• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Xbox Live to Cost $100?

Netflix just announced for the PS3, so.......Microsoft needs to cut the price of XBL.
 
Meh, I don't mind paying for Live. It allows me to play games with a very close friend of mine that lives in Alabama. It's a cheaper way to stay in touch than long distance.
 
I think that if PSN was still the joke that it used to be, then Microsoft would have no problem raising the price of Xbox Live. However, with exception of things like cross game chat and a party system (which are in the works), PSN is essentially on par with Xbox Live now and is free. And with the arrival of Netflix on the PS3, I do think that Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm will eventually arrive on the PS3 as well next year.

You can't justify a $100 price tag when your competitor offers the exact same thing for free. If anything Microsoft is going to have to cut the price of Xbox Live, not raise it.
 
Isildur´s Heir;17647318 said:
Netflix just announced for the PS3, so.......Microsoft needs to cut the price of XBL.

No, the people that want the price cut need to get a better paying job so they can afford to spend $4.17 a month.
 
I think that if PSN was still the joke that it used to be, then Microsoft would have no problem raising the price of Xbox Live. However, with exception of things like cross game chat and a party system (which are in the works), PSN is essentially on par with Xbox Live now and is free. And with the arrival of Netflix on the PS3, I do think that Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm will eventually arrive on the PS3 as well next year.

You can't justify a $100 price tag when your competitor offers the exact same thing for free. If anything Microsoft is going to have to cut the price of Xbox Live, not raise it.

I agree. Microsoft can't justify a price raise if PSN remains free, and start offering services that Live has (such as Netflix). I thought the free market is supposed to help keep the prices down, not up.
 
I think that if PSN was still the joke that it used to be, then Microsoft would have no problem raising the price of Xbox Live. However, with exception of things like cross game chat and a party system (which are in the works), PSN is essentially on par with Xbox Live now and is free. And with the arrival of Netflix on the PS3, I do think that Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm will eventually arrive on the PS3 as well next year.

You can't justify a $100 price tag when your competitor offers the exact same thing for free. If anything Microsoft is going to have to cut the price of Xbox Live, not raise it.

Again, it's Pachter. The $100 thing is his speculation at adding another level on top of the existing service.

Meaning: Silver (free), Gold ($30), Platinum ($100).

If $100 meant something akin to a Netflix for Games, then I could see the value in that. They already offer something similar with their Zune Pass. If they had unlimited games and music, I could see a lot of people willing to pay that, especially since you can find deals on these things relatively easy.

Personally, I could do without the cross game chat/party system. With how difficult it can be to get a NAT 2, it's pointless. The main thing that's missing for me from PSN are the demos for every title. That's just simply inexcusable, IMO at this stage.

I would buy a lot more PSN titles if I could sample them. I can see why they do it being the free network, but a little investment goes a long way. To put that burden on the developers is stupid.
 
I think that if PSN was still the joke that it used to be, then Microsoft would have no problem raising the price of Xbox Live. However, with exception of things like cross game chat and a party system (which are in the works), PSN is essentially on par with Xbox Live now and is free. And with the arrival of Netflix on the PS3, I do think that Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm will eventually arrive on the PS3 as well next year.

You can't justify a $100 price tag when your competitor offers the exact same thing for free. If anything Microsoft is going to have to cut the price of Xbox Live, not raise it.

This.

As i said in another thread, Live will soon be overshadowed by the PSN. Once cross game chat and a party system arrives, Live will be damn near irrelevant, unless they drop their price to $0. There will be NO reason that MS needs to charge when Sony is doing the same thing for free. Live is finished.
 
Microsoft just responded to the all PS3 Netflix deal, and it goes like this:

"The Netflix experience on Xbox LIVE is unique and reflects our commitment for social entertainment. We believe we offer an experience today that is a generation ahead of what others are offering," the spokesperson said. "For a little over $4 a month Xbox LIVE Gold membership is hands-down the best value in home entertainment, and gives you exclusive access multi-player gaming and early demos as well as Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, Last.fm, "1 vs 100" and more."
In other words, there will be no dropping of the Xbox Live Gold membership requirement for Netflix.
And Facebook, Twitter and Last.fm will be for "goldies" only



I call it BS.
The one thing good about the PS3 gaining momentum and start to sell it´s because it makes Microsoft look around and see that they can´t make things as they please, and that they can´t live on Halo alone.
Of course that, if the PS3 momentum fades away in a couple of months, we are all f***ed, because Microsoft will increase the Xbox Live Gold membership, because the Playstation becomes nothing more than a joke, and MS can do anything after that.
My call, at this point, if the PS3 continues to sell and there is no reason to think otherwise, by Q3 2010, Microsoft will drop the xbox live gold completly.
The question is, will their service get hurt in the process, because, for all i know, the gold members are the ones paying for the quality of the service and XBLA games.
 
Again, it's Pachter. The $100 thing is his speculation at adding another level on top of the existing service.
I think Pachter makes sensible predictions, they just don't go his way :awesome:

Meaning: Silver (free), Gold ($30), Platinum ($100).

If $100 meant something akin to a Netflix for Games, then I could see the value in that. They already offer something similar with their Zune Pass. If they had unlimited games and music, I could see a lot of people willing to pay that, especially since you can find deals on these things relatively easy.

Personally, I could do without the cross game chat/party system. With how difficult it can be to get a NAT 2, it's pointless. The main thing that's missing for me from PSN are the demos for every title. That's just simply inexcusable, IMO at this stage.

I would buy a lot more PSN titles if I could sample them. I can see why they do it being the free network, but a little investment goes a long way. To put that burden on the developers is stupid.
Xbox Live should be cutting it's price, not raising it. Regardless. PSN is not the joke it used to be and it's absurd that you're paying $50 in the near future for Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm.
 
Paying for LIVE means 3 thing, imo:

- People like the Xbox altogether, and are willing to pay to have everything
- People argue, but they actually don´t think $5 a month is very expansive
- People don´t care that much for multiplayer, because, if they did, they would go to the PS3 where it´s free.
 
Isildur´s Heir;17649016 said:
Paying for LIVE means 3 thing, imo:

- People like the Xbox altogether, and are willing to pay to have everything
- People argue, but they actually don´t think $5 a month is very expansive
- People don´t care that much for multiplayer, because, if they did, they would go to the PS3 where it´s free.


Or in the logical world we live in:

- People have close friends out of state that they want to play games with and both have 360s and not PS3s and see no reason to drop the money for a PS3 just for free online gaming when fifty bucks a year isn't that horrible and also cheaper than long distance.

At least that's why I pay for Live quite happily. :yay:
 
I think Pachter makes sensible predictions, they just don't go his way :awesome:

Sometimes. Either way, it keeps getting reported as fact, when it's speculation. FUD, in other words.

Xbox Live should be cutting it's price, not raising it. Regardless. PSN is not the joke it used to be and it's absurd that you're paying $50 in the near future for Facebook, Twitter, and Last.fm.

Paying $50 for Xbox Live is the same as paying full price for overpriced Blu-Ray discs. There's places to find both much cheaper. Most people tend to double up on their subscriptions, so when it's on sale for $30, most go ahead and pay a year in advance.

Again, my main reason for using XBL as my primary online system is because of the NAT 2 issue (why play online if you can't coordinate with your teammates?) and the lack of demos. Fix those two spots and I'll play more on PSN. As it stands, I've got another two years left on my sub (one free through referrals, one $30 :P) so I'm not worried.

If Xbox is expected to drop price to line up with Sony, Sony should offer demos for everything at their own costs to line up with Microsoft. You can't apply that logic to one without applying it to the other.

Is Sony still charging for Qore (demos) these days? I forget.

PS - Technically you're also getting 1 vs. 100 as well.
 
Again, my main reason for using XBL as my primary online system is because of the NAT 2 issue (why play online if you can't coordinate with your teammates?) and the lack of demos. Fix those two spots and I'll play more on PSN. As it stands, I've got another two years left on my sub (one free through referrals, one $30 :P) so I'm not worried.
The demo library isn't lacking, it tends to be on par outside a few here and there that Live gets or gets first, but I don't think there's an excess of demos one has over the other of retail titles.

Unless you mean Arcade/PSN titles

If Xbox is expected to drop price to line up with Sony, Sony should offer demos for everything at their own costs to line up with Microsoft. You can't apply that logic to one without applying it to the other.
Okay, I assume you have to be talking about XBLA/PSN titles then, because I'm pretty sure there aren't demos for every retail title for the 360.


Is Sony still charging for Qore (demos) these days? I forget.
Qore isn't demos, Qore is a 'show' of sorts that Sony puts together for PSN. Sometimes they offer first access of some demos to Qore subscribers or first dibs on betas, but I don't think there's every been an instance when a Qore demo offer (though beta offers I'm not to sure of) didn't eventually come up for the general public for free, and if there has it's definitely the exception rather than the rule. And I don't think that's all that frequent a tendency, either
 
Last edited:
If MS thinks they can up the price without losing so many subscribers it negates it, they will. Tho, IMO, while possible I'd put it in the improbable list. They want to continue to gain ground, Sony is finally getting it's mojo back, and Nintendo is still kicking ass, I doubt they'd price hike now. If they do raise it it will be incrementally over the course of 3 or so years rather than a straight price jack.

MS charges for an HD-DVD drive, wi-fi, harddrive (in some models), and online while all of those came standard with the PS3 (tho the PS3 costs more). It's not out of the realm of possibility since MS makes up for selling the 360 cheap by nickle and diming, I just doubt IF they did that it would be anytime soon.

Plus their $199 price point is on all of their commercials. If they raised it to $100, that would put their cheapest model at that same price point as a 120GB slim, and by the second year it would be $100 more.
 
Last edited:
BTW MS did respond,
http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/news...100p-y-in-next-couple-of-months-$1336017.html

Microsoft has responded to this speculation with the following comment: "I don't foresee a scenario where we're going to double the price of LIVE anytime in the next couple months," Microsoft spokesperson David Dennis told PCWorld. A little worrying. We would have preferred; "we're not going to duoble the price EVER,"but you can't have everything.

I agree with it being better if MS just flat out denied, non-answers like that bug me. "Well we can't deny, but we don't see it in the cards in a few months if that helps". The original article never said soon, just that he thought it was inevitable.

MS has to realise a price hike would put off customers. I still doubt they would, but MS's response is a little puzzling considering 2 E3's ago they claimed victory over the PS3 (by that I mean they're not afraid of stating bold absolutes).
 
Last edited:
The HD-DVD drive was entirely optional and was not required to play games. Not everyone uses wi-fi, so I have no problem hooking my 360 to an empty slot on my router. I worked the wire under the carpet, leave it plugged in and I don't even know it's there now.

Again with the online, while I don't bother with the multiplayer aspect of Live (which goes back to college and playing Half-Life and Counter-Strike and being bored by doing the same thing over and over, and then looking at other games with multiplayer and seeing that it's essentially the same thing over and over with whatever graphic skin the developers use), for those that do, the $50 yearly fee for the service averages out to $4.17 a month. If one cannot afford that, then they certainly could not afford the purchase of a video game console and games for it.
 
Again, it's Pachter. The $100 thing is his speculation at adding another level on top of the existing service.

Meaning: Silver (free), Gold ($30), Platinum ($100).

If $100 meant something akin to a Netflix for Games, then I could see the value in that. They already offer something similar with their Zune Pass. If they had unlimited games and music, I could see a lot of people willing to pay that, especially since you can find deals on these things relatively easy.

Interesting rumor over at Kotaku about a possible survey where Sony is looking to add a premium subscription model to PSN -- something along the line of what I outline above :D
 
My whole issue with xbox live is that you are paying your internet on top of that and they don't offer private servers...your basically paying for there version of a facebook with there apps etc...just called xbox live...i wouldn't give 50$ a month for facebook, so why should I with xbox live? i mean realistically it is cheaper than long distance but long distance is ridiculously over priced as is...
 
My whole issue with xbox live is that you are paying your internet on top of that and they don't offer private servers...your basically paying for there version of a facebook with there apps etc...just called xbox live...i wouldn't give 50$ a month for facebook, so why should I with xbox live? i mean realistically it is cheaper than long distance but long distance is ridiculously over priced as is...


Yea i know what ya mean. I dont really have a problem paying for Live because it works so well. Im signed up to both Live and the PSN and even simple things on the PSN, like finding and messaging your friends is a hassle compared to Live. So the way i look at it, PSN is what you'd get if Live were free and to me, that 50 bux a year is worth it.
 
I think it'll happen. Not with the current gen.

But the next-gen consoles? The Xbox 720?

Yeah, I think they will try it. They'll pitch us on it, and pitch us hard. Probably push on how revolutionary the 720's attached and hybrid Natal capabilities "change" the game and whatnot.

I don't have gold just b/c of the price. For the price to have GOLD, I just spend that money on a game instead really.
 
The only way I could see them feasibly doing this on the Xbox 360 is if they offer a third option above Gold with a lot of added value. But like I said at the beginning of the thread, I really don't think it's going to happen. If anything, with the way Sony is quickly catching up, they'll probably go the other way.
 
It's less than 5 dollars a month. It's really not much to spend.

I agree.

I just don't have the extra cash to splurge. When I find myself with the money, I go for a game instead. I was just pointing out that I've got trouble with going gold now, at $50, so I can't even imagine trying to go gold at $100 in a few years.

Course, I might be better off money-wise in a few years too.
 
With my free time at home dwindling down due to family & kids, I don't really think I'll renew my Gold membership when it is expired. I had great time playing ROTF and SFIV on Live against real opponents, but knowing that PS3 owners can play online as well and for free still irk me as a 360 owner.
 
Last edited:
Why in the world would I want to pay $100 a year to play with people who yell all the time, and do nothing but call you a *** when you win. If I wanted that I'd become a teacher and get paid.

Man, I miss the old Xbox Live. :csad: Before all the dumb people joined.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"