107 posts in this topic

Posted

Didn't see this posted here yet, Unless I missed it.

 

 

New gaming head Phil Spencer was recently asked about the problem on Twitter, and seemed open to changing the policy once he

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It'd be nice if he indeed makes this happen. And not just for the one, but for the 360 as well.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I've always felt that MS was trying to get to a point where they could push all apps that are the same as those out on other platforms from behind the paywall.

 

They obviously felt the apps added value to Gold at least at first, even if so many disagree with that from the outside. My guess was that as soon as they felt they were offering enough value to Gold outside of app access, they would finally bring about an app store that fits in with all of the other app stores out there.  The combination of more gaming features like Games With Gold and their soon to start rolling out exclusive media (those new shows they are working on producing as we speak) was probably just want they wanted to see take the place of app access as 'value' for Gold.  

 

Add that to the fact that MS is bringing the X1 into the 'One Microsoft' fold of universal apps as we speak (developers can already build the apps) and its clear they will have to change their policy on apps behind Gold.  A healthy app platform is not one that requires a membership to access.  MS really want to court all app developers, so I feel its more a matter of when, not if, MS will drop the paywall and let developers do as they wish. They are probably just waiting to announce it until they have the backend service for developers done (such as expanding the current windows store developer  portal for X1 apps)

 

I do think we could still see some apps offered free if you have Gold and either cost money outside of Gold or just not being available at all.  These would be apps made exclusively for the X1, with a unique experience that would not be comparable to some mobile app or something on the pc.  The ESPN app comes to mind as an example. I could see MS offering app developers support in exchange for offering an app free with Gold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The longer it goes on the more it hurts them.

 

"Not saying everyone will love everything, but we have plans." Doesn't fill me with confidence though. Almost a heads up they're going to do it half assed or it'll only apply to particular apps.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah but Gold accounts are a huge cash cow for MS are they not? While it's going to look silly once the same aps are shared across three systems, if you can for example use Facebook on Win8, WP8 but not XB1 for free where do they make they get the cash return back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What if... they kept free apps behind the Gold paywall... but made paid apps not require Gold? They get 30% of paid app revenue, so those could go through without a subscription.

It's not ideal, but it could be the plan they have that won't make everyone happy that he's referring to...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The longer it goes on the more it hurts them.

"Not saying everyone will love everything, but we have plans." Doesn't fill me with confidence though. Almost a heads up they're going to do it half assed or it'll only apply to particular apps.


You keep saying it hurts them but its not like they're struggling for subscribers, which is probably why they're not moving quickly to change this policy. There isn't exactly data to show that its hurting them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You keep saying it hurts them but its not like they're struggling for subscribers, which is probably why they're not moving quickly to change this policy. There isn't exactly data to show that its hurting them.

 

Never said it hurts their sub numbers or even how much they make. Obviously XBL is almost complete profit for them and that is why they're scared to change the model.

 

It hurts them because other platforms have higher numbers of users/activity for things like Netflix. It's not a selling point to tell your customers they have to pay a 2nd subsciption to access their apps. But I'm fully aware of your opinion on the matter so no point going around in circles again. Just glad to see Phil is seeing the light, even if it's not "perfect" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

About time, it's an old hat business model which worked when they were first to the scene, but years later when your direct (Sony/Nintendo) and non-direct competitors (TVs/Set top boxes/phones/tablets) do nothing of the sort you're outta touch.

 

The bullet points surrounding apps with XBL Gold really need to be scrubbed out and replaced with something else - Such as Games for Gold. It's not just affecting non-subs, subs as well as it's not value for money or an incentive any more, just an artificial wall. For a company at E3 daft about capturing the whole living room it sure was a missed opportunity not to rid of the paywalls. People will buy Gold for playing online anyway, I don't know why MS was too scared to change, Sony have been proving for a long time you don't need an app paywall to get premium subscribers. One of the main points being those that wanted to stay offline/SP only would simply use any one of the other 9000 devices in their home with Netflix anyway, hence as Andy said Netflix numbers being higher on other platforms.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

From that twitter post he really just makes a general remark.

 

I do hope they remove the apps from the pay-wall though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The longer it goes on the more it hurts them.

 

"Not saying everyone will love everything, but we have plans." Doesn't fill me with confidence though. Almost a heads up they're going to do it half assed or it'll only apply to particular apps.

 

 

I'm sure they will find a way to disappoint us.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The last tweet does not inspire any confidence that Microsoft has finally pulled their heads out of their asses. Revealing a policy change that only partially fixes the problem is arguably worse than keeping the status quo.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So much optimism in this thread...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So much optimism in this thread...

 

Once these "plans" are unveiled you'll see optimism if they're favourable for the consumer. Until then people will be skeptical considering how long this paywall has remained in place. What we don't want is okay guys, the apps like Netflix/YT/IE can now be used by anyone.*

 

*On a leap year and only when there is a full moon.

 

In other words it's all or nothing, no one is going to be impressed by one artificial wall being taken down and replaced by another. The sooner MS do it the quicker the message gets delivered even a company as powerful as MS cannot keep artificial walls like this in place - Looking at anything you might want to do EA...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The last tweet does not inspire any confidence that Microsoft has finally pulled their heads out of their asses. Revealing a policy change that only partially fixes the problem is arguably worse than keeping the status quo.

 

Well if you wanted to, you could take it in a positive way and say that MS is going to be making changes in some form.

 

 

 

So much optimism in this thread...

 

 

The reality is that most people around here and elsewhere have no love for MS thanks to the actions MS has taken.  In fact, most people posting here don't have a like for MS :laugh: beyond some passing interest in general news.

 

So when anyone from MS makes any claim, its met with skepticism. 

 

Once MS actually backs up the good words with good actions, then there will be no reason to be negative about it.  Until then, this is just the mood that will prevail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Once these "plans" are unveiled you'll see optimism if they're favourable for the consumer. Until then people will be skeptical considering how long this paywall has remained in place. What we don't want is okay guys, the apps like Netflix/YT/IE can now be used by anyone.*

 

*On a leap year and only when there is a full moon.

 

In other words it's all or nothing, no one is going to be impressed by one artificial wall being taken down and replaced by another.

 

I have a feeling they'll open up apps which don't require subs to Free accounts but everything else remains behind the paywall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What if I told you the wall was a good thing? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I have a feeling they'll open up apps which don't require subs to Free accounts but everything else remains behind the paywall.

 

Why not the opposite?

 

Many people's biggest issue is that apps that already require a paid subscription are behind Gold.  Let's say they started by just saying that any app that requires a subscription service does not have to be behind Gold? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Well first of all no matter what they do there will ALWAYS be someone not happy with it.   I do believe they will move things like netflix and hulu and amazon from behind the wall but most of it will stay.   At the same time i dont really care because I have 4 years still left on my xblive sub.  I dont know anyone with a XO that does not have xblive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why not the opposite?

 

Many people's biggest issue is that apps that already require a paid subscription are behind Gold.  Let's say they started by just saying that any app that requires a subscription service does not have to be behind Gold? 

 

Either way it makes no sense. You either charge people twice for the same content, or you make them pay for a free service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Either way it makes no sense. You either charge people twice for the same content, or you make them pay for a free service.

 

Oh I'm not saying it makes sense. 

 

I mean if we are assuming that MS will choose a method that makes no sense, then I was trying to think of which one makes the least sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Oh I'm not saying it makes sense. 

 

I mean if we are assuming that MS will choose a method that makes no sense, then I was trying to think of which one makes the least sense.

 

:laugh:

 

Well either way I hope they drop it soon (i.e this year).

 

Keep MP behind XBL, and then add value to the sub with GwG and the original TV programmes. Although, I highly doubt they're making the the latter free to view, but it again would make the most sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If Microsoft wants to do more than just gaming, they need to respect the people who may not always want to play games. I mean, hell, the Xbox One itself is designed in being the "one device to rule them all" sort of thing, but then you stick apps behind a paywall, say it's for quality purposes, and wonder why people might end up buying the console that's $100 cheaper.

 

It just doesn't make sense to me. I'm not about to give my customers the whole marketing spiel on why they need Gold if they're not going to play online, just to access a service they already pay for. I mean, would you? It just makes me cringe... :/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why not the opposite?

 

Many people's biggest issue is that apps that already require a paid subscription are behind Gold.  Let's say they started by just saying that any app that requires a subscription service does not have to be behind Gold? 

Either way they're making their service more complicated than it needs to be; which is always a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Remove apps that are free on the web, or that have their own subscription from the pay wall. Allow multiplayer games without Gold (that's what killed GfWL IMO). Just add a modest fee for each game sold that uses XfW or Xbox service and charge no fee. Maybe don't allow MP chat unless you have Gold, but allow the actual multiplayer gameplay. Xbox Achievements are better than whatever is going on with Steam as is the online community.

 

Steam means nothing to me but if MS does go with Steam, allow Steam to hook into Xbox achievements. My Steam profile and achievements there will never mean anything to me. Steam is to Xbox and XfW as Linux is to Windows OS. I have no use for it unless it was the only option left. But I do understand why gamers killed GfWL and XfW. Too many greedy fees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.