XBL Pricing Revealed

[Qroach]

I hate to say it, but chap raised the exact points I was just going to raise. Look at Ea, they want to charge a monthly fee for ALL of thier online games on the PS2. Imo, I think that's worse then people playing on xbox live an paying extra for MMORPG's and fees for extra content.

jeez, xbox live is currently the price of one game, and soon you can get it for less without the headset, and you can buy the headset later. To those that think the head set is absoloutly needed while playing on xbox live, it's not. It's a cool feature, but not everyoe likes to talk, and sometimes you just want to hit the mute button. Either way it doesn't effect gameplay in a negative way without it.

let me put it this way, I'd rather pay money for a structured online system, that allows for communication/friends between ALL of the online games, then I would for open system when it's everyone for themselves and free. Sicne it's free you'l find more publishers interested in charging pay to play just like EA. I don't see anyone here complaining about how EA wants to make money off pay to play.

 

[maskrider]

I don't see any big difference between Sony and MS for the online front, PlayOnline needs a subscription, XBL needs a subscription. On top of that, the game is going to charge you extra anyway if they provide extra services than the peer-to-peer matching service on XBL.

Apart from the big games, PlayOnline also has a couple of simple games to play Tetra Master, Mahjong, and online chat, e-mail, etc, that is available once you are subscribed.

And you will need to buy BB unit (it's indeed not cheap) or NA for PS2 and Live Kit for X-BOX anyway.

I do not expect any free lunch from the companies, everything comes with a cost. Anyway, I am not interested in online gaming.

 

[ChryZ]

I don't disagree with the fact that Live is a good bundle with nice features, but not everybody needs that special high priced AOL feeling. The open approach is pretty cool, too ... if you only play a game for 1-2 month, then you only pay for 1-2 month, if the publisher gives away p2p online play for free, then pay nothing

 

[BoddoZerg]

I don't get why people think XBL is too expensive. It's $50/year for crying out loud! Given the software attach rates on Xbox, the average Xbox gamer spends WAY more money on games than XBL will ever cost. If the 16 year old Xbot can convince his mommy to pay for MechAssault, UT2k3, and RTCW, surely he can convince his mommy to pay for Live? (Conversely, if he makes enough money flipping burgers to pay for all those games, surely he can cough up the dough for Live)

The problem with XBL right now is that honestly, there's not enough good online games to play (that aren't better on PC). MechAssault is thoroughly mediocre, UC is a laggy version of UT2k3 (which isn't that good even on PC), and RTCW is also better on PC. The downloadable content has absolutely sucked so far.

I can see XBL becoming popular when Halo 2 is released though...

 

[zurich]

RTCW is also better on PC

Do you have it? How is it?

 

[Vince]

How is it any bigger than having to buy a PS2 NA?

Because, they can ask someone to buy them a NA from Best Buy very simply. Hell what kid doesn't get gift certificates.

-Those with XBL can renewal their 1 year subscription for 50 bucks.
-Those without XBL can buy the starter kit with 1 year subscription and headset for 70 bucks.
-Monthly fees, 6 bucks, are for those who wants to testplay XBL, without the need to commit 1 year to it. Stop paying when you feel like it!
-Headsets sold separately, 30 bucks. Headsets are no longer require to play XBL.

Ok, this only re-enforces what I'm previously stated.

Pay to play will be the future for online games, MS is just having a headstart. The new XBL pricing is pretty fair. Haterz were expecting MS to charge exhorbitant fees in the second year, too bad MS didnt.

No, digital content distribution or a fee is the future. Pay to game isn't. I will say the same things if Sony or Nintendo ever charge.

Same situation with PS2.

Only to you Chappers… only to you. There's a difference between a one time charge of the NA for PS2 or Nintendo that they tangibly buy with a gift certificate and asking their parents to drop $50 a year to play on top of the game price.

We wouldnt know yet.
EA is considering to charge fees.
EA is not supporting 2k3 online games when 2k4 games are release.
FFXI needs a NA + HDD + monthly fees.
Capcom charges monthly fees for Automodelista in Japan.
RE: Online will have a monthly fee of around 4 bucks iirc.
Will Sony start to charge for their games, SOCOM2(will they support SOCOM1 anymore?), EQA2(will they support EQA1 anymore?), Syphon Filter3, GT4, Arc Online...nice list to rake up the dough...?

I know that basically all of Sony's high profile games thus far is... free.

EA is "considering"... Ok, I can respond to your unknowledgeable conjecture how?

EA is making people pay for a new game every year; how is this not fair? But again this absorbs cost in the traditional market model - without the need for a fee that becomes a burden.

FFXI is also a bit different, but that wouldn't matter to you Chappers...

Capcom charges in Japan? Do they charge here? What’s the state of BB Navigator/Broadband fabric in Japan verse here? Do you think perhaps they're offering additional content? Also, Japan is a different demographic... Where are you going with this... <shrug>

And then the list of games that will probably all be free (exception being EoA1/2) but you can write this and use uncertainty as proof of your nonexistent proof due to the addition of that retarded ' ' icon - which sums up your position nicely.

 

[Vince]

I hate to say it, but chap raised the exact points I was just going to raise. Look at Ea, they want to charge a monthly fee for ALL of thier online games on the PS2. Imo, I think that's worse then people playing on xbox live an paying extra for MMORPG's and fees for extra content.

Q, I summed this up in my reponce to Chappers. But, EA would be wise to keep the system free, like it is now and instead make users buy each new iteration of the software. This way they absorb the costs in a more traditional manner and they keep alot more of the revenues because it's an online game and Sony relaxes the liecensing fees.

I'd like to see Online gaming remain free, and I think it's possible to do this within the fabric of the free market and the inherient inter-developer competition.

I don't get why people think XBL is too expensive. It's $50/year for crying out loud!

Ok, brilliant... oh wait. Ok, here's another problem. A parent goes to buy a system for their kids: the Best Buy employee states that there's a monthly fee for playing Console A online, while Console B needs a onetime charge. Which do you think their going to pick?

 

[Geeforcer]

Why does everyone think that you would need a credit card to play online? For example, Sony sells pre-paid cards for EQ. I am pretty sure they will allow you to buy a year live "card" at a local EB.

 

[MfA]

I don't get why people think XBL is too expensive.

The costs of upkeep for the service are nil, trying to recoup its costs already by fees just shows a complete lack of faith in its ability to push games sales and in the success of pay to play MMPOGs ... it is a looser attitude (or a monopoly attitude, but in that case I think m$ is overestimating their lead and underestimating the need to get further ahead while they have the time).

BTW I hope to god console developers start using planned obsolescence for online gaming ... would be a big shot in the arm to PC gaming.

 

[ChryZ]

Why does everyone think that you would need a credit card to play online? For example, Sony sells pre-paid cards for EQ. I am pretty sure they will allow you to buy a year live "card" at a local EB.

Well, http://xbox.ign.com/articles/367/367233p1.html

4. Enter credit card info
Yup, you need a credit card to sign up for Xbox Live. Or you need your parent's credit card (if they approve, you don't just yoink it for yourself). This is standard info, including the name of the person the card belongs to, the credit card number, and expiration date.

Later on, it is so much easier and convenient to buy online content "New racing track 5$, push A to confirm!" , incl. heart-attack at credit card invoice day

 

[Qroach]

Ok, brilliant... oh wait. Ok, here's another problem. A parent goes to buy a system for their kids: the Best Buy employee states that there's a monthly fee for playing Console A online, while Console B needs a onetime charge. Which do you think their going to pick?

If people are really interested enough, they are going to do a little reasearch and find out what you get for your money. With xbox, you have a yearly fee (monthly isn't nearly as attractve). With it you get matchmaking and friends lists, and a number of other matchmaking features. You also get downloadable content (new maps and stuff like that). You get that on top of all the new features annouced at E3.

To me, that alone makes xbox live more attractive. You don't know how cool it is to be able to see what friends are playing.

 

[Qroach]

MS will do something similar to the prepaid card as well eventually. i only makes it mroe accessible to the general public.

Also, just because you enter your credit card info doesn't mean that you will be forced to pay for addons. Some addons will be free and others won't be. Don't blame MS for these extra charges, since it's completely up to the publisher.

IMO, I'd gladly pay an extra dollar or two for something that I want. something liek this probably won't be a problem for te xbox audience as they are mostly in the older (late teens and up catagory).

I'm sure MS is also goig to hold competitions where you can play and win money and stuff like that eventually (PGL anyone?). It's all designed to entice people to join.

 

[Vince]

If people are really interested enough, they are going to do a little reasearch and find out what you get for your money.

Your argument dies right there... Find me a parent that's going to do "research" on a game console. They will either: (a) Buy what their kids want, (b) Buy what's cheaper (eg. which leads to my Best Buy example).

MS will do something similar to the prepaid card as well eventually. i only makes it mroe accessible to the general public.

Heh... Ok, Q... Ok... How can anyone argue against such rock-solid comments? Nintendo will eventually sell their console at $79 and this will make it more accessable to the public.

Also, just because you enter your credit card info doesn't mean that you will be forced to pay for addons. Some addons will be free and others won't be. Don't blame MS for these extra charges, since it's completely up to the publisher

I can just see it now... Papa Quincy gets his monthly Visa bill and sees little Billy has sent a C-note of Pop's money to "Microsoft Home and Entertainment" for upgrades, downloads and etc. I wonder how long thats going to last... heh.

 

[zurich]

Vince,

Your entire argument is based around parents funding their kids gaming hobby. You're forgetting about the enormous 18-20+ yo gamer market who can support themselves.

I dare say that if MS had Nintendo's demographic & rep, this would be a problem, but they don't.

 

[Vince]

Vince, Your entire argument is based around parents funding their kids gaming hobby. You're forgetting about the enormous 18-20+ yo gamer market who can support themselves.

Needless to say when there is competition that's basically free for the same thing - it makes me wonder if this will suceed large scale. Older gamers might not want to play online (more 'casual') and younger ones have the parent factor. Aswell as the parents who when they buy it will choose the one that's cheaper. How big is that middle again??

 

[DemoCoder]

The price of XBL is a non-issue for me. I view XBL as a network for the privileged. It requires broadband minimally, a credit card, and fee. I think the fee is too low ($50 is a pittance unless your a blue collar worker)

I wish they'd raise the price higher to keep the kids off. I'd rather play with 10,000 adults than 100,000 kids.

Counter-Strike, Diablo2, et al are brilliant examples of this. Unless you find a few adults to play with and play with them consistently, the experience is very bad, with immature idiots cheating and spamming text and voice channels.

I found a few CS clan servers were the players in the clans are mostly married adults and the experience is night and day.

EverQuest in the early days was also an example of a community that discouraged childish behavior.


I own all three consoles and for me to pay $150 or whatever to get a years subscription to all three is beneath the radar.

 

[zurich]

Needless to say when there is competition that's basically free for the same thing - it makes me wonder if this will suceed large scale. Older gamers might not want to play online (more 'casual') and younger ones have the parent factor. Aswell as the parents who when they buy it will choose the one that's cheaper. How big is that middle again??

Thats writing off a significantly large userbase on a whim

 

[DemoCoder]

Actually I think 18-35 gamers are more likely to want to pay to play online and to segregate themselves from the kids. Everyone of my late 20/30 something friends play games online, and most of them get really annoyed by teenagers f*cking up the experience.

Many older people prefer the "social" experience of multiplayer gaming, whereas I think it is teens that have no problem pumping 40+hrs of driven attention into a mindless shootemup or platformer. It's primarily the adults that crave backstory, plot, environment, and other people.

 

[chaphack]

Firstly Vincey, why are you assuming the average gamers to be kids?

Today, 28 is the average age of a gamer, the Interactive Digital Software Association, or IDSA, says in a recent report.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...tories/stories/bi_oldergamer071102.ca78c.html

Because, they can ask someone to buy them a NA from Best Buy very simply. Hell what kid doesn't get gift certificates.

And they cant ask their parents for XBL kits?

Ok, this only re-enforces what I'm previously stated.

The price is fair, considering that you getting 12 months of unlimited online gaming.

No, digital content distribution or a fee is the future. Pay to game isn't

I believe it is part of digital content distribution.

I will say the same things if Sony ever charges

Sony HotShot Golf has monthly fees in Japan.
Figures, since they are KING in Japan, a strangehold of the market always helps.

I know that basically all of Sony's high profile games thus far is... free.

Yes, thus far. If they are smart, they should keep that going this whole generation. But we will never know what might happen...

EA is "considering"... Ok, I can respond to your unknowledgeable conjecture how?

EA Sports may start charging for online play.

In a report on CNN, John Riccitello, president and COO of Electronic Arts, suggested that future iterations of games under the EA Sports label, such as Madden NFL or NBA Live, may have some sort of online subscription model, pointing out that the potential to make new revenue is there.

No wonder they are boycotting Live.

FFXI is also a bit different, but that wouldn't matter to you Chappers...

Yeah, like i didnt mentioned MMORPGs...
No neeed to sound so elitist.

Capcom charges in Japan? Do they charge here? What’s the state of BB Navigator/Broadband fabric in Japan verse here? Do you think perhaps they're offering additional content? Also, Japan is a different demographic... Where are you going with this...

To show that Sony free model might not be too user friendly to the "kids"!
Dont forget, RE:Online will be charging fees, Japan and US! the last i heard.

but you can write this and use uncertainty as proof of your nonexistent proof due to the addition of that retarded ' ' icon - which sums up your position nicely.

No need to act so holy. If you noticed, i was pondering on the possibility of Sony charging for their major titles. Lets carry on with our little debate on console gaming, and we shall see how large is you holy knowledge here. 8)

 

[Vince]

Firstly Vincey, why are you assuming the average gamers to be kids?

If you would have read, I clearly stated that I didn't assume this. But, rather, questioned the demographic that: (a) will want this, (b) can get this. How many 28 year olds want to online game?

And they cant ask their parents for XBL kits?

Again, I already addressed the fallacies of this when it comes time to pay the Visa card and there are payments to Microsoft Home and Entertainment that seems to appear out of thin air. Do you not read my posts?

The price is fair, considering that you getting 12 months of unlimited online gaming.

The price's perception and 'fairness' is relative, nothing more. And you tell me how it relates to PS2's free line up after E3.

I believe it is part of digital content distribution.

I don't. Buying a movie or music is fairgame, paying for a MS Gamespy and a game thats free on the PC is hardly the same.

No wonder they are boycotting Live.

We shall see...

Yeah, like i didnt mentioned MMORPGs...

EQA is what then?

To show that Sony free model might not be too user friendly to the "kids"!
Dont forget, RE:Online will be charging fees, Japan and US! the last i heard.

Thsi is lacking coherency. So, the free model of buying a game, putting it in the tray and playing online isn't as user friendly as puting an MS game into the tray and playing?

And speculation on RE:O, thats cool. I don't like the series, thus I won't pay for it... problem solved.

No need to act so holy. If you noticed, i was pondering on the possibility of Sony charging for their major titles. Lets carry on with our little debate on console gaming, and we shall see how large is you holy knowledge here. 8)

This is classic, "pondering" on the possibilities of Sony charging. Lets ponder what would happen if Sony like totally charged, like $600 for a PS2 and $150 for a NA. Lets ponder what would happen if the Government started buying XBoxes and used them as spaceheaters for the homeless. Lets ponder what would happen if.... What if....

Give me a break. This is you stating your biased opinion and instead of asking, as Marco correctly stated, if MS made the right choice by not being more proactive and taking the short-term hit for the long-term gain; you'll sit here and say, "But what if Sony did this at n point in the indeterminate future."