Ads Are Now On Xbox Live :-/

[Qroach]

I mean embedded IN your browser...so whil you're reading this post, a big flashing add would sit on your screen? WOuld you like that? I'm just illustrating the point that ads are annoying, contrary to your statement: "You're complaining about ads?? common guys there's ads everywhere. "

You're totally glossing over the point I was making. If an ad banner was built into your browser then it would be intrusive, providing it's taking viewable space away from you. I'm not arguing that ads are annoying, but what's the point in complaining that they even exsist? what is that going to accomplish? I'll tell you, it will accomplish nothing. now if you're complaining about ads that are intrusive, like text msg's that are trying to sell you stuff on your cell phone. Or ads that you have to click through only to bypass it, or ads that block your view of something you want to use. then that's something worth complaining about...

Despite the facts ads are everywhere, does not mean they are a welcome intrusion, and does not mean it's not a valid complaint. Going your logic, they could place an ad anywhere at anytime, and it woould be fine because: "ads are eveywhere"

again scooby you missed the point. I didn't say ads are welcome, but when they don't intrude on a experience or affect anyone in any way other then just being visible to them then why bother complaining about something that will never change. Nobody complained when the only ads in that same screen was just for other video games. do people in that target demographic not like to use deodorant as much as video games? let's try and be reasonable.



BS? I think that my $60/year should entitle me to dedicated servers in all games, it would be a small fraction of the profit MS reaps in from the subscriptions, that's my opinion and it's no more BS than your position that you're OK paying for a subpar, inconsistent experience.[/QUOTE]

What part of "it's up to the publishers to provide dedicated servers is difficult to understand. You'll never see dedicated servers in all console games. you won't see that on Sony's network, nintendo's network or MS's game network. What's BS again is you're sitting there saying MS should provide these servers for titles other then the games they create? right, that's BS and an unrealistic view. it's only valid complaint if you say "MS published titles".

 

[Qroach]

Home is different. It's a standalone application. The blade with the ad on it pops up first thing every damn time I turn on my 360.

What difference does it make if it's a standalone application? You could say the dashboard is a stanalone application too. You never have to see if if you would rather boot into your games. I don't see you complaining about game ads and movie ads in teh same way, why complain about an ad over Axe body spray?

Home is no different imo and I bet you will see far more ads ad less complaint when it arrives. Just because it's free doesn't mean they can spam you with ads! See how foolish that sounds both ways?

Igf they're going to make me pay for thigns other services offers for free AND serve me ads - then what the hell am I paying for?

you are paying for the service, you already answered your question. Once again just because you pay for something doesn't mean it's going to be add free.

At least serve relevant ads but just any random crap like deodorants (from a brand with a history of decidedly sexist ads) don't exactly help against user annoyance.

It's called targeting a demographic. you don't see ads on there for pantyhose or depends diapers do you? to me a it sounds like you and a few others are just complaining for the sake of complaining.

 

[infinity4]

what's wrong with ads???

does ads affect people's gaming experience or any inconveniences??? ads are wherever the market is

so we can now complain google for putting ads for every searches we make then, okay?

 

[Qroach]

It's funny to see some people judging/criticising others because of " they don't like ads in a service that they pay 60 bucks / year " ...

Try reading a bit closer next time. Here's what I wrote below: "if the ads are intrusive in some way or affect the user experience then I can understand complaining about it. I'd rally behind any cause to get rid of intrusive ads, as I personally hate them. However when they don't have any impact on your experience, other then being visible to you, it's a waste of time to complain since it won't accomplish anything."

 

[Qroach]

Yes... in Home, the trick is: Advertisement spots are more subtle and in-context due to the 3D metaphor. e.g., People who wander into a Car zone or a Movie theater would naturally be interested in related items; Generic banner location are also part of the interior design (or it may look too bland).

Right and when you visit the Axe body spray zone built into HOME you can send me the details on how that is worse than a simple banner ad that changes over time.

 

[Qroach]

More fundamentally, a Home comparison falls apart when you consider it is free. That's the nub of the complaint here..it's not free, yet you still see the ads.

A closer analogy would be if there was ad(s) embedded in the XMB, or the network portion of the XMB. And I'd hope that never happens given how clean the XMB is, but again, I'm not paying any subscription fees to ward that off.

The "free" comment holds no weight imo. You don't pay subscription fees to get rid of ads. You pay a fee for the service. Again more on point that I made earlier,if the ads are intrusive in some way or affect the user experience then I can understand complaining about it. I'd rally behind any cause to get rid of intrusive ads, as I personally hate them. However when they don't have any impact on your experience, other then being visible to you, it's a waste of time to complain since it won't accomplish anything.

 

[patsu]

Right and when you visit the Axe body spray zone built into HOME you can send me the details on how that is worse then a simple banner ad.

You can always stay away from them during your Home exploration. Something like Home provides more scope to play with the ad subtlety... as opposed to just a (width x height) screen area. e.g., you can sponsor fashionable apparels for fans to wear.

Advertisements are not necessarily bad, some are beautiful and non-intrusive, some are funny, yet others are informative. Doing it in Home is better than doing it in XMB. I don't own a 360, so I can only comment in a general fashion.

To take someone's google example above... it would be bad if the ad distracts, or interferes with the search result or layout.

EDIT: IMHO, the snapshot in the OP looks overdone. The AXE ad does not mention anything about its free images and looks out of place. The GoW mini banner reminds people further about crowded browser ads (even though it may not be one). Overall, it's not done well.

 

[scooby_dooby]

You're totally glossing over the point I was making. If an ad banner was built into your browser then it would be intrusive, providing it's taking viewable space away from you. I'm not arguing that ads are annoying, but what's the point in complaining that they even exsist?

Well what's the point in complaining about anything ever? To vent really.

And I didn't miss your point, I already agreed with it! If it's not intrusive, big deal! What I was responding to was your initial post, where you did essentially argue ads are no big deal.

again scooby you missed the point. I didn't say ads are welcome, but when they don't intrude on a experience or affect anyone in any way other then just being visible to them then why bother complaining about something that will never change. Nobody complained when the only ads in that same screen was just for other video games. do people in that target demographic not like to use deodorant as much as video games? let's try and be reasonable.

I already stated I feel the same way in my OP

What part of "it's up to the publishers to provide dedicated servers is difficult to understand. You'll never see dedicated servers in all console games. you won't see that on Sony's network, nintendo's network or MS's game network. What's BS again is you're sitting there saying MS should provide these servers for titles other then the games they create? right, that's BS and an unrealistic view. it's only valid complaint if you say "MS published titles".

I don't buy it, that's all. The bottom line is the experience is lacking, I don't care how they solve it, but for $60/year I expect it to be solved.

If MS wanted to make it happen, they could. The annual income from subscribers outweighs any potential costs by a mile, even if they supported every single game on the system. Or they could simply support their own titles, and mandate all publishers do the same.

Or, if they want to continue providing a subpar experience, then make it free like Sony. In other words...where the hell's the money going? What exactly am I paying for here? I've let my subscription lapse, and don't have any real plans to renew it...my buddy does keep pestering me to play some gears with him though...and Forza is coming up, so we'll see.

I really don't see how that's BS, I'm, not telling you you're wrong, you're welcome to your own opinion, but don't tell me my expectations are BS, 250 million/year is alot of money, there's no doubt they could provide dedicated servers without too much impact to the bottom line.

 

[Titanio]

The "free" comment holds no weight imo. You don't pay subscription fees to get rid of ads.

No, but you might pay them in the expectation that your money will pay for the service, and that advertising revenue will not be needed.

Particularly with online services, it is often the case that subscribing allows you to turn off ads (see IGN Insider, for example). In the more direct context of online console gaming services, neither of the other two free services have advertising as prominent as this in their UI, and that's what people will compare against. That's the context I was speaking of earlier. However, who knows in the future how that might change if a precedent is set..

I can agree on one thing, though - merely complaining won't change anything. But I wouldn't rail against complaints as ridiculous.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Again more on point that I made earlier,if the ads are intrusive in some way or affect the user experience then I can understand complaining about it.

Intrusive can be subjective though. For some, ads can just ruin the aesthetic. eg. A billboard out your window is just an image, but it's mighty intrusive if it's not what you want to look at and blocks your view of the sea or whatever. Personally I don't think it matters in this particular case as I don't think much of the dashboard design! But something slick like XMB or MediaCentre (XB360 really should have gone with a like interface IMO) with an in-your-face ad slapped on it would annoy me.

Oh, and ad sounds really aggravate. I just hate going to websites and having a flash ad cut over my music. Especially those scummy buzzing or similar noise ads. If it has a noise component, it's intrusiveness goes up by leaps and bounds by my estimation.

 

[Rangers]

Particulary in a service that people pay for and don't offer any tangible benefits over similar free functionality on other platforms.
Peace.

Whoo boy I think that could be argued as a very innacurate statement..From what I understand XBL is a good deal ahead of PSN in a lot of areas such as unified friends list etc etc etc. Never mind Nintendo..

Also, why does everybody keep listing Live as $60 a year? It's $50. Just a minor quibble.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Whoo boy I think that could be argued as a very innacurate statement..From what I understand XBL is a good deal ahead of PSN in a lot of areas such as unified friends list etc etc etc. Never mind Nintendo..

Also, why does everybody keep listing Live as $60 a year? It's $50. Just a minor quibble.

Well...I can only speak for myself, but north of the border it's $60

Thing is, all the 'extra' functionality is included for free for silver members, so the $60 truly is only going towards online play, which does offer nothing more PSN. Granted, it's the whole package that makes it work, but still, you're not paying for anything but online play, the rest is free.

 

[Qroach]

No, but you might pay them in the expectation that your money will pay for the service, and that advertising revenue will not be needed.

that's not an expectation I'd assume to be true.

Particularly with online services, it is often the case that subscribing allows you to turn off ads (see IGN Insider, for example).

IGN still has ads, but paying allows you to turn off the intrusive ads. not all the ads.

 

[Titanio]

that's not an expectation I'd assume to be true.

Not in all cases, but..

IGN still has ads, but paying allows you to turn off the intrusive ads. not all the ads.

..again, even discounting the IGN comparison and taking things in an even more direct context, comparing to its direct peers, MS does seem to be pushing the boundaries here, and it may seem all the more..cheeky, for want of a better word, to some, given that theirs is a subscription service to start with.

I won't change your mind on it, but I hope you can at least see why some might complain.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I really don't see how that's BS, I'm, not telling you you're wrong, you're welcome to your own opinion, but don't tell me my expectations are BS, 250 million/year is alot of money, there's no doubt they could provide dedicated servers without too much impact to the bottom line.

IMO, XBL has always been a rip off because of the lack of dedicated servers. Compared to what MS is earning on the XBL gold service, the cost is small, and would do wonders for a lot of the games.

XBL sucks because of all this Peer-to-peer hosting crap, if you play with random players its almost certainly going to lag (anything above 100ms ping is unacceptable for a FPS games, after you've played PC games online), not only that but your playing at the mercy of a 12 year old kid, who happends to host the game, he can kick you out, or just leave a game, whenever he feels like it.

Now i know, somebody is going to say "play with your friends" or something like that, but frankly it doesn't work like that, your friends aren't allways going to play when your on, or even the same game.

I'm sick and tired of joining a room (that is supposed to have "green" ping) in R6: Vegas, waiting for the round to end, only to find out that the host doesn't know basic networking, doesn't understand that his 512kb upload speed is not fast enough to support 7vs7, and he doesn't even believe the others when they complain about lag, because he isnt getting any (how could he? Hes the host, he cannot lag).

I have NEVER figured out why people praise Xbl so much, sure its nicely integrated to each game, but that's something i'd expect from all consoles with an online capability. The fact that you have to pay to play is just beyond me, aspecially when they are not offering you dedicated servers.

That being said, im absolutely amazed how bad online with Sony is right now, everything being unified should be the bare minimum of going online with a console.

Now lets do some math, for the people that say that "bla bla bla dedicated servers costs to much"

4 million gamers, dedicated servers?

Let say, you need servers to be able to hold 1million of these gamers at any given time (so people don't have to sit endlessly and wait in queue to join a game, because the service to hot).

Now, most games only support 8 players online, but lets say it would be a 12 average if we had dedicated servers all around. Okay, thats 83 333 servers. That would run you $25 monthly including maintance, thats $25 million a year.

Your giving MS right now, $250 million a year, for being able to connect to another player, its pure profit for MS, there is no significant costs involved for them. I hate how gaming journalism makes out XBL as such a great thing, people should have more balls to demand proper services.

 

[valioso]

No. Not random commercial ads.


Yeah and never access marketplace or my online profile etc.. Right.
Peace.

So having an axe banner where a gears of war or any other game banner would be is much different? The point is that is the same spot it has always been.. is not like a brand new banner they suddenly added to advertise Axe, that's been since I first booted my xbox way back in 05

 

[AzBat]

What a bunch of whiners. "Oooh my poor thumb hurts so I can't push the D-pad to change the blade or menu option." Maybe you need to invest in some anal-gesic creme. Just damn plain retarded if you ask me.

BTW, I've done the free PC online gaming thing and personally I'd rather pay the Live Subscription fee. If you don't like it, then fine. At least I don't have to see your whining butt online. LOL

Tommy McClain

 

[Cheezdoodles]

What a bunch of whiners. "Oooh my poor thumb hurts so I can't push the D-pad to change the blade or menu option."

No need for the D-pad, flip the left analog.

 

[Tap In]

No need for the D-pad, flip the left analog.

or hold a bumper button to move fast :smile:

 

[NBK-Steve]

This thread is totally ridiculous! You're complaining about ads?? common guys there's ads everywhere. Why is this such a big deal.

I was just thinking the same thing. I really don't care if it has ads, I just want to play games...