Free multiplayer for silver Live members Comments by Robert Purchese

That's ok skillian, really.

What I do find funny, is that many ppl mix other issues with the said "value for money", or is it really a product I would enjoy.
I do systems administration for a living, Unix. And for that I go to a lot of Unix, Open Source, Linux conventions, and I meet a lot of funny characters with a grudge for MS, and some of them go a bit further, like no Nike shoes because they employ children, no Nestle Ice Tea because they didn't forgive Nigeria government debt to the company (and always that obnoxious pony tail)..., Life that way must be complicated.

edit: almost forgot, last one I went some character said I should drop the use of SuSE because that american company (evil?) named Novell bought them. uau!

miiiguel,

'no Nestle Ice Tea because they didn't forgive Nigeria government debt to the company (and always that obnoxious pony tail)..., Life that way must be complicated.'

Can you elaborate on that because I dont get it. Thanks

er..., I'll try (my english is not that good): there was this guy that told me he had a list of companies that would never see his money, and I started laughing when he said Nestle, and the reason was because they didn't forgive some african country debt (Nigeria I think). I really thought he was joking, but he wasn't.

10p a day for Live is good value in my book. If it gives you the best gaming experience then why not, for me it is about the games and how they play. Not who makes the machine, (they are all after your money in the end anyway) that's why I have (mainly)changed each generation so far (VCS, Amiga, PS1,Dreamcast,xbox,360), I wanted some amazing improvements from Sony's 'cell', but so far I have been dissapointed. Even Grant Tourismo is a poor last gen style game.
If you can't afford 10p then maybe you should get a better job ; )

Nestle have a very controversial history, and many people have boycotted their products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9...

I have nothing but respect for people whose personal morals influence their purchasing decisions. It may be complicated but I don't really see why it should be mocked.

@miiiiguel: i wouldn't compare anti-us sentiment/dislike of microsoft to the boycotting of nestle. there's a world of difference between disliking a company cos you find their business methods dubious or something, and not funding a company cos they actually put profit ahead of human life. try reading up a bit on the subject rather than laughing about it - here, there's even a handy wikipedia page to tell you all about why people don't buy nestle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestle_boyc...


all of that may be slightly off-topic for this comments thread...


edit: and completely pointless since skillian just posted the same link while i was typing...

I don't "mock" I just find it funny. I mean, they don't forgive a debt to a country that spends it's income in guns instead of spending with their own citizens... but ok... I guess everyone is entitled to try to find a way to feel less of a cog.

Although I do find a bit pretensious when someone thinks they have a higher moral standard because they carry a spread sheet around with the items they can and can't buy. What's the next level jihad ?

edit: I don't believe everything Wikipedia says, but then again it's just another tool for that job of trying to feel less of a cog. Just out of curiosity, in Wikipedia, choose boycot... *that'd be complicated* lol!

did you even read the wiki page? it's got nothing to do with forgiving debt or guns - it's about milk for babies and nestle's promotion of their baby milk formula over natural breast milk, with all the problems that entails... try reading the page.

your point about 'higher moral standards' and 'spreadsheet of items they can buy' is just plain stupid man. no-one ever said they had higher moral standards cos they don't buy nestle products, it's all about what you want to do as an individual - if you're not bothered about their actions as a company, then keep buying their products, fair enough. if it does bother you, buy an alternative product from someone else who's a bit less morally dubious. no spreadsheet required here...

as for not trusting what wikipedia says, well this all came about long before them - i haven't bought a nestle product for many many years, before i even heard of wikipedia - they didn't make this up. you can read the details anywhere, i just linked to wikipedia cos it's easy to find the info there.

^ the spread sheet comment was not aimed at anyone of you guys, was at that guy (once again I'm not judging his way of life, I just wished he didn't think I am a "capitalist pig" - I swear I could almost see one of those comic book's bubbles saying that). I mean, in 5 minutes he said: I should throw my shoes to the garbage; I should go dring tap water, and I should format my laptop. WTF ?!

well he's obviously a bit of a dick then!

i'm all for making informed product choices, and not buying from companies that are seriously dubious about their morality,but i don't preach about it to other people - what you wanna do is your own choice, innit?

yes, well I'm sorry if I went too far and too off-topic.

;)

yeah i think we may have strayed slightly from the topic in hand... ;-)

Nutella is from Ferrero.

FYI

Shadowrun is actually great. and was much maligned as it has no single player game and wasn't anything like the Roleplaying game. it has however been my game of choice to play for the last year. All over games have come and gone, and yet i still go back to shadowrun.

It'd be nice to see M$ use free live as a promotional tool more often.

Free live on multiplatform games, i.e. those that are available for the PS3 also. Keeping the exclusive4s for Gold members will keep the subs up.

Also, if that's too much for them they can simply restrict live play for silver members to certain days of the week, times of the day, days of the month, or months of the year.

Like an off peak service to make sure that their network capacity is not wasted during the troughs. Also, thay could give away free live play to silvers to encourage sales of certain Xbox Original games, like Burnout 3 and Outrun 2006 (please!).

It's like Carphone Warehouse buying Opal Telecom business to business then using TalkTalk to make the most of the network capacity by giving away free calls to residential customers. It grows the business and lets you sell additional services.

You still charge for some types of call / online play.

"For a limited time, we are offering free online multiplayer on Xbox 360 Games for Windows titles that offer Live cross platform play. This promotion won't last, so we encourage everyone to take advantage of it while they can."

I noticed a few things in this sentence and automatically knew that it's just another stupid business effort to claw more members and keep members happy. Just another scam which most people fall for.

1. Limited choice of games

2. Outdated games that no-one really plays on anymore and won't let them play on popular games as they'll lose out.

3. The word limited and the sentence This PROMOTION won't last

Oh how Microsoft make me sick.

@skillian

"this is a very long way from free multiplayer which is what you were suggesting. It's just free MP for three specific titles"

Read that back again and tell me if it still makes sense. To my ears, free multiplayer for three titles... sounds an awful LOT like free multiplayer. I say again, the clock is ticking. This is just the beginning.

Yes, it makes sense. This is not free multiplayer, unless we can also say DLC is free on Live just because there are a couple of free map-packs.

If you know something Kanga, stop beating around the bush and just tell us. But I'm guessing this is just speculation on your part, and this announcement doesn't really make your prediction any more or less likely.

"If you know something Kanga, stop beating around the bush and just tell us"

Hey, it absolutely is speculation. I have no insider info at all. This is just me observing the market and the industry and making a prediction. It just happens to be a prediction I have confidence in, so I present it very matter of factly :)

Also, the map pack analogy doesn't quite fit, because we are not talking about content here, we are talking about control of the delivery service itself.

Fair enough. I think you may well be right, and if PS3 starts to gain ground/overtake Xbox 360 then I wouldn't be surprised to see MS open up free multiplayer for all. I really hope they do it too, as I think online should be free for everyone, just like it is/has been for every other online-enabled system.

I just don't think this is much of an indicator of that happening. If anything, I think it's just appeasing those Xbox players who would rightly feel hard-done by when playing games together with PC gamers who haven't had to pay.

I tend not to think in terms of should and shouldn't. I tend to think that market forces are quite able to sort these things out in the long run. If people are happy to pay for XBLive (as many are, including me most of the time) then MS will keep charging for it. If people don't like that, they can vote with their wallet.

I just think that now is the time when MS have to start caring what the PS3 is doing. There was a time when the installed based of the PS3 was so small, MS didn't really have to react that much. Now the PS3 base is growing, MS have to consider every area in which it might appear to be more appealing to new and existing customers (I say existing customers, because MS aren't just concerned with selling new 360s. They also want existing owners to keep using the XBL service).

I'm not saying that paying for XBLive is a deal breaker for anyone choosing a console - far from it, but no company should ignore any aspect of their product that appears less appealing than a competitor's offering. MS have to continually examine whether the money they make from XBL subs is the most profitable angle to take, and whether making a few quid each month from each user is not costing them more money elsewhere in a less obvious way. If they drop the subs it wouldn't be a matter of just writing that money off, it would be more about finding another avenue from which they can generate the same income, in a way that is more palletable to a majority of customers.

Like I said, it hasn't mattered previously and most people still agree that XBL is ludicrously good value, but I feel in my cerebral bones that a change is in the wind.

Heh, I've had similar conversation with you before and I know you're a "market forces" kinda guy ;)

That's obviously the way to think about it, as MS are never going to make the decision one way or the other based on anything else but profit. The free Live Gold subs on PC show that they are willing to change their minds if the market doesn't accept their proposition.

I'd love to see Xbox users boycott the service for a few months, a little protest if you will, and I'm sure MS would offer it free to them too, but as you've said most users are happy paying for the service so that'll never happen.

The really interesting thing is that if PS3 had launched on time and in a less shambolic manner, PSN might have been a subscription system too. I think they had to offer free MP just because they were playing catch up, and MS might have to do the same if the tables begin to turn.

In Raphaels voice from TMNT:

We got the Foot Klan over heeere and the ninjas over heeere.

Mortal Kombat guy: FIGHT!

The guy who sings go ninja go: GO FANBOYS! GO FANBOYS! GO!

Great. At present my 360 is at Microsoft having its Red Ring of Death smeared with the Microsoftian version of Preparation H.
Does this news make me all fuzzly-wuzzly and happy-wappy with life? It f**king does not. /vent