What does paying for Live get you?

bbb7002004 | June 17, 2008 | Blog | PC Playstation 3

Most would agree that the Xbox360 has the best online system on the market today with their Xbox Live service. However, with the continuing improvement of rival online systems on both PC's and the Playstation 3, is the annual fee of Xbox Live Gold Membership truly worth it, and what does it offer that the PSN and Steam don't? Read on to find out.

Until recently, Microsoft could brag about how Live was by far the most feature-complete online service on any platform, with a unified Friends list, the best online shop, voice and video chat as standard and a consistent and stable online experience. But in recent months there’s been a shift in the market, and even bigger changes are coming. Microsoft is the only player to charge for online play, and their policy has landed some of the best online games on the 360... but as PC and PlayStation developers offer comparable features at no extra cost, the Gold subscription starts to lose its shine. The launch of the PC’s Steam Community late last year and promises made by Sony at January’s Consumer Electronics Show have placed Microsoft on the back foot, and has all of us asking: what does your annual subscription pay for?

News Story attached to:

Battlefield: Bad Company [XBOX360, PS3]
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare [DS, PC, XBOX360, PS3]
Gears of War 2 [XBOX360]
Halo 3 [XBOX360]
Mario Kart Wii [Wii]
Metal Gear Online [PS3]
Super Smash Bros. Brawl [Wii]

25 comments | go to source (www.gamesradar.com) | Add to favorites!

favourite this article |

send to friend |

add alt source

Images about this story:

Comments

Comments with -10 or lower "thumbs" are removed from display.

1 thumbs!
Donnelly | June 18, 2008

XBL is the greatest bargain in video gaming alongside the Orange Box.

I find the (whopping) fee off 11p per day to be wholely acceptable for the service they provide.
- 2 thumbs!
  Red 9 | June 18, 2008
  
  Doesn't mean the competition won't be catching up with it. By the end, PSN will likely have most of the same features as XBL (unless MS ups their game), an for free, too.
  - 3 thumbs!
    Silent Storm | June 18, 2008
    
    That really depends on how far away "the end" is, and I doubt MS will just sit there idly.
    
    But if/when PSN does catch up to XBL, Microsoft may be inclined to drop the price, which is always a good thing.
  - 1 thumbs!
    Donnelly | June 18, 2008
    
    That's all good and well saying PSN will eventually have the same features as XBL, but until it does I'm going to carry on paying my £40 a year with a smile on my face.
2 thumbs!
Supernouva | June 18, 2008

Reading that article really made me rethink Live's "advantage" over its competition. It's no lie that PSN is quickly advancing in online functionality and catching up to Live. PSN is free, but of course all of its features are being paid for by Sony and third party companies. Unless third party companies and Microsoft can offer some groundbreaking feature worth the $50 that Live Gold users spend annually, it would've lost to PSN simply because PSN is free. Nobody likes to pay for stuff that they know they can get for free, and that's what this matter is turning into.
- 1 thumbs!
  Storm | June 18, 2008
  
  True, so long as it's free, it'll likely get people's attention. But to me, this goes like that saying, 'you get what you paid for.' Live is great, and though the PSN may be getting some similar features, I don't think they can top Live. The huge DLC (ranging from demos to movies), chatting capabilities (great for FPS games), easy and manageable friends list...the list goes on and on, for only $50...and that's for a whole year. It's less than what gamers will be spending on games throughout 12 months.
  - 1 thumbs!
    Red 9 | June 18, 2008
    
    I think it's a little more than just $50 a year...
    
    Anyway, I don't think PSN is skimping out on demos; there's plenty of 'em, whether they're immediately listed or not. Same goes for movies; you can't expect Sony to just immediately load every movie available straight to PSN, there's time needed for that.
    
    It's quite true that PSN is not up to par with XBL, but I believe I can speak for many when I say that nobody expected it to be 100% perfect straight from the get-go.
    - 1 thumbs!
      Play ISDF | June 18, 2008
      
      Actually it isn't really, I pay like that much for a year of gold, get 200 microsoft points, a spare headset, and a free full arcade game.
      
      As far as I'm concerned with Live, it's a great service and I don't mind paying just once per year to get gold. It's the same amount I'd pay for a game...so no big deal.
-2 thumbs!
Nath | June 18, 2008

Not sure how Xbox Live and the Playstation Online component really compare to the PC. Even if you assume that Steam is the only option that anybody has to play online (most games have their own) then it's still a free service.

It comes with the consoles that makers have a monopoly on the service and can charge at all, and you can't really compare that to Steam, which is not only free but also a small fragment of all online PC gaming.
- 0 thumbs!
  Guticb | June 18, 2008
  
  Steam and Xfire cover just about every XBL feature for free though. =/
  - 0 thumbs!
    Nath | June 18, 2008
    
    Yeah, they do. That's what I mean, sorry if I'm vague. There's no contest if you get the same thing for free.
0 thumbs!
tallteen86 | June 18, 2008

Ummmm, I have to argue with their interpretation of Point 5.....That you can play X-Box originals online (requires HDD).....Ummm, Silver users CAN'T do that (Correct me if I'm wrong), since it is ONLINE gaming, which is the whole point of GOLD....

Wel, moot point I guess, since the PS3 does the same thing, for free (For PS2 games though, not X-Box originals, of course, lol), so it would be excluded anyhow....

In any case, this article has pretty much says what I was thinking (but in a more well researched, concise manner)....The LIVE Gold subscription is NOT worth the cost....It may be a bit more stable in some cases, but it costs too much for it to be worth it for me....MAYBE if they dropped it to $15 or $20 a year, I'd get it, but that would be just because I will have 360 exclusive games that have online play >_> Gamers are paying so 3rd party devs with low budget (or not), can get their games online. Great for the devs, and in a way, for the users (games they like that would otherwise be free of online play, get it), but still, it seems kinda cheap of MS (and in the case of devs who could easily host their own games, them too) to do that.

Quie simply, Live Gold is all well and good, but not worth the price it is offered at....
- 3 thumbs!
  Donnelly | June 18, 2008
  
  "Quie simply, Live Gold is all well and good, but not worth the price it is offered at...."
  
  *bleep*ing hell, you can't afford 11p per day?
  
  I wouldn't like to see you when it's your turn at the bar.
  - 1 thumbs!
    tallteen86 | June 18, 2008
    
    I'd rather just, hmmm, I dunno, use that money to get another game?
    
    I also don't drink. I am not very social either, so that doesn't matter to me. Besides, this is more about about 'is it worth the money', which it isn't. Would you pay $50 for something that, to you, is only worth maybe $10 or $20 bucks to you? Maybe if you like pissing money away, you would....
1 thumbs!
Seproth | June 18, 2008

I just bought a PS3 (Yes, for MGS4). I've heard a lot of people say that PSN is free and does everything Xbox Live does. It doesn't.

Live is easy and streamlined. It's accessible at any time during any game. PSN drives me insane that I can't send messages or even see who's online without first going to the dashboard.

I'm not going into extreme detail, there are plenty of things that separate Live from PSN. They really don't compare Live is better.

Of course HOME could change that. Who knows? I wouldn't pay for two services though. Not that I think I will. If I'm forced to choose however I'll take LIVE everytime.

BTW, apart from it's fantastic downloadable market, Steam is pretty terrible. In my experience with it anyway.
- 1 thumbs!
  Red 9 | June 18, 2008
  
  Just be glad Firmware 2.40 is on its way.
3 thumbs!
NyffTotal90 | June 18, 2008

Xbox Live is definitely worth £40 for a whole year. Microsoft provide an awesome service with that. I am however pissed off that to connect wirelessly I'm going to have to shell out £55 *bleep*ing quid for a special adapter.
6 thumbs!
BANDITO ATTACK | June 18, 2008

it accesses you to an enormous assortment of games with active online communities. pretty much every xbox title is online enabled.
-2 thumbs!
Final Blade | June 18, 2008

_{I honestly don't really care if Gold is worth it, as long as it does what I want at the time than Im going to use it.

PSN for me is perfect, and sure XBL has many other options that it offers than PSN, but its options that im not going to be stressed about not having. Now if or when Sony releases 2.40 FW which has part of these options will I use it? Of course but its not like im dying without the option.

Good article though.}
7 thumbs!
Sereph | June 19, 2008

The article's points are perfectly valid, but one of the features it missed that XBL has is the only reason I'm willing to pay for it:

Stability.

I can't tell you how many PS3 owners I've seen complain about their favorite game being unplayable online for some stupid reason. In CoD4, it was random disconnects for no reason, on TF2, it was 10 times as laggy as the 360 version, on RSV:2 it was completely unplayable online, on GTA IV, again, random disconnects.

The entire time I've been playing my 360, I've been randomly disconnected only a couple of times, and I'm not quite sure I can blame that on XBL (as the net at my house tends to act weird and disconnect itself entirely for no reason, even on my PC).

I know that I can pop any XBL enabled game into my 360 and go play it for hours on end if I wanted to with no problems. Can the majority of PSN users say the same?
- 2 thumbs!
  Red 9 | June 19, 2008
  
  I can't tell you how many times I've tried to play Warhawk, only to find it won't connect. However, I've been fine since the last Firmware before 2.36.
- 0 thumbs!
  tallteen86 | June 19, 2008
  
  Yep, stability is one of the things I've been saying is great about Live (well, though it is just from what I've heard, not actually experienced first hand)....
  
  The PS3 DOES sign me out a bit much. It isn't so bad though. It is predictable for me:
  
  Sign out soon after turning on (PSN friends list doesn't load right. I DO have about 50 friends, so I'm near the limit).
  
  Sign out after quitting the game.
  
  Easy enough to get around both of these issues.
1 thumbs!
DragonMaster Dyne | June 19, 2008

PS3 online has a lot to improve upon before its even close to be as great as Live. The main things it lacks is the ability to view friends online in-game and to view/send messages during this time. The fact that they dont have this option really hurts Sony. Plus, gamer profiles are more detailed on the 360, the overall layout is more appealing, and shopping is less of a chore than the PS3.

It's 50 dollars a year. People should not be crying.
-4 thumbs!
GTA Legend | June 19, 2008

Well I like free stuff, but not free cheap stuff, if other systems are offering good free content then I would be more interested in those than the ones that cost money!
1 thumbs!
Daedric Prince | June 28, 2008

Xbox live is pretty awesome. It seems the only game that I ever have problems with is Halo 3 lag. COD4 and other games are fine, so I don't think that is microsofts problem.