Xbox Live Gold… what exactly are we paying for?
Xbox Live was an online gaming service that was released in late 2002 back when the original Xbox console was still in its early years. The Xbox was by no means the first console to attempt this – Sega attempted to start an online service with the Dreamcast, but due to the lack of broadband adoption at the time, the service fell short.
Originally, there was only one type of Xbox Live subscription – you had to pay a monthly or annual fee to be able to access the service, or you wouldn’t be able to access it at all. When the Xbox 360, the successor to the original Xbox console was released in 2005, a new type of membership was added. There was now a free version of the service called Xbox Live Silver (The paid version of the service being named Xbox Live Gold). The free service was very basic: You could download content from the Xbox Live Marketplace, create a friends list, and that was just about it. If you wanted to play games online, set up a private chat, or use something like the upcoming Twitter and Facebook features, then you’re going to have to shell out your cash.
But the question that i’m asking right now (and indeed, have been asking myself for a long time), if why do we have to pay for this service? Lets break down the benefits of the Gold membership, just to see what I mean:
- Play games online: Simple enough – you can play with people on the other side of the world if you wanted to, this is pretty much the bread and butter of Xbox Live. But well, how does it work? Every single first party game on the 360 (That is – games that are published by Microsoft) don’t use dedicated servers. Each one of these games uses a peer-to-peer networking system.
What does this mean? You’re effectively paying Microsoft to use your Internet Connection to host their games. Uh… something doesn’t sound quite right there, don’t you think? If anything, surely Microsoft should be paying me to host their games? Microsoft are even outdone by third party publishers in this regard – Electronic Arts have dedicated servers for the Battlefield games, and Valve have dedicated servers set up for Left 4 Dead. Two companies who probably get very little (if any) of the money that I spend on my Live subscription.
The most annoying part of this is that the peer-to-peer system doesn’t work very well. In Gears of War 2, if the host quits the game, the entire game ends for everyone. In games like Halo 3 or the upcoming Modern Warfare 2 (Which isn’t a first party game so I can forgive it slightly) where there’s a host migration feature, which means that when the host quits, you have to sit and wait in the middle of the game. Sometimes this can take a few seconds, but at times this process can take a good minute or two (Sometimes the game completely craps out during the process). Quite often this can have some adverse effects on the game:
Granted, the Battlefield games, which use dedicated servers aren’t perfect, and they can lag at times, but I find that dedicated servers make the game more fun. It results in less bullcrap occurring in the middle of a game, which means that you don’t get as frustrated as you can in, say, Halo, when some guy kills you through a wall. Simply put: In regards of online gaming, you’re getting pretty much nothing for your money.
Also, please don’t give me the whole “Dedicated servers would cost too much” bullshit. Microsoft are one of the wealthiest corporations in the world, we pay for Xbox Live, thus, there should be dedicated servers. I’m not a huge fan of World of Warcraft, but at least the people who play that game get their damn monies worth.
- Early access to game demos – Xbox Live Gold members get access to game demos a week before Silver members do. This is a nice benefit, but a gimmicky one. What kind of tool pays money to get access to something that they can get for free a week later?
- Twitter, Facebook, Last.fm, etc – Again, why pay for something that you can get for free elsewhere? Just about everyone with an Xbox probably has a PC. If you have a PC then you have a web browser (which is free), you can then type in www.twitter.com or something, and bam, you’ve got the same functionality as Xbox Live Gold members have, but 100% cheaper. Again, the Twitter and Facebook functionality is nice, but making people pay to use them is ludicrous.
This is the exact same functionality that you get out of the Twitter app on the 360, except on the 360 you have the joys of being able to spend an eternity typing out your 140 character message using a controller. Unless you paid for the overpriced Chatpad. Again, why pay to use something that works better on your PC, and is free to use there? The same applies to the Facebook and Last.fm functionality – it’s free on your PC.
And so that concludes my post. Microsoft may have gotten away with charging people in the previous generation of consoles, but with Sony and Nintendo offering similar services for free I think that Microsoft are going to have to start to step things up a bit, or they should make Xbox Live free. That said, I doubt that either will happen. Console gamers seem to like getting ripped off. In fact, writing this post has made me feel like a bit of a mug.
Flame Claw here,
Granted, Microsoft do provide a superior service to Ninty and Sony, however they don’t seem to realise that common folk like us don’t regularly buy £200 toilet roll, and we also don’t have much money to spend on overpriced accessories. Whenever I’m in some argument about why Xbox 360 > PS3, their only possible response in ‘Xbox online costs money’ where as their George Foreman grill can do it fomade XBL free, then they’d win this console generation by a mile.
flame95 said this on October 31, 2009 at 5:21 pm
First off, I hope your post Pokeh attracts more attention throughout the next couple of days, it is well deserving of it.
Anyway:
I completely agree with you Pokeh; the fact that there exists almost no definable, appealing, and or advantageous qualities between the different types of Xbox Live memberships is not only horribly wrong, but very detrimental to Microsoft’s image.
In comparison of course, there are many appealing qualities of the Xbox Live community compared with that of both PS3, and the Wii. The Xbox Live community has an unparalleled culture of interaction and fun; something that one might argue that that is what you are paying for.
But, the underlining principle is that: compared with the qualities of the free online console communities, Xbox live is lacking immensely; to the point that it becomes evident that you (the player) are paying for something that you are already paying for (internet service), but also horribly managed, and heavily unbalanced.
The sound of the name “Gold Membership” brings to a consumer’s mind, features like: more reliable connections, enhanced server processing, support for more than 16 players per game, etc. Though, unfortunately, this is far from the case.
Rather puzzling to say the least, despite Nintendo and Sony not requiring players to pay fees for online play, they still are capable of managing and supporting an online community of hundreds of thousands, while maintaining a pleasureable experience. Yet, Microsoft offers a less reliable, and much less pleasurable features while charging you for it. And despite having an income from online support, they continue to provide a most unattractive service.
It is unknown to any of us, I think, why Microsoft requires payment for a service that they don’t even control. We already pay for internet service, and yet Microsoft doesn’t even own servers for their most profitable games, much less any other game. Whether or not they are greedy, or are using the funds to provide for something outside the Xbox realm, it is clear that the Xbox Live community is not getting it’s money’s worth.
Yes, last year’s fall updates were enjoyable, but Netflix requires membership as well. The sound of a “Gold Membership” would seem to maybe allow at least a limited number of viewings per week from the blockbuster super-giant, but it doesn’t. And now, we’re going to be paying for features like Lastfm, twitter, etc., things that are all free.
Microsoft is heading in the wrong direction, but also in the right direction. For every step they take forward, it always seems they take two steps back. What they are doing right is that they are providing many more features that many people would find convenient, and enjoyable. But yet, the price tag still hangs from our angles like a ball and chain shackle.
I cannot say what it is Microsoft will do, if in fact if they even plan on doing anything. Either way, it is predominately clear that Xbox Live costumers are paying for an almost monopolistic service; one that provides unbalanced features while practically stealing from the costumer.
Again, thank you for the great post Pokeh, I hope that within the next couple of days, many more people will read it, and perhaps open some closed eyes to Microsoft’s unbalanced approach to online play.
Sincerely,
Caleb
Caleb said this on November 1, 2009 at 11:17 pm
This is a great post – just what I was looking for. I kept hearing reports that Battlefield 1943 and Left 4 Dead (2 games I play heavily) had dedicated servers, and I was beginning to question what I was actually getting when I paid for my gold membership. Now I realize they are the exceptions and not the rule – peer-to-peer matchmaking is the norm.
So what am I paying for? What features can I get on the 360 that I can’t get anywhere else? (btw, I’m trying to suss out my own feelings on this… this isn’t meant as a rebuttal or anything)
1. Community
I love the feel of the xbox community. I’m always checking to see who is on at any given time and Microsoft works hard to generate a community atmosphere. I have very little experience playing on the PS3 network, but my impression is that the community is not as cohesive and that Home is pretty lackluster so far. And the Wii’s online is so gimped as to be laughable.
2. Gamerscore/Achievements
I know, I know, this is pretty silly, but what can I say? I enjoy unlocking achievements and seeing my GS go up. A small perk which I could live without, but I like it anyways.
3. Netflix
Caleb mentioned this in his comment, but I have to say that I use the living heck out of that service. My kids watch videos on it all the time, I can access full seasons of South Park and Lost whenever I feel like it… honestly, the $170 I pay yearly ($50 gold + 12 months Netflix) is almost worth it to me, I use the service so much. Granted, the PS3 is now getting Netflix, so this becomes a moot point, but for a while the Xbox was the only way to access this kind of service from your living room (no, I do NOT like watching TV in front of my computer).
4. Exclusives
A nasty word, I know, but there it is. If you like playing Halo 3 multiplayer, you only have one option. Same for Left 4 Dead, which I adore. And no, I don’t consider the PC to be an alternate option. The price to buy a rig that can run the game (I’m a mac person, so spending money on a PC is distasteful to me), combined with the fact that I don’t want to play games while sitting at a desk, makes the Xbox the only choice. Is $50 a year worth it to play versus mode in Left 4 Dead 2? Yes, yes it is.
Xbox Live is, to me, worth paying for. Yes, I would rather it be free, and yes, Caleb’s comment that “the price tag still hangs from our ankles like a ball and chain shackle” feels very appropriate, but when I consider all of the options, it is the best value for me, personally. Will that always be the case? Maybe not. Microsoft needs to take all of their Gold Membership booty and start upping the ante. Ideally, they need to start perfecting the multiplayer experience so that it is, bar none, the best option around. Additionally, they could start charging a bit less – $25-$30 sounds about right. But you know what? I’m going to pay that $50 bucks anyway, so why would they lower the price?
The PS3 could quickly become the best online experience, primarily because it matches the 360’s and it is free. It’s not quite there yet. But come the next console generation, Microsoft better have its game together.
Evan Derrick said this on November 4, 2009 at 5:56 pm
P.S. I just realized the irony in my “I’m a mac person so buying a PC is distasteful to me” statement. My only defense is that I view the 360 in a different light than a PC running a Windows operating system.
Evan Derrick said this on November 4, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Great information, thank you for sharing
Xbox Live is really worth paying for!
All Xbox Games said this on November 29, 2009 at 12:33 pm