Which of course can only be accessed with xbox live, so add another $60 a year on top on the game pass subscription. I already pay a premium fee for something that could (and should) be accessible out of tge box, and now they want us to pay a premium fee to access a library of games you won't even own.
I get that it sounds like a good deal, like EA access sounds like a good deal, but it's only that as long as you're willing to pony up the cash every month as opposed to just purchasing the games that appeal to you.
English
-
This all means nothing when you consider how you don't need to purchase it and you don't need live to use it. I know the store I went to when mom rented me games charge about $5 to rent a game for 2 days. With this I can have 100+ games rented for $10 for an entire month. Doesn't seem like a bad deal at all to me. I'm pretty sure that if you want to subscribe you can subscribe for a single month and cancel at the end.
-
Except it does matter when enough people buy into unsavory business practices. Either way I've said my peace. I'm not trying to dictate how people spend their money, only expressing a view that I don't see this as healthy for the end user.
-
Edited by Leo687: 3/2/2017 6:29:12 PMCan you clarify 'unsavoury' because near as I can tell all this does it cut out the middle man. In the U.K. One of the only game rental places charges £21 a month to rent two games. MS is giving us the better deal by having it be A. Lower in price and B. Unlimited downloads per month. Let's say I complete 1 game a week, that's £10 for four games I would have otherwise had to spend £42 (if I rented two games from the rentals place.) or 4x£45-£50 per game if bought. Once again your 'unsavoury' needs clarifying.
-
Edited by DecidingReaper: 3/2/2017 6:43:59 PMWell holy crap your UK rental places beat out MS by a lot. Also, as stated before I view this service in the same manner as microtransactions in triple a titles. I don't like the idea of charging a premium fee on top of a premium fee on top of paying the ISP. Homestly this just seems like an attempt to shut down video game resales and rental services. In the US we are very antimonopoly and therefore this should be viewed as problematic. Either way, all I'm saying is that while initially presented as a good deal looking into it more in depth no matter what your opinion is warranted. Why are skeptics getting hate for looking at this through a similar lense as the DRM issue when the console announced?
-
I think skeptics are getting a hard time due to it being optional with no expectation to use or pay for the service unless you WANT to so manning about it is un needed even if it's an attempt to explain to others why it's a bad deal. Like I said personally for me it's a good deal £10 a month cancelable at any time with a library of games which I'd have to pay double to rent elsewhere and usually the max is two games at once. Yeah in the UK we get screwed over a fair bit (not that other countries don't.) prices are rarely balanced for exchange rates meaning a $150 edition of a game is £150 here. Rental wise there's only a couple choices which only do a one or two game rental programme even then you rarely get one you wanted to play and we stiffed over for edition exclusives like Halo Wars2 in the US you get two pins/metallic badges same for Australia but in the UK all you get is two blitz cards packs. It's as if Devs don't want our money lol.
-
I've always found it wierd when people say they paid £60 for a game. That's out right highway robbery imo. Thank you for enlightening me on this particular aspect of things, as I live in the US and am almost entirely ignorant of the European market.
-
I still disagree because of various reasons. I nonetheless respect your opinion and thank you for keeping it peaceful.
-
I try to respect people who are respectful
-
Except you only need Gold to play online with this service... Any single player titles should be fine, I don't have gold and I can get it in Insider.
-
Edited by DecidingReaper: 3/1/2017 10:42:01 PMThen I stand corrected at least on the point of single player. I still believe the game pass to be an extremely anticonsumer concept. [spoiler]I'm old school I guess. I still buy hard copies unless there's a steep discount on digital download.[/spoiler]
-
To each their own.
-
Oh no! They're forcing us to [i]pay for their products and services?![/i] Lets take this back to 4th grade economics. They are the producers, we are the consumers. They have a product. If we want that product, then we have to pay whatever amount they choose in order to get it. If you don't like that amount, DON'T BUY IT. If you have something that people want, are you going to give it away for free? No, so stop acting like it's unreasonable for them to not give you free stuff. How about you go through the time and effort to design and maintain the XBLive network, and then tell me you don't want to charge people money to use that network. Why the F[b]U[/b]CK do people think that they're entitled to things like this because they paid for something else? You pay for access to their service. That's it. That's all your $60 a year includes. Anything else is extra, and it's well within their rights to charge for it.
-
Because it's a premium service that shouldn't be a premium service. Something as basic and fundamental as online play should be free. Look to Steam. They don't charge for online services. Why? Because it's this thing called pro-consumer practices. Microsoft is not providing these online services. Game developers are. Did Microsoft create and maintain EA's dedicated servers for Titanfall 2? No? So why I have to pay Microsoft to use those services? Shouldn't the price be bundled in with the price of the game? Oh that's right, it is(on PC). The only difference is that on console, Microsoft and Sony want that extra money. Sony used to offer free online play until they realized what a gold mine it is to charge for it. People like you won't even complain, you'll gladly accept it. Bottom line is: [b]You have to pay a 3rd party for a service they don't even offer, just to be able to play a game you already paid for, on a system you already paid for. [/b]
-
Never said I was entitled to the service. Never said game pass should be free. Simply pointing out this is nothing more than a bullshit ponsy scheme to fleece you out of even more money that you work hard for. Furthermore, if we as gamers want to change these kinds of practices it's important for us to recognize that we are feeding into the crap and stop purchasing a bill of goods just because it's there and Microsoft tells us it's a bargain. -blam!- you sir for calling me entitled when all I'm trying to do is point out these anticonsumer practices like game pass, console exclusives, microtransactions in triple a titles, premium access when you already pay a premium for internet access. I do understand how economics works and am pointing out that as the consumer can change how companies see these practices, you on the other hand assumed I was demanding free shit and felt the need to comment without pulling ypur head out of your ass for two seconds to understand how these things hurt the consumer. You want to blindly shell out more money for crap you don't need, go right ahead, there's absolutely no one telling you how to spend your money.
-
I never said that you said you wanted the game pass for free. I was clearly saying that you wanted LIVE for free. [quote]I already pay a premium fee for something that could (and should) be accessible out of tge box[/quote] What exactly was this supposed to mean then if you didn't mean Live should be free? XBLive is available "out of the box," so yes I assumed you were saying it should be [i]free[/i] out of the box. Going on an anti-corporation rant about how big business is hurting consumers is a pretty dumb way to weasel out of why you were originally saying. Peppering constant insults into what you're saying is also pretty damaging to any argument that you may be trying to convey.
-
You really are a special kind of window licker aren't you? The anticonsumerism rant is the entire point of both posts. And yes, I think it's stupid as all hell to charge a premium charge to be able to play multiplayer. It was no extra cost on psn for ps3 and is no extra cost for pc. As for peppering in the insults, I feel no need to be cordial with people like you.
-
[quote]Oh no! They're forcing us to [i]pay for their products and services?![/i] Lets take this back to 4th grade economics. They are the producers, we are the consumers. They have a product. If we want that product, then we have to pay whatever amount they choose in order to get it. If you don't like that amount, DON'T BUY IT. If you have something that people want, are you going to give it away for free? No, so stop acting like it's unreasonable for them to not give you free stuff. How about you go through the time and effort to design and maintain the XBLive network, and then tell me you don't want to charge people money to use that network. Why the F[b]U[/b]CK do people think that they're entitled to things like this because they paid for something else? You pay for access to their service. That's it. That's all your $60 a year includes. Anything else is extra, and it's well within their rights to charge for it.[/quote] Well Steam/Valve don't charge money for their services. What sets XBL/Microsoft apart?
-
Two things: 1. Why do people always quote the entire comment they're replying to? I could understand picking out a specific line or two for clarity when arguing a point, but not the entire thing. That's just obnoxious. 2. The simple answer to that is this: Steam is basically eBay for digital games. They just host a store for developers to sell their games on, and they take a percentage of those developers' profits as payment. There are other, more complicated aspects too it, but that's the basic idea. They don't have an in-depth social/entertainment network like XBLive or PSN.
-
you took economics in 4th grade? dang that is an advanced school
-
Well it was an American history class, but there was a chapter on the economy.
-
Only for MP. Solo games and campaign can still be played without XBL, just like with hard copies and DDs.