Microsoft Disloyal to consumers.

[shaka]

I found this on the internet earlier, I believe that Microsoft is very disloyal and the way they treat their consumers is very messed up. Read this, tell me what you think.

" won’t pretend that this is a completely original idea and no one else has ever raised the question of why Xbox Live is a pay service. In fact, I used to be one of the people who argued against them and supported Xbox Live. But, with recent Xbox Live troubles and news, it’s becoming significantly more difficult to do this. Having taken the time to really look at the state of Xbox Live is making me have to start agreeing with the people who I used to argue against.



Let’s start with the recent Xbox Live downtime. It is, quite frankly, absolutely unacceptable for a pay service. Until a few days ago, my brother had a two week period where he could not recover his GamerTag from Xbox Live. That’s two weeks of no Xbox Live access whatsoever. He tried deleting the profile of his Xbox and recovering it again, but this didn’t work either. Now he couldn’t even access his game saves or earn any achievements. Although I had my account on my Xbox, that’s not to say everything’s been great. Like the rest of you, I’ve been experiencing a lot of trouble with Xbox Live. Inability to join games, sign in to Xbox Live, load the dashboard blades, sometimes problems bad enough to freeze my 360 entirely until I pulled out the Ethernet cable.



Yes, we’re getting a free Xbox Live Arcade game as compensation for nearly 3 weeks of Xbox Live downtime. Woohoo. No details have been given, and as a result I suspect that this free game will be a specific title or list of titles which Microsoft will choose. I feel that at the very least we deserve to be either refunded for a month of Xbox Live or given a free month on top of this. Think about it, if your cell phone service had trouble for a month, dropping calls, refusing to dial numbers, etc., you wouldn’t be satisfied with a free cell phone game. The first step would be a refund for that month and then some sort of compensation for the inconvenience on top of that.



Connection troubles aside, there’s other reasons why I feel Xbox Live shouldn’t be a pay service. As of March 1, 2008, Xbox Live Diamond will become an additional $6.95 fee. No thanks. Not only was this service close to worthless, but to charge for something that was supposed to be a benefit of paying for the Xbox Live service is absurd. It was pathetic as a freebie and to think anyone is willing to pay for this is ridiculous.



Next up, Xbox Live is full of ads. Even when you first boot up your Xbox 360, you’re greeted with ads on the Xbox Live blade. While this may not seem like a huge issue, how would you feel if your internet service provider, who you pay a fee to, placed ads on the desktop of your computer (which you also paid for)? Gold members should at the very least be given an option to disable these ads.



Xbox Live also feels the need to wrap content in restrictive DRM schemes that limit users’ access to the items they’ve purchased. Worst of all, this is done without proper warning of just how restrictive it is. Xbox Live Arcade titles and dashboard themes are unusable when not connected to Xbox Live unless you are on the same Xbox they are purchased on. So, as a reward for being a loyal customer and upgrading to the Halo 3 edition of the Xbox 360, all the content I purchased on my previous content is now unusable when I’m not signed into Live on the account I purchased them from. This means that when Xbox Live is having trouble or when I’m on vacation or anywhere else I don’t have steady high speed internet access, I can’t play the games which I have paid for.



Despite the fee for Xbox Live, networking is almost entirely peer to peer reliant. There are no dedicated servers for games, something which has been long available to PC games with no online fee. The average residential high speed internet connection often does not have an upload bandwidth capable of properly supporting large amounts of players. This results in lag and allows for exploits relying on network manipulation, for example the standby cheating which plagued Halo 2.



One would think that the fee for Xbox Live would entitle users to extra content to justify the fee. However, Microsoft allows companies to charge often high prices for nearly every single piece of downloadable content for games. This setup for the Xbox Live Marketplace encourages developers to either purposefully withhold content or release games lacking content with the intent of later releasing and charging an additional fee for the rest of the content. Xbox Live’s content setup may even discourage free content. Epic Games founder Tim Sweeney is quoted in a 1Up Podcast as saying that “We've been wanting to give them away for a long time, but actually Microsoft has been pushing back on us for that.” The video game magazine Game Informer supported this in a 2007 issue where they also claimed that Microsoft forces companies to charge for content they wish to distribute. I do not doubt this to be the case, as free content for online PC games has long been the standard. Call of Duty 4 currently has a new downloadable map available for PC users which is absent from the 360 version.



So, what exactly is Xbox Live offering its paying customers? A unified friends list? The same feature has been available to PC gamers through free applications such as XFire and Steam. Put simply, the features of Xbox Live simply do not justify its price when considering the free services offered by the competitors and the robust structure of online PC gaming.



Although I’m sure many are likely to disagree with me and simply respond with “if you don’t like it, don’t pay,” it’s not quite that simple. Without an online service, my games and the console itself lose much of their playability and worth. I also lose contact with my friends who still use Xbox Live. So unless I’m willing to cut off contact with my friends and make my system no longer worth playing, no longer paying for Xbox Live isn’t really an option.



I’d like to hear the thoughts of the rest of the community. I feel that now, in light of the recent Xbox Live downtime, is a good time to start changing Xbox"

 

[McLaren]

Let’s start with the recent Xbox Live downtime. It is, quite frankly, absolutely unacceptable for a pay service. Until a few days ago, my brother had a two week period where he could not recover his GamerTag from Xbox Live. That’s two weeks of no Xbox Live access whatsoever.

I'm sure this guy survived like the rest of us did. Being a pay service though, does not mean the service has to be online 24/7. Comcast has experienced problems here with its internet. Should I suddenly be saying, "THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!" If my electricity suddenly goes out because of a problem at a plant for a few days, should I sue them for $5 million even though it was likely they couldn't avoid it?

He tried deleting the profile of his Xbox and recovering it again, but this didn’t work either. Now he couldn’t even access his game saves or earn any achievements.

That's not Microsoft's fault. He deleted his profile, he lost his stuff.

Although I had my account on my Xbox, that’s not to say everything’s been great. Like the rest of you, I’ve been experiencing a lot of trouble with Xbox Live. Inability to join games, sign in to Xbox Live, load the dashboard blades, sometimes problems bad enough to freeze my 360 entirely until I pulled out the Ethernet cable.

Although this is a problem, it does not happen to everyone.

Yes, we’re getting a free Xbox Live Arcade game as compensation for nearly 3 weeks of Xbox Live downtime. Woohoo. No details have been given, and as a result I suspect that this free game will be a specific title or list of titles which Microsoft will choose. I feel that at the very least we deserve to be either refunded for a month of Xbox Live or given a free month on top of this.

While I think we might deserve a little more than 1 game, I can't see MS giving a free month as 3 weeks is not a month, and MS will use that as it's defense. But we certainly do not deserve $5 million like 3 idiot Texas residents.

Think about it, if your cell phone service had trouble for a month, dropping calls, refusing to dial numbers, etc., you wouldn’t be satisfied with a free cell phone game. The first step would be a refund for that month and then some sort of compensation for the inconvenience on top of that.

Cell phones & Live are nothing alike. What a silly comparison.

Connection troubles aside, there’s other reasons why I feel Xbox Live shouldn’t be a pay service. As of March 1, 2008, Xbox Live Diamond will become an additional $6.95 fee. No thanks. Not only was this service close to worthless, but to charge for something that was supposed to be a benefit of paying for the Xbox Live service is absurd. It was pathetic as a freebie and to think anyone is willing to pay for this is ridiculous.

Then, don't buy it?

Next up, Xbox Live is full of ads. Even when you first boot up your Xbox 360, you’re greeted with ads on the Xbox Live blade. While this may not seem like a huge issue, how would you feel if your internet service provider, who you pay a fee to, placed ads on the desktop of your computer (which you also paid for)? Gold members should at the very least be given an option to disable these ads.

Ads help pay for things. Your Internet Provider already gives you ads. It's called, the internet. It's up to a website to decide this.

Xbox Live also feels the need to wrap content in restrictive DRM schemes that limit users’ access to the items they’ve purchased. Worst of all, this is done without proper warning of just how restrictive it is. Xbox Live Arcade titles and dashboard themes are unusable when not connected to Xbox Live unless you are on the same Xbox they are purchased on.

Or, you know, you could switch out your HDD.

So, as a reward for being a loyal customer and upgrading to the Halo 3 edition of the Xbox 360, all the content I purchased on my previous content is now unusable when I’m not signed into Live on the account I purchased them from. This means that when Xbox Live is having trouble or when I’m on vacation or anywhere else I don’t have steady high speed internet access, I can’t play the games which I have paid for.

So, this is Live's fault? Because you're in a place without a good internet access? Who plays their Xbox 360 on a vacation anyways?

Despite the fee for Xbox Live, networking is almost entirely peer to peer reliant. There are no dedicated servers for games, something which has been long available to PC games with no online fee. The average residential high speed internet connection often does not have an upload bandwidth capable of properly supporting large amounts of players. This results in lag and allows for exploits relying on network manipulation, for example the standby cheating which plagued Halo 2.

But, hasn't EA been the one making dedicated servers for their games?

As for the upload comment, this is still Live's fault? Don't think so. I can freely play with 15 other folks, no problem. This depends on the users, not Live. I only lag when someone else has a poor connection.

One would think that the fee for Xbox Live would entitle users to extra content to justify the fee.

Like access to Live multiplayer, a service that has worked flawlessly for 90% of the year, and feels the need to be blamed because of 1 month's downfall all of the sudden?

However, Microsoft allows companies to charge often high prices for nearly every single piece of downloadable content for games.

Microsoft sets the prices. Why do you think developers have to wait for their confirmation.

This setup for the Xbox Live Marketplace encourages developers to either purposefully withhold content or release games lacking content with the intent of later releasing and charging an additional fee for the rest of the content.

See above.

Xbox Live’s content setup may even discourage free content.

Although there's actually a lot?

Epic Games founder Tim Sweeney is quoted in a 1Up Podcast as saying that “We've been wanting to give them away for a long time, but actually Microsoft has been pushing back on us for that.”

Which contradicts the statement that developers are purposely holding back content & charging for it. MS is the one who sets this.

The video game magazine Game Informer supported this in a 2007 issue where they also claimed that Microsoft forces companies to charge for content they wish to distribute.

This also almost supports the previous fact developers don't set the price. MS does.

I do not doubt this to be the case, as free content for online PC games has long been the standard. Call of Duty 4 currently has a new downloadable map available for PC users which is absent from the 360 version.

This isn't new. The same goes for different consoles. The Xbox version of GTA:IV will get official DLC. No other platform will.

So, what exactly is Xbox Live offering its paying customers? A unified friends list? The same feature has been available to PC gamers through free applications such as XFire and Steam. Put simply, the features of Xbox Live simply do not justify its price when considering the free services offered by the competitors and the robust structure of online PC gaming.

XFire is not like Live. Steam is not either. Steam multiplayer games such as CS:S run off a private server, not Valve's. That's why it's typically free.

Although I’m sure many are likely to disagree with me and simply respond with “if you don’t like it, don’t pay,” it’s not quite that simple. Without an online service, my games and the console itself lose much of their playability and worth.

This is silly. This guy had this ability for 11 months. 3 weeks without it, and suddenly, Live is not worth it.

I also lose contact with my friends who still use Xbox Live. So unless I’m willing to cut off contact with my friends and make my system no longer worth playing, no longer paying for Xbox Live isn’t really an option.

You lose contact with your friends because Xbox Live is down? Well, that says a lot about this guy....Perhaps he could, you know, talk to folks he knows in real life?

I’d like to hear the thoughts of the rest of the community. I feel that now, in light of the recent Xbox Live downtime, is a good time to start changing Xbox"

I think this guy is an idiot.


This service worked for 11 months & suddenly, 3 weeks without justifies people to whine & moan. So Microsoft has current problems with Live. Use this time to do something else. Live is not god, you don't need to play it all the time. This is also over-exaggerating because it is NOT true that nobody can get on.

I can get on any game fine, and haven't been experiencing this problem so it doesn't affect everyone like some folks seem to make out.

 

[YSSMAN]

I've only had issues once, with COD4, and that was it. Otherwise, LIVE has been completely trouble-free. I can appreciate a service thats worth paying for, and once again, I've been doing it for years, and I plan to continue doing so.

Stick 18 Million users on the PS3 network with HOME running and we'll see what happens. Technical problems are going to occur with anything, you just have to roll with it.

Like it or not, this article comes off without much of an understanding of the LIVE system and what it is meant to do, and makes itself worthless otherwise. Thanks for playing, reviewing issues we already know about. See you next time!

 

[V1P3R]

Problems or not I still think it's just another way to blatently suck money from it's xbox customer base. It's not like they are in trouble in terms of money and it's not like they have to pay for anything with this service or items in xbl.

As for M$ disloyal? no such thing, it's more like When M$ says jump you say how high. That's it. Criapple is the same way.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I've always wondered about the ads.

 

[Vasco]

I haven't really had troubles with live since the first day after christmas, but then again I haven't actually tried to join any online games and I do live in Australia (so there's probably less traffic when I'm on)...only basically signing in and out.
I was hoping Sony's free online service would make Microsoft abolish having to pay for XBL gold, but it seems that idea hasn't really come to be.

 

[vectradriver]

People would have been just as pissed if Live was free and went down for that length of time. It's an online service, that doesn't stop the games working in single player. Mine was stolen last month, with my hard drive, so be bloody grateful you had one over Christmas, because we weren't as lucky.

 

[Rue]

Nothing in life is perfect. Think about the amount of time you sit in front of your Xbox enjoying the joys of XBL, I'm sure that far ouweighs the amount of time you've been complaining you can't get online. Granted it's frustrating, but it's not like M$ wanted the negative publicity generated by this. Look at it this way, the service went down due to the huge increase in users and popularity of the system. That can only be good for the future of the 360.

 

[YSSMAN]

Look at it this way, the service went down due to the huge increase in users and popularity of the system. That can only be good for the future of the 360.

Quite right!

Have an expansion in the user-base on the same level with the PSN or Nintendo WiFi network and I'm sure similar problems would have occurred...

 

[V1P3R]

Think about the amount of time you sit in front of your Xbox enjoying the joys of XBL, I'm sure that far ouweighs the amount of time you've been complaining you can't get online.

I think most are probably remembering the times it froze or RSOD more than no online connection. xD

 

[Digital-Nitrate]

Quite right!

Have an expansion in the user-base on the same level with the PSN or Nintendo WiFi network and I'm sure similar problems would have occurred...

Then I guess you were already proven wrong...

PS3 had just as many new users as the 360 over the holidays... no hiccups on PSN.

In addition, back in March, when the PS3 was launched internationally, they had a similar spike in numbers, and again, no hiccups. In fact, I’ve seen a very noticeable increase in the average transfer rates when downloading files off the PSN stores.


Besides, MS charging for XBL has been a point of contention for a long time, even the staff of Team Xbox has been quite critical of the cost of XBL. Back in April the editor, Cesar Berardini even wrote an article on the subject, as well as other known issues with XBL, cleverly titled: "A Inconvenient Truth":

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
By: César A. Berardini - "Cesar"

Xbox Live Gold is overpriced.

I said it.

Back in the Xbox days, online multiplayer on a console could be considered a value-added proposition—but in this generation, it is just a commodity. The PlayStation Network is vivid proof of that.

It is also worth highlighting that, with this new incarnation of the service, Microsoft is getting lot of money from Xbox Live, thanks to its Marketplace. The success of TV shows, films and other downloads have exceeded Microsoft’s expectations, so it’s not like Uncle Bill is losing money this time around.

But it is easy to criticize without proposing solutions and alternate options.

To prove I’m not the typical make-it-free whiner who is demanding Microsoft to make Xbox Live completely gratis, I’m instead proposing that the two-level memberships should exist as it does now, but with online multiplayer gameplay (as we know it) being free for everyone, while a paid membership incorporates new features. What features, you ask?


Server-Based Online Multiplayer

Xbox Live online gameplay sucks. A weapon like Halo 2’s energy sword or Gears of War’s shotgun offer strong evidence that the user hosting a match—which translates into having no lag at all—has a terrible advantage over the other players.

Paying for peer-to-peer online gameplay is a scam. If we are paying to play online, the least we deserve is a server-based system where matches are hosted on a server provided by Microsoft.



Clan and Party System

Everyone cheered when Microsoft announced that on the Xbox 360 you’d be able to listen to music while playing games without developers having to program such a feature (as they had to with Xbox games). It was a feature that became universal when it was incorporated into the Xbox 360 dashboard.

So, how about also throwing in there a Clan and Party system that lets you play every Xbox 360 game on Xbox Live like in Halo 2? Bungie (which is owned by Microsoft) has already developed the technology, so it shouldn’t be a big issue for Microsoft's Xbox division to implement this technology across the entire platform.

What benefit should Xbox Live Gold subscribers get over Silver users? Well, Silver users should only be able to join one clan, yet have no option to create one, while Gold subscribers should have the ability to create their own clans and be a member of as many clans they want.



Dedicated Download Servers

Have you tried to download a big file from Xbox Live? You can leave the Xbox 360 on, go to have breakfast, lunch and dinner, then read “War and Peace” and maybe the download will be completed. Granted, Microsoft is saying that the soon-to-arrive Spring Dashboard Update will help this process in a couple of ways, but…

If we are paying a monthly fee for Xbox Live, the least we deserve is to have dedicated download servers similar to those offered by FilePlanet (which, by the way, is a sister service of TeamXbox).

Furthermore, even if you are an Xbox Live Silver user, paid content should always be pulled off from a dedicated download server differently from those hosting free content. If you’re paying for the content, you deserve a better bandwidth!



Microsoft Points Program

Another thing that is totally unfair for paid subscribers is that paid content costs the same for Silver and Gold users. There should be some advantage for those who are paid subscribers and there should also be some benefit for those who buy more content.

I think Xbox Live needs a “Microsoft Points Program,” something similar to credit-card services or airline-mileage programs, in which loyalty to a service rewards you for buying content. Obviously, only Gold subscribers should be eligible to enter the program—and it could be an addition to the Xbox Live Diamond Card.

That way, even if you pay the same as a Silver user for a TV show, a film or game content, you will get some Microsoft points in reward.



No Ads

If you are paying for your online-game service, why do you have to see ads on those Xbox 360 blades? Furthermore, if you are paying for a game, why you have to see ads in games? I’m cool with ads making content free, but, conversely, paying for content should remove any ad.

It’d be great if Microsoft could a develop a technology that enables game publishers and developers to know if the user playing the game is a paid subscriber. That way, the game will automatically know if it should display an ad (or not) in its single-player campaign or online multiplayer modes.

Microsoft has already acquired Massive Inc., which (along with the other big in-game advertising companies, Double Fusion and the recently-acquired-by-Google AdScape) already has deals in place with most major game publishers. You’d think if they wanted to remove ads for a specific group of players, they could easily do so by signing an agreement and developing the necessary technology to identify Gold subscribers from Silver users.

That said, the simple reality is that it is in fact Microsoft's responsibility, to itself and to it's stock holders to find ways of generating revenue, and as long as 360 users are willing to continue to pay for it, regardless of the issues and complaints about the service, don't ever expect it to be free.

Sure, one can easily argue that they have a captive audience, and thus by controlling their market they can get away with charging for things that perhaps in a more open market they would not be able to, but this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has followed the business practices of MS over the years. Frankly, they are very smart in this and many other ways of doing business.

Yes, I have compassion for those that have already spent over $1,000 on their hardware and software, and don’t feel the service they get is worth the $50 a year (or even more in other countries). However, it’s also not like MS first offered it for free and then later charged for it. In other words, it’s the responsibility of the consumer to do their research and know exactly what it is they are buying into, and all the added costs that come with it, especially if they think they are going to be using it for several years.

 

[V1P3R]

In other words, it’s the responsibility of the consumer to do their research and know exactly what it is they are buying into, and all the added costs that come with it, especially if they think they are going to be using it for several years.

If we were talking about anything else I'd agree, but when someone has a monopoly it's pretty hard to put the blame on the consumer. If you want proof ask the millions and billions of people that bought Halo 3.

You don't expect me to believe they bought it because the 360's awesome power enhances the game or that they were only going to play single player. xD

 

[nk4e]

If you want proof ask the millions and billions of people that bought Halo 3.

I got the Xbox 360 for COD4 and Ninja Gaiden 2, Halo 3 was an epic failure, part one was better 👍

If you want lag, you should try out PSO. It has more Adult players than Xbox live, from what I believe.

 

[YSSMAN]

Then I guess you were already proven wrong...

Very interesting numbers! The performance wasn't radically different, but certainly your critique is correct. I do wonder how things will work long-term, particularly with HOME sitting on the server as well. We'll see I suppose, but I'm skeptical at best. I would suspect that with the continual strong performance of the PSN Microsoft may eventually switch XBL to something that is cheaper, or free. But in the short-term, I don't mind spending $4 and change a month for the online service.

In other words, it’s the responsibility of the consumer to do their research and know exactly what it is they are buying into, and all the added costs that come with it, especially if they think they are going to be using it for several years.

QFT!

That being said, I often do wonder who the major complaining parties have been. My assumption would be that the newer members of the XBOX community are the ones having the largest issues, which by comparison to the surprisingly loyal XBOX base (those being who were XBL users on the origional XBOX) are much more radical. Established users are probably much more likely to continue paying for the service, happily I might add, simply because of the pocket change nature of the service (overall).

Yes $50 a year can add up (by now I've spent what, $150 on it?), but spread out over time, it doesn't seem like much. It, of course, depends on how you look at it...

 

[LaBounti]

YSSMAN, so far you've made 2 comments here about PS Home, More than likely Home will be a separate component for PSN. And its not even required. If Home crashes from overload and max user capacity its not going to shut down the PSN, just Home. You will still be able to play only games, have all your stats tracked, access friend lists, PS Store and everything else. Only when the PSN goes down is when trouble begins.

 

[m7ammed]

They only thing is worth adding from that article is the Servers, it would much better performance than peer to peer

 

[Scaff]

I got the Xbox 360 for COD4 and Ninja Gaiden 2, Halo 3 was an epic failure, part one was better 👍

If you want lag, you should try out PSO. It has more Adult players than Xbox live, from what I believe.

Are you referring to the Playstation Network when you refer to PSO?

If so then I can assure you that lag is not an issue with the system at all, a few titles have suffered (R6:Vegas being the worst) due to poor server networks at the suppliers end. However the vast majority of titles have no lag issues at all, Resistance and Warhawk can both handle 30+ player without a hint of lag.

PSN online gaming may lack the full range of functionality that XBL has (in game messaging for example), but as far as stability goes, as it doesn't rely on peer-to-peer, lag is most certainly not an issue.


Regards

Scaff

 

[m7ammed]

PSN online gaming may lack the full range of functionality that XBL has (in game messaging for example), but as far as stability goes, as it doesn't rely on peer-to-peer, lag is most certainly not an issue.


Regards

Scaff

XBL has beem around longer I'm sure the PSN would evolve to reach that level, I played GT5 yesterday with no problems at all

 

[nk4e]

Well, the servers of Socom: Combined Assualt always feature lag within games and the players always get booted out because of their connection or the connection of the game( or servers).

 

[Scaff]

Well, the servers of Socom: Combined Assualt always feature lag within games and the players always get booted out because of their connection or the connection of the game( or servers).

Which I believe is on-line for the PS2, which had a seriously underdeveloped on-line set-up (most would say non-existent). To bundle all Playstation on-line gaming in the same way based on one PS2 title is not really representative. It would be the same as me judging Xbox live on a single original Xbox title.

PS3 online gaming is actually very lag free, to the degree that one of my friends was actually shocked when he saw Warhawk running, he was reluctant to believe it had as many people in the game as it did with no lag at all (he has since now bought a PS3).


Regards

Scaff

 

[Robin]

You PAY... and you get ADS..... hahahaha thats priceless! 👍

 

[YSSMAN]

Most of the "Ads" are for new content being made available for the X360 (more often than not its a new release, maybe new DLC), which seems completely rational. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does the PSN stuff not do the same? I know that the Wii does as well...

Meh. You live with it. I turn it on, I see they got new DLC for "_____" or maybe they're doing a promotion for Cloverfield, I think about it, and I go off and play my game/movie/media. No big deal.

 

[Scaff]

Most of the "Ads" are for new content being made available for the X360 (more often than not its a new release, maybe new DLC), which seems completely rational. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does the PSN stuff not do the same? I know that the Wii does as well...

Meh. You live with it. I turn it on, I see they got new DLC for "_____" or maybe they're doing a promotion for Cloverfield, I think about it, and I go off and play my game/movie/media. No big deal.

The only ads that PSN currently has are in the store itself, so unless you are looking at the store you will not see any advertising at all (its also limited to game related stuff).

However its has long been rumoured that more generic advertising will be present in Home when it is released, as one of the ways of ensuring that PSN remains subscription free.

Regards

Scaff

 

[YSSMAN]

So its essentially the same as XBL then. You usually only see advertisements on the XBL and Marketplace blades, and I believe you can set it to start on others if you wish to avoid them...

 

[V1P3R]

However its has long been rumoured that more generic advertising will be present in Home when it is released, as one of the ways of ensuring that PSN remains subscription free.

I don't have a problem, with that at all. Especially if they announced it before hand.

 

[m7ammed]

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/14/lawsuit-forces-microsoft-to-stay-mum-about-xbox-live-status/


hell of a way to ruin things for others

 

[V1P3R]

Sorry, but I gotta go with M$ on this one... People need to have patients sometimes.

You don't see grown ups suing Comcast because their network went down...

 

[Joey D]

You don't see grown ups suing Comcast because their network went down...

I've seriously thought about it though, it unacceptable for me to pay them $179 per month for internet and TV and have their service go down at least twice per month if not more. I've had times where I was with out both internet and TV for three or four days...not that it was life ending, it's just if I'm paying that kind of money for a service I expect it to work.

Xbox Live is much cheaper so I can tolerate a problem here and there, it's annoying but I haven't really had any issues so far.

 

[YSSMAN]

You've had the Comcast issues too? Our cable has done the same thing on a pretty consistent basis, and they very rarely get around to fixing it. I'm happy we stuck with DSL for our interweb service.

On the issue:

While it is disappointing that we won't be knowing what exactly is going on behind the scenes at XBL for the foreseeable future, Microsoft is doing it to cover their own behinds. Ask anyone in the market, they'd do the same thing if they were being sued over their services as well. It does sadden me that my service will continue to be spotty, but given that I'm back in school, I'm not playing it all that often anyway...