Xbox Live 3.0... what can we expect?

[ERP]

Given that ~1/3 of Xbox users are willing to pay for multiplayer, what would MS suddenly make it free?

I think the changes will likely be incremental, possibly adding new features enabled by always on functionality the large system reserves they seem to be planning for imply.
If anything I'd expect a more tiered model.

 

[XpiderMX]

Given that ~1/3 of Xbox users are willing to pay for multiplayer, what would MS suddenly make it free?

I think the changes will likely be incremental, possibly adding new features enabled by always on functionality the large system reserves they seem to be planning for imply.
If anything I'd expect a more tiered model.

Because it is a new console, new users, new platform. Current users are paying because it is the only way to play online games on Xbox, but a new machine is a "restart". I know a lot of people tired of paying for something that is free in the rest of platforms. The only one "loyal" user (maybe) is CoD player.

I don't know if MS will let the silver users play online, but I think they must put some incentive for free users, they are the 2/3 (50 millions?), a lot.

 

[AlphaWolf]

When the 360 came out it was a new console too. I'd expect them to give incentive for people to pay, not the opposite.

 

[XpiderMX]

When the 360 came out it was a new console too. I'd expect them to give incentive for people to pay, not the opposite.

Yes, new console->Xbox Live Silver...

And they can make the gold attractive, even with very basic multiplayer online for free.

 

[ERP]

I would think that MS is pretty happy with the live gold subscription rates, I can't see them removing multiplayer from that tier at this point.
They'll likely IMO try and increase the value proposition for gold subscribers, and if they have enough additional value they can add, add additional, premium subscription tiers.
They could I guess add an add fueled gold subscription, which might be interesting, though I think they'd actually get significant backlash doing that.

 

[HTupolev]

They could I guess add an add fueled gold subscription, which might be interesting, though I think they'd actually get significant backlash doing that.

Maybe, though it's worth noting that having XBL Gold right now does not save you from the recent addition of ads to the 360 dashboard.

 

[DJ12]

Lot of dreaming going on here, if they made online multiplaying free they reduce the amount that will pay for gold drastically therefore it's not going to happen.

 

[-tkf-]

Lot of dreaming going on here, if they made online multiplaying free they reduce the amount that will pay for gold drastically therefore it's not going to happen.

Or they will see less sales because they require money for something that is free everywhere else, they had a unique situation when then launched the 360, no competition and they were the first console with a good solid multiplayer support. Even when the PS3 launched it still had a rusty Multiplayer part. That was then and this is now (ok the future).

360 games is not something i buy because i have 2 platforms where everything is included with the price of the game, the 360 in my house is used when the kid wants to play 2 player minecraft with a friend (XBOX exclusive) or kinect games.

To sum it up, it's going to be a part of the buyers decision when they have to put the money down, and Microsoft is going to have some weighty arguments to combat the Wii U, PS4, DS, iOS, PC platforms.

"Yeah it's priced at $400 and then you have to pay $60 every year while you own it to actually get the best from your games"

 

[XpiderMX]

Lot of dreaming going on here, if they made online multiplaying free they reduce the amount that will pay for gold drastically therefore it's not going to happen.

Yes, or maybe they can lose some users. PS3 online is free, and people are getting free games with PSN+.

As a Xbox 360 user (and PS3 user), Xbox Live Gold looks like an expensive service. And the worse is we need gold for youtube or internet browser.

But again, the topic is not "free vs gold", it is about the new things in Xbox Live for Durango.

Or they will see less sales because they require money for something that is free everywhere else, they had a unique situation when then launched the 360, no competition and they were the first console with a good solid multiplayer support. Even when the PS3 launched it still had a rusty Multiplayer part. That was then and this is now (ok the future).

Yes, Xbox Live, at 2005, was a really impressive service (for consoles), PSN was a joke compared to XBL. But now the things have changed, and a lot of people is paying gold because it is the only way for online gaming in their console. But it is not only Sony, if SteamBox become a real thing, it will be another guy with free (and really good) online.

 

[DJ12]

-tkf-, I agree but they haven't done it now so it's unlikely they will. I think Sony charging for online multiplayer is more likely than MS doing it for free.

 

[XpiderMX]

-tkf-, I agree but they haven't done it now so it's unlikely they will. I think Sony charging for online multiplayer is more likely than MS doing it for free.

Well, but if you look my list, I'm not saying something like "eh!, the online will be the same for silver and Gold", my guess is they can go for a limited online for silver users, and the gold users having all the good (and pro) things.

But I will edit the first post because the topic is not clear.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well, but if you look my list, I'm not saying something like "eh!, the online will be the same for silver and Gold", my guess is they can go for a limited online for silver users, and the gold users having all the good (and pro) things.

But I will edit the first post because the topic is not clear.

That does make it clearly that the focus is on features and not business choices, but I'm still somewhat confused about the 'Live' distinction as opposed to just being apps. eg. Taking Scott's ideas:

Some of these I believe are more likely than others

-higher quality voice chat
-larger group chat
-picture-in-picture video chat
-overlays for displaying notifications from web apps like weather warnings, sports scores, stock ticker, email, calendar, social platforms
-picture-in-picture video from apps (youtube, netflix etc) and music streaming from apps while gaming (Pandora, Xbox Music, etc)
-store for user created content
-larger packet limit for online gaming enabling more players in a game session
-new algorithm for player matchmaking
-ability to save, upload user gameplay videos
-more player-to-player features for recommending games, "liking" content, rating content etc
-more Avatar shit that I don't care about
-3D video chat with Kinect
-better implementation of "Beacons"
-some achievements crap that I don't care about

A lot of those could just be apps with nothing to do with Live!, or only made available as a Live! subscriber. Which still muddies the waters of the discussion - is the possibility of YouTube PIP going to be a Live! enabled feature, or an OS feature?

Perhaps that's an overall issue with the XBox platform? It's unclear what's the box and what's the service, with MS liking to collate services under their Live! subscription where every other platform provides them as OS level functions (eg. Netflix is freely accessed on every other device). As such, it's hard to know where new features will come in, and whether new features should be discussed on the OS level or the service level.

 

[ERP]

Yes, or maybe they can lose some users. PS3 online is free, and people are getting free games with PSN+.

Assuming there is no change to PSN/PSN+ on the Sony side with the launch of a new platform.

 

[Billy Idol]

Assuming there is no change to PSN/PSN+ on the Sony side with the launch of a new platform.

Well, that is actually what I wonder myself. Sony must be super jealous, seeing those millions of gamers willing to pay MS for online play. If MS is keeping pay for play...Sony might just do the same! What will the press say? They are evil because they do same as MS now...highly unlikely?

I for myself as a user hope that online play gets free. I am not talking about advanced services like chat or something...just make the pure gaming free. If this is not an option, supply each bought game with an online pass that allows you to play the game online free for the first 10hours or so...at the moment on Live it is impossible to check out MP of a game...to see if you even like it!

 

[-tkf-]

Well, that is actually what I wonder myself. Sony must be super jealous, seeing those millions of gamers willing to pay MS for online play. If MS is keeping pay for play...Sony might just do the same! What will the press say? They are evil because they do same as MS now...highly unlikely?

I for myself as a user hope that online play gets free. I am not talking about advanced services like chat or something...just make the pure gaming free. If this is not an option, supply each bought game with an online pass that allows you to play the game online free for the first 10hours or so...at the moment on Live it is impossible to check out MP of a game...to see if you even like it!

If sony implements online with PS+ then i think it will be a mistake*, but i think they might plan to, because afaik they haven't really been that vocal about having something that is free while the nearest competitor charges for it.

*I have PS+ and think it's worth it because i get plenty of games and the cloud save has saved my ass from a fumble my kid did with a lego save. However, people that buy lots of games might see less of an advantage with PS+

 

[RobertR1]

360 has cloud saves also.

Not sure how profitability works out on PSN+ after payouts on the free games. It'd be interesting to see numbers.

I'm sure it's profitable but just would be interesting to see the breakdown.

 

[KongRudi]

I'm a sceptic that MS will start multiple SKU's of live subscription.
I think they're gonna launch with basically the same model as today, online play cost money and maybe a few more 'media-services' than now.

And then a few years into next gen, raise the price another 10$, from 59.99 to 69.99.
The tactic worked great this generation, and there were no vocal outcry against it.

 

[BRiT]

I'm a sceptic that MS will start multiple SKU's of live subscription.
I think they're gonna launch with basically the same model as today, online play cost money and maybe a few more 'media-services' than now.

And then a few years into next gen, raise the price another 10$, from 59.99 to 69.99.
The tactic worked great this generation, and there were no vocal outcry against it.

I think the only reason there wasn't such a large outcry is because users can still find deals on Gold subscriptions for $35 a year and they offer a family pack of 4 subscriptions for $100.

I can see MS offering a platinum level that includes an all you can eat multimedia content like movie and music rentals for a higher monthly cost.

 

[KongRudi]

I can see MS offering a platinum level that includes an all you can eat multimedia content like movie and music rentals for a higher monthly cost.

I don't see how they'll be able to compete with the ones allready providing such services, to garner the interest in such a service, i.e. Netflix, Hulu, etc.

 

[Scott_Arm]

A lot of those could just be apps with nothing to do with Live!, or only made available as a Live! subscriber. Which still muddies the waters of the discussion - is the possibility of YouTube PIP going to be a Live! enabled feature, or an OS feature?

Perhaps that's an overall issue with the XBox platform? It's unclear what's the box and what's the service, with MS liking to collate services under their Live! subscription where every other platform provides them as OS level functions (eg. Netflix is freely accessed on every other device). As such, it's hard to know where new features will come in, and whether new features should be discussed on the OS level or the service level.

Sure, some of those are OS features, but pretty much any online content that can be provided with a Live account would require OS support. I'm not sure how you separate the two, or why that even matters. To go online you need a Live account, whether it's free or paid. If the OS provides hooks to give notifcations, picture-in-picture, saving, transferring, streaming then I'd consider all of those features of Live. It's part of their online world.