No More On-Time Free Content and Demos for Xbox Live Silver Members

[randomnut]

The thing is, after PS3 came out with FREE online access, MS really should be doing something to make Live seem worth paying for instead of just stripping silver users.

Dedicated servers, more bandwidth etc would be money well spent.

[(Spork)]

/shrug no biggie

[Mando]

Wow, this is so gay, i never really got into live but i do enjoy the demos, pffft, more reasons not to get a live subscription, jerks

Lets look at the costs though ?39 for 12 months is literally nothing in a year. I never understood why they even had a silver membership to begin with, we didnt with the original Live on the old black box. Its less than the price of 1 game for the 360.

I pay more than that for a fileplanet account or lotro subs!

[Spookie]

or lotro subs!

Can't really compare an MMO which gives patches, new content and support to a P2P networking service tbh.

Saying that I wouldn't mind paying ?10 for live if I got my downloadable content for free. More chance of winning the lottery though!:pp

[CY:G]

Lets look at the costs though ?39 for 12 months is literally nothing in a year. I never understood why they even had a silver membership to begin with, we didnt with the original Live on the old black box. Its less than the price of 1 game for the 360.

I pay more than that for a fileplanet account or lotro subs!

It might not be much to you, but when you are trying to live frugally every bit counts, and you tend to appreciate the free services, i cant really justify the price of live for demos, as i said before, i tried online console gaming and i didn't like it for a lot of reasons. I still appreciated the demos tho, well at least they didn't eliminate them, i guess i just have a wait a week:((.

In my opinion Microcash should be implementing new services to further justify the price of live instead of removing the ones that were free to begin with.

[Kushan]

Services like what?

[lnmnky]

I'm on a core console and silver, so doesn't bother me one bit. :p Might renew my Gold for a few months over Chrimbo though, as I'll have time to play then.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

In my opinion Microcash should be implementing new services to further justify the price of live instead of removing the ones that were free to begin with.

Well I'd appreciate dedicated game servers for certain games... but is that up to MS or the Developer?

TF2 is non-existant on the 360, as most games are hosted by players - LAG central.

Demo's should be free and on-time within the same day (hours delay) or a day or two later.

Why don't they allow us to download demos through the PC and then play from memory stick/portable hard drive? That would alleviate some stress off Live servers?

And anyway, all us people paying for gold subscriptions should really give MS the money to have fast servers.

PSN can be damn slow at times, but then you can't really complain much as it's free to start off with.

And for all the flak PSN gets, the more it improves the less you can complain if you aren't paying squat to start off with.

Edited December 5, 2007 by Audioboxer

[CY:G]

Well I'd appreciate dedicated game servers for certain games... but is that up to MS or the Developer?

TF2 is non-existant on the 360, as most games are hosted by players - LAG central.

Demo's should be free and on-time within the same day (hours delay) or a day or two later.

Why don't they allow us to download demos through the PC and then play from memory stick/portable hard drive? That would alleviate some stress off Live servers?

And anyway, all us people paying for gold subscriptions should really give MS the money to have fast servers.

PSN can be damn slow at times, but then you can't really complain much as it's free to start off with.

Exactly, i can think of many more services Microsoft could implement in live, like you said, one of them could be Dedicated servers run by users, it would be awesome, it has worked great for the PC, i know of really nice communities that are based of game servers, be it Counter strike, call of duty or other games.

[Kushan]

Those dedicated servers are paid for and run BY those communities, though. That would require Microsoft opening up the Live platform to joe public, which just isn't going to happen.

If I recall correctly, they let EA run their own servers and they made a complete mess of it.

Also,

Why don't they allow us to download demos through the PC and then play from memory stick/portable hard drive? That would alleviate some stress off Live servers?

Not really, that just shifts the same issues from Live servers to PC download servers. Instead of putting on dedicated PC download servers, they'd be better adding extra Live servers.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Those dedicated servers are paid for and run BY those communities, though. That would require Microsoft opening up the Live platform to joe public, which just isn't going to happen.

If I recall correctly, they let EA run their own servers and they made a complete mess of it.

Also,

Not really, that just shifts the same issues from Live servers to PC download servers. Instead of putting on dedicated PC download servers, they'd be better adding extra Live servers.

Does that mean MS could/should allow sites such as Jolt/Multiplay/Wireplay ect to run TF2 servers for example?

They host a lot of the PC servers in the UK.

[Kushan]

Possibly, I mean it's not outside the realms of possibility, but it creates a series of problems -

Firstly, the game itself has to support dedicated servers. At the moment, Live games have been designed to work with the users themselves hosting the game and for now that works well enough, so why would they switch to a dedicated hosting model?

What's more, should they switch to such a thing, they need to find the hosts. While people like Jolt are likely more than happy to supply a few servers, they're not going to be willing to serve thousands of people.

Just look at Halo 3, the lowest number of people I've ever seen on that was about 150,000. That's a LOT of people to serve, requiring a lot of bandwidth and a lot of servers.

And then what happens 5 years down the line when not as many people are playing it? Do you turn the servers off? People still play Halo 2 today and no doubt people will still play it years down the line, but if it ran off dedicated servers, then it'd probably be shut down. And do you think the hosts are going to just sit back and let Microsoft take in money for gold subbys and not pay a penny for the hosting?

So you have to make a choice at which is better for everyone, at who hosts what and so on. I think in this generation we're too far in to make major changes like that.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Possibly, I mean it's not outside the realms of possibility, but it creates a series of problems -

Firstly, the game itself has to support dedicated servers. At the moment, Live games have been designed to work with the users themselves hosting the game and for now that works well enough, so why would they switch to a dedicated hosting model?

What's more, should they switch to such a thing, they need to find the hosts. While people like Jolt are likely more than happy to supply a few servers, they're not going to be willing to serve thousands of people.

Just look at Halo 3, the lowest number of people I've ever seen on that was about 150,000. That's a LOT of people to serve, requiring a lot of bandwidth and a lot of servers.

And then what happens 5 years down the line when not as many people are playing it? Do you turn the servers off? People still play Halo 2 today and no doubt people will still play it years down the line, but if it ran off dedicated servers, then it'd probably be shut down. And do you think the hosts are going to just sit back and let Microsoft take in money for gold subbys and not pay a penny for the hosting?

So you have to make a choice at which is better for everyone, at who hosts what and so on. I think in this generation we're too far in to make major changes like that.

Hmmm I understand.

Some games would be better off with dedicated servers though (Y)

Halo has enough people playing for things to go smoothly. As I said less populated games like TF2 don't have as many people playing and therefore suffer from really bad lag.

They wouldn't need to put a lot of servers in place for games like that.

MS should pay for the hosting in some way. It's one more thing to justify paying what we do for Live.

[Huleboeren]

Kushan: you know - dedicated and user-hosted can both exist at the same time.

No need to remove one of them..

[Kushan]

Yes that's my point, but then why bother supplying dedicated servers if any user can host the games anyway?

And even if you do, how do you stop players from just whoring the dedicated servers because they're too selfish to host their own once in a while?

Plus, the servers would end up getting populated by all of the best players, the matchmaking services at least try to put you with similarly skilled people, so only the elite would really benefit from it.

Don't get me wrong, I prefer PC gaming for these reasons, I like dedicated servers, I like being able to make my own custom games and play them online and have people come and join without needing to be invited (Take Note, Bungie!), but I can see so many reasons why Live operates the way it does.

What amuses me is that so many people claim Live is the best thing since sliced bread and nearly all of them are primarily console gamers. PC gamers like myself can easily see how flawed it really is.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Yes that's my point, but then why bother supplying dedicated servers if any user can host the games anyway?

And even if you do, how do you stop players from just whoring the dedicated servers because they're too selfish to host their own once in a while?

Plus, the servers would end up getting populated by all of the best players, the matchmaking services at least try to put you with similarly skilled people, so only the elite would really benefit from it.

Don't get me wrong, I prefer PC gaming for these reasons, I like dedicated servers, I like being able to make my own custom games and play them online and have people come and join without needing to be invited (Take Note, Bungie!), but I can see so many reasons why Live operates the way it does.

What amuses me is that so many people claim Live is the best thing since sliced bread and nearly all of them are primarily console gamers. PC gamers like myself can easily see how flawed it really is.

That was the first thing that confused me when I started Halo 3.

I expected to be able to go in a see a list of servers and choose which one I wanted.

I understand how it works now, but I guess im too hardened to PC gaming and prefer to see things the way it's done on the PC :laugh:

[Kushan]

You and me both, mate!

[DeadDean]

It just goes to show how money hungry microsoft are.

[what]

Uh, guys, Microsoft has always advertised the gold account as giving you exclusive access to new demos before non-gold account holders. If you're upset about this move maybe you should read about all the benefits a gold account gives you. It's not all about being able to play online, and it never has.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

No dedicated servers sucks. No other way around it. My experience with COD4 last night proves it.

Live getting hit hard because of the new update = COD4 MP running like ass with tons of lag and it being nearly impossible to find a game at ll.

This is the HUGE issue with having one integrated service.

And do not even get me started about TF2. A game I really was looking forward to playing, that has collected nothing but dust since I beat HL2:EP2 and Portal. Now I wish I only rented the Orange Box thanks to no dedicated servers.

I too come from a PC background, and as much as I love what Live can do, I have played online with the PS3, and it was always a pleasant experience online with Resistance and Warhawk, almost never experienced Lag, and much more like the PC, especially since there was a server browser. Why? Dedicated servers. Sony at least got one thing right there.

So MS really need to explore the option of dedicated servers down the road, hell, leave it up to the developer to run them, I do not care. At least make it an option.

Either that or the Halo MP Netcode needs to be given to every single developer who makes MP games for the 360.

[Kushan]

Are you sure the COD4 lag was caused by Live getting hit hard and not by there just being less people playing online because they all wanted to play with their shiny, new update?

I mean I don't know what live's backend looks like, but I find it hard to imagine it's all one big system, I would have thought there'd be matchmaking servers, content servers, etc.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

Are you sure the COD4 lag was caused by Live getting hit hard and not by there just being less people playing online because they all wanted to play with their shiny, new update?

I mean I don't know what live's backend looks like, but I find it hard to imagine it's all one big system, I would have thought there'd be matchmaking servers, content servers, etc.

Pretty sure considering it said, and it varied during my 3 hours of trying to play and then playing, but it said that anywhere from 45,000 to 80,000 people were playing online.

And everyone who was playing was talking about how their game was freezing when searching and they were having massive issues connecting. Literally everyone.

So although it may not be a huge number, 45,000 should be enough not to have issues.

And I do not understand either to be honest how it all works, but I have heard the term integrated use in marketing, by people, etc. So although I would also hope that they have separate servers for separate things, I also have to think one may affect another.

It was the same with Gears Of War as well actually. A major update came out, and it was hell to find a game to play and there were issues, for a few days actually. So I am also basing "my theory" on that experience as well.

[Kushan]

It's almost certainly related, that's for sure. But then again, that's why they only do it twice a year I suppose.

Steam isn't much better, any time a game gets updated on that you can pretty much be certain that you wont be able to play it online for a while. Hell, if the servers get hit bad enough then you can't even play your SINGLE PLAYER games >_<

[BajiRav]

I don't like this and I am Gold subscriber. :crazy: This is the old hated side of the Microsoft and the reason they get so much flak on the Windows side.

[Mistwaver]

Source: http://n4g.com/xbox360/News-90232.aspx

Who doesn't have a Gold account though? :wacko:

Still, this will probably tick off some people... and a week is a little harsh! How about a couple of days?

A lot of times I feel there isn't enough reasoning to keep my Xbox Live Gold account. I don't play on Xbox Live that often, and what other reason is there to have an Xbox Live Gold account other than to be able to play games online through Xbox Live? Making demos immediately accessable only to Xbox Live Gold accounts is a good start -- they should do the same with show episodes and full movies. This will definitely encourage me to keep my Xbox Live Gold account and not downgrade to Silver.