things get a bit different.
i think sony will be offering a service that offers about as much, or if not, more than live. and for a lot of people, free is so much better. i can afford £12.99 or whatever it is, a month for WOW, but i choose not to. i only play MMOs that offer a free service but have the option to subscribe.
i hate subscription, i dont know why, but i do. and i dont think im alone.

[Tyrael]

like anyone with common sense would argue, if you put money towards something, it will improve its value - of course id love to have free xbox live, id also like a free xbox 360 to go with it, and while i play my free games id like a blow-jay and a sandwich. the price people pay to keep xbox live an excellent service is worth it

and as for the 360 being loud - im sorry, i cant hear my console or your whining over my 400 dollar surround sound system...

[MattFoley]

Bj's and sandwiches would be sweet. I agree and wait till home does drop sony will have so much advertising on everything under the sun. Its just like product placement on tv and in movies it takes away from the experience. I also doubt Sony will deliver thye have a history of falling short of what they promise.

To who ever it was above me hyping bioshock are you kidding me its Doom 3 all over again. Most of the enviroments are dark and confined, tell me people will be playing that game next year at this time so I can laugh my a$$ off. Its a good game that takes FPS in a new direction as far as story and weapons but lets be honest one or two play thrus is all its worth. Go buy Orange Box if you want to play a great FPS. No comparison.

[genericname]

classic MS bleeding people dry. and to think, they charge and still can't turn a profit.

[poopface1]

Xbox live silver is free. Gold costs 40-50$ for 12 month. I think it is worth the money. But I think It would be alot better if they cut the price in half.

[Devr]

It should be. Playstation Home is pretty much the same as Live, but with a 3D interface and apartments and all that stuff. And that's going to be free. Live doesn't even have dedicated servers.

[Bazookajoe_83]

Atleast it should be cheaper, if Sony can do it for free then Microsoft should be able to do it. But i wouldnt want it to get worse, but i might be the only one who doesnt really see a diffrence between Ms and Sony´s online service. The thing i do with my 360 is talk to people while i play online and download stuff. With my Ps3 i talk to people while i play and download stuff, there´s really no diffrence. Well i have used my ps3 to surf the web, but it takes to long without a mouse and keyboard, but i have plans to buy that when Ut3 comes out.

Edit: Whats annoying with Live is that what i read from others here on this site is that the cost seems to be diffrent, this depeanding on were you live. For me Live cost´s about 90$ a year, thats bummer.

[hahahabutt]

The silver service Microsoft offers should offer free online play but take away features like demo's downloads, etc. The gold should be the online with all the features. I like my 360 but sometimes i feel that online gaming should be free like PSN. charging 50 dollars is over the edge for only a year. I doubt i would pay for xbox live after my service is up, I feel it should be free. and everyone with a good mind should feel the same.

[poopface1]

Id say that eventualy it will be free or very cheap. I just realised that by offering a freee membership microsoft is building up live so that it will eventually pay for itself. Everyday there is more and more content that people are willing to pay for, and soon microsoft will be making enough money thruogh little games and stuff that people are buying $5.00 at a time. originally live only got money from subscription fees, now there are many different ways for them to make money, so Id say that soon they wont need to charge as much/any and the freeer it is the more potential customers microsoft will gain. I mean comon who can resist downloading DOOM for liek 5.00(without getting off my laze ass) I couldent.

[Bazookajoe_83]

If they get so many people i doubt they would release live free. If we say they get 10 million people paying 50$ a year i seriuosly doubt they will say no to 500$ million dollar. Those money would probably go to shareholders.

[Spinitus]

or atleast less than $20 a year. hey what fux happend to the 2 month card???, thats how i used survive back then?? now they give u a 48hr of xbl thats wak.

[Kenshin_BATT0USAI]

I do agree that Xboxlive is currently better than psn and indeed worth the $50, but having it for free would make it much much better than it already is.

Think about it once psn is at the same level as Xboxlive there would be no reason to the 50$ tag on live.

[davidadrake]

It's only $50 a year, which is less than $5 a month. My girlfriend and I each have one year subscriptions, and we have since the console was launched. I currently pay $54 a month to Comcast for the Internet alone, so this is negligible.

The reason that LIVE is so much better than PSN is because of that fee. The old adage holds true; "you get what you pay for."

-Dave

[Bazookajoe_83]

I own both console, and don´t really see a diffrence. But the only features i use on both console is playing online and downloading.

[starbuck]

Im more than happy to pay the £3 a month I pay. Im an Admin from a very large gaming community whilst we we're founded on the PS2 Im all for paying for online my life has been made a lot better with the features Live has to offer and you can guarantee if the service becomes free MS would have to cut corners on what they offer and this would be bad. Live is an excellent service and Id hate to see it take a step back. IMO I cant see how people can moan at paying £3 a month (when paid yearly)thats nothing for the service we get. Another good thing of paying for Live is that a lot of kids cant pay for it meaning less crying and screaming, yes you still get it but nowhere as much as I had on the PS2.

[Jinxstar]

Sorry dude. I disagree. In the end you are right that they will cut corners but not because they have to but because they are cheap. MS has a ton of money and can afford to do it. They chose to be cheap though. Gamers should not have to pay the price for a service thats free on PS3 and Wii. If they wanna charge they should at least offer like 2 free movies a month rental... Or something to make it better. They can afford to do this but dont... why?... Cause they are cheap. Thats all it comes down too.

[starbuck]

Well i can tell you the PS2 cost me a lot more our community was founded on Star wars Battlefront but guess what a month after its release the servers where taken down so the only way we could play it was to rent our own server at over £1000 a year. 2 years later SWBF2 was released and after 2 weeks guess what the official servers went again costing us another £90 a month to run. The fact is if your from the UK and played those games it was only by the kindness of our community you could play the game online. the FACT is Sony can take down online service for a game whenever they like because there is nothing to stop them. How would you feel after going to the shops and bringing your £50 game back excited to play it online only to be faced with no online for it and cant do a thing about it because Sony have the right to withdraw online service without warning. With MS you enter into a contract meaning if the game is advertised to be online it is and will stay that way.

[Jinxstar]

You heard of a game called "Warhawk"? Guess what. your PS3 is a server. same with Tekken 5 and a slew of other games... Whats your point? Its free and hasn't been taken down. So until it is. This is not a valid point. XBL could do the same.

@ below

Agree to disagree. I still feel they should offer something. There are tons of PC games that you can play online free. Even games that are on 360 and PC. Do you think PC gamers are gonna pay to play Gears online? No. Maybe a few but Rare knows they wont sell anywhere near as many copies if they do that. Basically yeah Sony could take them down. I dont care much though cause I have been playing all the games I have wanted to play. I know how server maintenance can suck. I used to work in NSA and know how bad it can be.

Basically everyone is doing it free except MMO games and XBL. So still imo it should be free. MMO's I can except due to the amount of time involved in it..... Sooo Seriously though. I have a 360 and pay for online. I dont see it being all that bad ass.... Halo lags often enough on me and it has issues.... So I dont like paying for it if they dont even offer anything with it...

[starbuck]

did you read what I put MS cant take a game down for so many years when we pay them we enter into a legally binding agreement with Sony there is no agreement.
When we ran that server I can tell you it was a lot of hard work we had everyone in Europe who played the SWBF games having to play in our servers which where running 24/7 and had to be maintained well worth paying £3 for someone else to do it. All of the Xbox games have to go through some kind of server hence you get your stats for games like Halo, see what people are playing and to find games yes a lot of the games then switch to p2p but game searching has to go through a server. Same with PS but Sony can stop this anytime. Dont tell me they wont do that because thats what I thought. All the crap and hard work I had to deal with on the PS2 is what made me get a 360 because if your part of a big 1300+ community the 360 and live really is the only way to go.

@ Above I totally agree they should give us something like Star Wars Galaxies does (yes Im a Star Wars nut and no Fanboy as Sony get my money too because they run the SWG servers)Star Wars Galaxies will give you Veteran rewards (In game Items) IMO MS could give us money off downloads etc Im always happy to have something for nothing :)

[Jinxstar]

Oh yeah I played SWG a while. Til they nerfed Jedi's. I have a long list of MMO EXP dating back to UO.

But yeah thanks for not being a fanboy here. I truly am not one. I like my 360 like all the other systems. I just do feel like you should get like 1000 points a month or maybe even a scaling point thing i.e. first month 100 2nd 200 caping off at 800 or something. That would truly be cool I think. That would be mad respect from me.

Im a SW fan as well. Love Rogue Squadron and waiting on force unleashed like mad. Game on bro.

[Jinxstar]

Should Xbox live be free? Of course. Or at least give gamers something on it free.

[Guitarded]

when PSN is equal to XBL in ALL areas. Then and only then will this be relevant.

[Jinxstar]

You will not be able to ever judge that. They will be different just like the Wii will be different. I mean.... In home you invite your friend from half way around the world to come in and watch a movie with you in you custom built house with pics of your family on the table and music from you PS3 streaming in the house... Will it be even then? When you can DL movies? When PSN has home for free and XBL is charging wqithout anything like that? So far I enjoy PSN games like Super Stardust, Everyday shooter, Flow and Tekken 5 more then anything on XBL with respect to Carcasonne(Its fun XBL game). Same with the Wii store games... Its always going to be opinion. If MS can do it free then they should or at least give something for it besides MP which is free on the other systems(PS3, Wii, PC). Talking of when "PSN or Wii online(Whatever their network is) are equal" RFOM has 40 player online matches on a RELEASE title.... So whats "Equal" in your eyes? XBL has good features I'm just saying I think you should get some stuff for fre if your paying. Maybe a few movies and otherwise.

[lodossrage]

People are obviously willing to pay for it.

If people want it to be free, they have to show they are NOT willing to pay for it.

Until that happens, keep those wallets open lol

[snoopgg]

I mean the RROD really put a dip in profits this year. Hell, he had to spend 2 billon dollars on repairs, he has to make money someway on the 360. Hell, I wonder if he has even shown a penny profit on both consoles yet???????? HA AHAHAHHAHHAH

[DJ]

for a P2P service just seems a little over the top for me. If Xbox Live used dedicated servers for online multiplayer like PSN, then it would be justified since Xbox Live has a few more software features than PSN. That's the real reason PSN is more reliable from a performance standpoint.

Don't expect Microsoft to start paying for dedicated servers anytime soon though; Xbox Live Gold is one of the few things helping offset the division's multi-billion dollar debt.

[zonetrooper5]

I'm willing to still pay but I would not mind MS giving us gold memebers some more stuff over Silver memebers like deadicated servers for their first and second party games while letting third party companies decide whether to use P2P or servers, also give Gold memebers the best servers to download demos, music, movies etc sorta like Fileplanet and maybe some other stuff. XBL just needs a few more things added on to it and then it will be amazing, not that isn't now.

Also about Home, I really don't want to go into a 3D game just to invite someone or to join their game, also Home is free because of the adverts in it.

[367 To Your Ass]

there is a silver account and a gold account

Silver account FREE: download updates,demos and XBLA demos,game trailers,move trailers,free theme packs,and free movies.

GOLD account price varies on how long you want it: play online, download updates,demos and full XBLA games,game trailers,move trailers,all theme packs , all movies and TV SHOWS.

[Bazookajoe_83]

Most people want to go online to play multiplayer matches, therfore they should have given free online gameing, and with gold you could download stuff. This is just my oppinion but that would have seemed more logic..

[DJ]

but they'd be making a lot less money off of advertising (which includes movie trailers).

[BLACKJACK VII]

LOL, Call me when you can share High Rez screen shots & make movie clips of your *actual gameplay* & instantly share them with everyone on your friends list (Thanks M$ & Bungie !) ... is Ratchet & Clank and PSN going to have this feature ???

[starbuck]

What you got to think about is games like Forza 2 and Halo 3 all the extra features you get.
Ive never known a game that tracks everything like Halo 3 you can go to bungie.net and even see a top down view of your last 25 games and see who killed who where etc and the added feature of being able to see screen shots share custom game modes and videos is great. Forza 2 has the fantastic auction house on there site to see what cars are being sold as well as being able to download you screen shots and photos.

[7ero H3LL]

and there are games (like Amored Core 4) have certain features that require gold. I've found that out the harsh way: AC4 has this thing called "regulations files", which are basically like CFG files for a mech. They tune characterists and assets of parts, so as to balance out areas that may be found to be too advantageous. When I updated to regulations file version 1.5, I had just lapsed one month on my gold, which reverted back to silver. The next time I loaded up AC4, it asked for the location of my regulations files, which is awlays my HDD. I selected it and then it told me that there were none found. It also states that you must have a Gold account to download and use regulations files past the initial version (1.0)

So my finely crafted AC was reverted down to v1.0 (which gave me weight and energy problems), until I got gold again.

Point is, having 2 versions of a service can get out of hand when your game saves are at risk like that. After all I play games to master them, so getting the most out of it is very important to me. I was very proud of my level 99 Cloud back in FF7 (even had not 1 but 2 5 star MASTERED KOTR summon materia...talk about TIME CONSUMING!!!!)

[toughNAME]

if you dont like it use the alternative...PSN..

exactly! who would??

get over it or get inferior. its that simple.

[jackdoe]

I just wished that with the money we're paying for Xbox live, that they'd at least have some dedicated servers for Halo 3 games. I hate it when the player acting as the server disconnects and disrupts the flow of the game.

[OmegaKulu]

only thing about live that i think they should of done is some dedicated servers for the more popular games.

[jackdoe]

Exactly.

[dragunrising]

But until there is a free service that matches that of Xbox Live, I'll be happy to pay. I also think is interesting that Playstation ONLY fans harp about online being "expensive" yet they have the most expensive console. Ads will eventually make Xbox Live free.

[jinn]

no it should be even more expensive. lorl

[waldopepper]

If it didn't compromise the quality of the service then sure, why not.

Would the service be the same, or would the price of the 360 need to rise to cost of maintaining and developing Live? That's another question.

[UltramanJ]

Of course it should be free. XBL is awesome, but there's really no reason to pay for these features. They could offer the system for free, and let sponsors pick up the tab (maybe run a short commercial while waiting for demo download to que up). Perhaps the silver version could be improved in that regard, and let gold members pay the premium for no ads.

[Bubble Buddy]

face it, i'm azn, i was going to get 360 but paying extra for all the wifi and hd drive and wireless headset, and xbox live and hardware problems, then id have to buy warranty but canada's stores are gey about that. all that adds way more than a ps3 so i stuck with ps3. and thats why i'm a sony fanboy. i can trust their hardware. And they know what they're doin

[Bladestar]

I think many people are not understanding the possition of xbox gold subscribers...

Would we like xbox live to be free? Yeah.. no doubt about it.. but if the condition would to change then I rather pay those $4 a month.. and continue to receive the benefits...

Do you actually think if Sony would have made PSN better do you think Xbox live would not be free? PSN is a living proof of what xbox live would be if free... everytime a new Demo comes out on xbox live and not on PSN why microsoft charges for xbox live.

Do you guys remember when NetZero was giving dialup for free? with ads? how come lots of people were willing to pay for AOL or the other dialup services?

Why do people pay for Cable when they can just have local TV? Why do people prefer a private pool than a public pool?

Why do people pay for premium channels when they can see most of the movies on TV(with ads).

I'm not sure who to blame for having to pay for xbox live.
Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft....

Why can't Sony or Nintendo come up with a xbox live killer.. with all the features... all the demos... all the videos... gamescore, achivements, friend list, etc... and force Microsoft to drop the price off xbox live?

When Sony released PSN they basically validated xbox live cost.

That's not to say that PSN will get better over time.. and so will xbox live... but as of today.. Xbox live can charge money because no other service match it... hopefully one day.. PSN will not longer give microsoft the option of charging for it... until then... XBox live is worth those $4/month.

[FirstknighT]

I don't know where you sony idiots are getting $70 for Xbox Live. I'm more than happy to pay for top of the line service. Just look at all the problems Warhawk has. And that is only with about 100k playing. Halo 3 and Gears of War has millions of people playing at a time and without any major problems.

[caffman]

Here you go buddy
http://www.game.co.uk/Xbox3...
thats 13 months for £35. At current exchange rates that $70

[Bazookajoe_83]

http://www.webhallen.com/pr... Thats a link to swedens biggest game retailer, they sell them for 449kr = 69.6$..

[Megaton]

Should absolutely be free. They don't even use dedicated servers. They force you to pay to use your own internet. Sure it's not expensive. Costs less than 1 game for a year's worth of service, but on principal, it's not right.

Never understand why you guys are so docile about issues like this.

[Bizmal]

XBL should be free. They offer a laggy service that runs on a P2P method. They control how you find a game and they will not simply give you a list of games with your ping showing. Ranking systems that are a "time spent" method and not skill. Achievments that are also Time spent, they are things that a child could get over time. It's not like a gamer cards means your good. That could be your friends playing your mom, dad whoever, it has nothing to do with showing a players skill. There a waste of time and what do you get for them nothing.... (Not that I don't enjoy them but there not worth paying for is my point) They charge you for every single thing including things that were made to be free like guitar hero content. PC gamers know these things and many consoles gamers have never had it good so they have no clue there being robbed. People often say they don't lag. Not true unless you're the host you're lagging. Just because you're not jerking around and rubbering does not mean you don't have allot of delay. Halo 3s recording options can proove it. It's all over sites where people are putting up vids complaining. That either the other guy was cheating or Halo 3 is buggy. When it's just lag. People also claim it's not XBL but it's that player. All I can say is my PC does not lag,my Ps3 does not lag when playing on dedicated servers does not lag. I love my 360 but XBL blows.. I own them all so I'm not just making things up. I've play them all,all the time. The screens attached show a bullet killing me in the background. Yes that's the bullet...

[Bladestar]

can you explain how is it that I don't have any lag problems?
I mean seriously... isn't obvious that xbox live just like any other P2P game.. depends on the connection of the host?
So, if I have a PS3.. and I'm lagging.. for some stupid reason like... NAT is close.. or my router is dropping pockets.. I have to assume is that PSN sucks?
If you have lost of lags on all the games you play on xbox live... something must be wrong with your connection, interent or router...
I remember having problem playing Battle Field on my PC and having lots of problems... and then find out that it was my router...

You people make it seem as if xbox live is laggy and all... yet so many (millions) of people registered to xbox don't have any problem... if the service would be so laggy and unplayable.. isn't obvious... that people would abandon it? common sense...

Are you telling me you never had a PC game lag on you?
I have Halo 3 configured to only connect to people with good connections... which is why I never lag.

You are trying too hard to convince people that xbox live sucks... who are you trying to convince? Obviosly those that are currently paying for the service and using it will not stop.. since they don't have these lag issues you speak off... you don't have to try to convince the Sony fanboys.. since they flame xbox live no matter what... What are you trying to accomplish?

"All I can say is my PC does not lag,my Ps3 does not lag when playing on dedicated servers does not lag." that's the biggest bull I ever heard... So you never lagged on the PC? damn... all I can say is Liar! What do you think.. we don't play PC games? sometimes all it takes is one lagger to bring the game down... did you ever play C&C online?
Every system lags unless you are lan... I remember COD for the PC... I used to bookmark or rightdown the name of the servers that didn't lag... because some of them were umplayable...

Stop trying to prove to people that the only network in the world that lags is xbox live... you look stupid doing so.

[AllroundGamer]

very nice comment describing the exact problems XBL has. After i bought the xbox360 i played Gears a lot with my 3 free trial Gold accounts, and i saw, that you had almost no chance killing the player/server, when you were both equipped with shotguns, cause the lag was so obvious :( therefor i used only the trial Gold accounts, and that was an end to the oh so great online service , that on PC and everywhere else is free...

[DJ]

That live recording of Halo 3 matchmaking was abysmal. Has Xbox Live gotten worse from the time I had it back in 2005??

[starbuck]

Sorry but that video really is a fanboys attempt to moan about somthing he knows nothing about
"You don't get to choose a game on most Xbox live games. They do it for you"
There is only Halo that does that out of all the Xbox live games (if there's another than sorry) that hardly means most.
"you don't get to see your ping"
Every XB game I have shows you your ping
"You don't get to see the game name or how many players are in that game"
Again thats only Halo because the matchmaking does what it says, it makes matches for you
The only game I get lag in is GRAW 2 when there's a lot of people in it and thats it. Lag is starting to become an excuse for crap players who get killed every other second.
On Halo Ive never waited more than 1 minute to join a game, like the guy above me touched on choose your match making setting wisely.
That video is just funny please tell me you didn't make it and that you found it somewhere else.

[Solid_Skip]

i would have a xbox if it was free

[Korosuke]

I don't think all of the players are familiar with such a word, ping or dedicated server etc, so auto serching or connecting method is acceptable. or I think it's a good idea for thoes who don't know such a word well.

My concern is many games tend to pretty short play time in single player mode recently, mainly FPS/action. It seems to be totally made with extra charge DLC with a premise. As if it's completed as one product only after you supplement it in DCL. And this trend spread out of xbox/xbox live.
I think many xbox360 users play Half Life 2 in orangebox recently and they notice HL2 is more long game to complete than other FPS in xbox360. maybe around 20 hours or so to complete.
HL2 is out two years ago and 20~30 hours single play time was common in those days of FPS...

My opinin to price tag, if MS keep to charge a fee, MS put dedicated server for each games.

[donscrillinger]

NoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OO!!!!!then it would be way more glicthing plz,MS keep it the way it is , its just great ,make the comp catch up PLZ DONT CHANGE IT !!!!!!!

[3sexty rulzzz]

and i have to say that i'm going to buy it again when my 12 months is up on this card. i'ts well worth the money, I just got from circuitcity a 12 month subscribtion for 39.99 which isn't bad. I would have bought it for the regular price of 50.00, buy why not save 10 dollars and buy some microsoft chips and buy more games from xbox live arcade.

[feejo]

No it should not cause it is anti-capitalist. It would be wrong for them and they woun't sleep at nite.

[jackfatal]

thats i guarantee u!

[sheng long]

I'm starting to see a lot of gamers with "free xbox live" as their motto. I know where they stand.
Me personally, i'm not happy having to pay 50.00 in order to play online since i can do the same for free with my ps3, but the service is good so i will renew my membership when it's up.

[The Chief of Mjolnir]

Yeah, that thing about the motto was just a rumor. Someone told some people that if about a million or so changed their motto to "Xboxliveshouldbefree&quo t; it would be so, but I don´t think that happend. I tried it, but nothing. But I can pay for XBL, it´s not so much money for me. It´s almost the same price of a game over here.

[xbox360elitegamer]

it should be free all the way! :)

[Bizmal]

Man you're a crazy one. I mean you're not making much since. Maybe you're just blind fighting to ignore the facts. I'm sorry, you must have allot of issues with your connection. Just to be clear. I do not lag on my PC. I do not lag on Ps3 dedicated servers. I'm sorry you think it's not true. Maybe you should seriously look at your ISP and maybe your settings cause it sounds like you live in a world a lag. I'm not trying to attack you like you're trying to do me. I trying to help you out. Good luck.

[Bladestar]

Thanks for trying to help me out.. but I don't need help...
I'm not the one that's having problems with Xbox 360 lags... Currently I'm not playing any PC games... last game I played on my PC was Battle Field 214?.. forgot... I play games using a T1 in my office... and I have Verizon Fios... at home.. ohh yeah... and my VOIP phone I have it on a separte DSL..

But saying that you don't lag regarless of what server you play on... ever.. ever ever... you know is just wrong.. You are making it sound as you never join a PC game where you lagged?

And just to make it clear... I'm not trying to be unsensitive with those of you who can't afford xbox live... and see paying $4 a month as the end of the world.. just don't pay for it... but this lag issues you speak of sound.. exacly as the RROD issues... you people are trying so hard to convince me that I have RROD or lag issues with my xbox 360.. when I don't.. fine.. you have lag issues.. that's too bad for you... but I don't.. what do you want me to say.. that I do?

Everyone that played PC game experience lag as some point... it's the nature of the interent... no only on xbox live as you people are trying to make it seem.

By the way.. setup..

I barely play any single player games... no long after the PS2 was released I became a PC gamer... because of the lack of online...
The xbox 360 brough me back... if a game does not have an online component.. I don't bother with it. I was also into MMO games... and my favorite genre is RTS (none of the PS3)... I play C&C3 on the xbox 360... I probably experience lag once... and I disconnected and tried another game..

I'm not going to get into a never ending argument with you or anyone anymore... if you believe xbox live sucks.. nothing will change your mind... same way... you can't convince me that PSN is better than xbox live... Let's not forget that not every game on the xbox 360 is P2P... developers choose if they want to allow P2P or host their own servers... Battle Field Modern combat on the xbox 360 is hosted... Huxley will also be dedicated hosted.... not every game needs to be dedicated hosted. like RTS games or sport games.

[DJ]

It takes a lot of work to force yourself NOT to criticize negative aspects about a product; in this case, Xbox Live. He just defends anything Xbox-related, and attacks the competition. Don't know why, but that's just the way he his. There's a few other members on the site just like him, and thankfully they're a minority.

[Snukadaman]

once in awhile you will have some lag in some games...either gears of war or halo 3..but im also wired now. wifi isnt the best way too game seriously. plus you save 85 bucks not buying that crappy adapter. But some people dont have their desks next too their phone.

[snoop_dizzle]

IF the 2.00 update has in game friend list and stuff then i do see xbl's price being unnecessary, however until that happens i will totally gladly pay 50 since a lot of my friends are on xbl, and most
of the people i play with have great connections( granted thats just me, not everybody, but its a reason for me).

In fact i think psn should have a multiple account type structure like a gold account. The current tpye being free, and possibly every other feature like a universal friend list in-game music etc in the higher up account. I would gladly pay for that higher up account if i got great features.

I love warkhawk, but they really have to do something about the whole matchmaking/friend list system overall. Hopefully the update fixes that.

Hopefully by the end of this month v2.00 will fix that, becasue if they don't, i will be getting COD4 on the 360 EVEN if its graphically better on the ps3, plus a lot of my friends in college have 360s so thats another reason.

but hey, maybe v2.00 will be the thing I'm looking for and in that case, might get it on the ps3. Graphical differences don't really bother me, unless its drastic of course.

[Bladestar]

Very nice comment.. I was going to give you bubbles but you don't seem to need any...

[godofthunder10]

if it could stay like it is,but i don't belive that they will be able to keep it like it is.it probaly end up like the psn and i rather pay $5 a month to keep it like it is instead of it ending up like the psn.

[Bizmal]

Explain that please. What do you mean? I play games on both. Can I get a little detail. Thanks

[caffman]

is the fact that droids are saying it should be free. If Xbox live was free, lots more people would buy 360s and make the gap even bigger! I don't mind £35 for 13 months

[Snukadaman]

yea i dont think I would pay that much myself....I feel sorry for you people over the pond..you get screwed by all game companys.

[PumPum]

Doubble post =)

[PumPum]

no thats 35£ POUNDS, it actually costs around 70€ EUROS around here, yeah thats right almost $100 USD and games cost between 65-75€ EUROS.

[CrazzyMan]

now you sound like a droid. =)))))))

[Wile]

It should NOT be free for many reasons but the biggest one is that if someone is cheating, exploiting, and/or being completely obnoxious online they are going to be banned and lose the cash they spend for the service. Without the fee there is not risk to being a jerk online and when he/she gets banned they can just start a new account without penality.

[Snukadaman]

I dont think thats the reason they are charging us..but I like your idea...here is a bubble too add too your collection

[Prismo_Fillusion]

Couldn't they just ban the person's IP for a period of time reflecting the severity of the incident? I realize there are ways around that, but I'm sure there are other ways to decrease cheating without a monetary penalty. Another one might be a temporary ban of the actual system where the penalty was committed.

[Wile]

the other reason (other than to make a little more money) is that it also keeps down the gold accounts that the XBL system would have to track. If everyone was free to create 5 to 10 accounts for whatever reason it would tax the XBL system that much more and possible effect XBL's performance. I feel that making it free is a losing proposion XBL customers on almost all fronts with the exception of fiancial and new user accessability.

@ Prismo_Fillusion

temporary bans only work if the user doesn't have an easy ability just to create a new account. For example, say hypothetically NASIM were to be banned from N4G. Since he/she doesn't have to pay to get a new account, NASIM new alter ego "NASIM RETURNS" appears in the forums the very next moment. No risk, no need to behave, no reprocussions.

Since XBL has a fee, temporary bans can be effective do to the fact if the player wants to play during the ban it's going to cost them another fee.

[Prismo_Fillusion]

Wile: You'd be right if I mentioned anything about banning accounts. Banning an IP or an actual 360 system is a lot different. Some loopholes still exist, but it can be much more of a pain in the ass.

[Wile]

I think banning the console itself or the IP is pretty extreme. My roomate has and Xbox360 too and we share a internet connection and if he got my IP banned because of what he was doing I would be POed. And if you ban the console what happens to the other legit users who have accounts on that box? (the roomate, wife, brother, sister or friend) Do they lose there access too? They would have to if the service was free.

[monkey602]

I want it to be free. But purely because my gold subscription needs to be renewed in two days :(

[PumPum]

Absolutely yes!
Played my trials to the end. But im not paying a dime for it.
Would like to duel in AC4 but im not paying for that over hyped , over praised crap service that should be 100% free(not the extra content ofcourse)

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

Xbox Live is like digital cable while free PSN is more like clunky DSL/dial up. While you may have free online play on the PSN, it's also not supported across the entire platform and it's limited. It's aslo apparent to everyone that these two services are not the same and do not offer the same "additional features" Again you get what you pay for.

[Saint Sony]

You think MS will make it free? Heh.

Of course they won't make it free, why would they? It is running ok, and people actually use it.
I'm happy it is not free, just because money makes it possible to keep it running and there are people hired to make it better and better and better. All paid from the live money.
Free service like Sony has, lacks so many things and does not even have proper dev team behind it.

[Aass]

I will also pay for Home. It's gonna be awesome.

[otherZinc]

I don't want that POS Wii online service or that POS PS3 online service.

You get what you pay for, this is why XBOX LIVE is even better than the computer games online service.

Unified service is the only way to play together.

[Grim]

It is only really the Xbox haters that mention the price of Live gold membership, ask the majority of 360 owners and they will say they are happy to pay for Gold membership. I for 1 am happy to pay it, it's no big deal because the service you get is good for the money!

[WilliamRLBaker]

FACT
Right now according to used signed up, money made...ect Xbox live killed psn...in the future? who knows but sony doesn't have a good track record now do they?

and xbox live will just keep geting better and better.

[segasage]

we all know everyone in the world would love everything to be free.

It's one of those rhetorical Questions.

The gaming Industry is a business, just as Cable Television Vs Over the Air Free TV.

one is Free and the other is not.

Now a good question would be should it be cheaper, well I wouldn't mind it being cheaper but everyone wants things for free, and yes it does help market the companies product and services but but what does it do to any business?

I wouldn't mind the service being cheaper and that's still a possibility, as well as looking at what the competition does it might become free, even though I doubt it, but this is why we have competition, but who knows.

everything should be free, then again no money would be made for companies to provide quality services. Think for one second the SALARIES that have to be paid to people that support the SERVERS?
THEY HAVE TO BE PAID TO.

XBL has around 7 million subscribers and of course it could be close to 100% of users with the box that could be online but XBL model came out first and now to compete Sony has this "FREE" motto.

Do you think for one second if XBL did not Exist SONY would offer a free PSN? Every benefit happens because of COMPETITION.

[andy001]

In the UK the Gold subscription is £40 ($80) which I think is OK if I played online enough. Unfortunately I don't as there just hasn't been a game to make me want to go online again. I used to play a lot of MotoGP2 on the Xbox and played PGR3 on the 360 but it wasn't the same somehow. I don't like the points system it is crap. Everything is priced in such a way as to ensure you have 100 points or so left which is no use for anything apart from 'gamerpics' which is just such a ripoff. However, the interface is quick and it is OK to find stuff.

The PSN is lacking in a few areas, as I find it slow when navigating, you can download in the background but you still then need to install demos and games. There is more free stuff available which is surprising as I would expect it to be the other way round, and I also like that there seems to be more variety with the stuff to download. Games like GT HD and Tekken 5 are must haves and free. The Euro store is a let down though, Sony needs more content on there.

The thing is, I remember when the 360 live service only just started and everyone was moaning there was nothing on there and it was still £40. If the PSN improves at the same or better rate and stays free, then Microsofts service will seem expensive.

I am a Silver member and when MS decide to treat Europe with the respect they said they had (when the PS was delayed in Europe) and charge the same as the US ($40, or £20) then I may pay again.

[ZeVeX]

Paying just to play online is one of the main reasons i haven't bought a 360, if you don't mind payin, then good for you, but i choose to play online for free on ma PS3 thanks.

[iballa]

So poor people and kids cannot afford it then I will not have to listen to their voices.

[Atomic Rage]

i couldnt agree more

[CRIMS0N_W0LF]

IF XBox Live was free I would buy an X360.

come on I NEVER Payed to play online with better features and less lag and more players on PC for AGES.

[witchking]

It's only $4 per month. For what you get, it's worth it.

[Atomic Rage]

yea its only 1 dollor a week for a year of no-stop online action