I want threads talking how anti consumer is to charge for f2p games to play online...
Hahahahahahaha ok...They have been made before. But everything that MS is doing makes this a non issue.
No, it doesn't make a lick of sense to charge for online multiplayer unless your goal is to fleece your customers (which it clearly is I guess). But it should make no sense to us.
What is the weird Stockholm Syndrome gamers have about paying for online? Or are there just way more MS and Sony shareholders on this board that I would have thought?
If this is the case that's a pretty big price hike for live. They're gonna lose even more people.
They announced that but people are insistant that it's the whole online paywall going away which never made sense. It's probably going to be combined with gamepass basic.Haven't they already heavily implied that the gold paywall is coming down for f2p games? That would be a change.
The article title is bad for sure but they do put the quotation marks in the right placeI'd imagine any changes to Xbox online would come at, or soon before, the Series X launch.
The article itself is wrong, on that account.
*door creaks*
you dont need gold on gamepassI still believe is going away at least for F2P games. They would need to be very dumb to release a free Halo MP and lock it behind a paywall on consoles.
Again, I will be happy to eat crow if they do it, but I just cannot see them removing the paid online. There is no business reason to remove it. They make so much money, I can't see it going away unless they have another method to make money.
Sure, Xcloud/GamePass could take off on non-Xbox consoles but that's a big IF. Game streaming is by no means a guaranteed success in the next 1-3 years, especially with a global economic downturn. So it would be strange to me they'd remove the online fee requirement for non-F2P games with so much uncertainty about Xcloud in the future. If Xcloud is a smash success, has tens of millions of subscribers across a variety of platforms in a few years, sure, they'd have replaced that revenue source. But as is, I want to believe the insiders but IDK.
This is the same company that kept XBL Gold a requirement for F2P games in the 3 years AFTER Fortnite became the biggest gaming phenom since Minecraft/Pokemon, so I will not hold my breath for this type of significant change.
Yep. SOMETHING is changing. Which is only logical. Gold is redundant at this point.There is no way nothing is changing if they removed the 12 month option. This is just PR until they actually announce it.
Wait what?
By removing the 12 month option that cost $60 instead of $120 a month.
The yearly sub is gone, and the price is twice as high for monthly subs at 9.99 a month.
Get it for 30 then. :DBy removing the 12 month option that cost $60 instead of $120 a month.
Something is happening IMO — so it's either "free to play games won't require live" or its this.They want to get us mad right now so that we're overblown with joy next month when they announce it'll be free. I see you MS, I see you.