Fall Update07: Silver Accounts Get Content 1 Week Later Than Gold Options

[Xbox-Scene]

Fall Update07: Silver Accounts Get Content 1 Week Later Than Gold Posted by XanTium | December 5 02:52 EST | News Category: Xbox360

From majornelson.com (FYI: MS owned site): [QUOTE] Just a reminder that if you have a Silver account, you won't have access to free content on the the Marketplace (like demos) when they are first posted. That content will be available to Gold level exclusively for one week, after which Silver members will have access to the free content. The Fall update has a special message to reflect this as well. If you have a Silver account and you see a piece of content that has a red circle with a slash through it you'll have to wait until a week after the content is released to access it. This is not done to annoy our Silver members--limited time exclusive access to content is just one of the many benefits of having a Gold Xbox Live account. [/QUOTE]

[Birdy2k2]

This isn't anything new. Gold accounts have had access to content a week in advance from the start. The only difference is that before now, the content wasn't shown to silver accounts until it was available to them. Don't know why they changed it, maybe they just want to make a point of illustrating the benefits of Gold?

[Software2]

This is not done to annoy our Silver members

I wonder how many times they had to practice saying that before they could say it with a straight face.

You make gold worth it by adding new features, not hindering the lower tier.

This post has been edited by Software2: Dec 5 2007, 10:22 AM

[Swahili]

Yeah its a pretty fucked up way to handle things.

Lets take away stuff from the silver users, NOT add things for gold members.

Xbox live just got even worse, stop this having to pay for online bullshit. If you force ads on us then why the hell should we need to pay for online?

The 360 is a crippled gaming machine as long as live isn't free.

Oh and when are accessories whoring going to stop? 80$ for wifi dongle (or 125$ which is the markup price in Sweden)...

This post has been edited by Swahili: Dec 5 2007, 10:41 AM

[cornfield]

This is why software pirates win. lots and lots of money left over for xboxlive fees (and backup consoles). This is sad.

[Markus1712]

I'm very grateful to M$. Now I won't definitely buy live gold... EVER!!!

[MrFish]

Xbox live just got even worse, stop this having to pay for online bullshit. If you force ads on us then why the hell should we need to pay for online?

The 360 is a crippled gaming machine as long as live isn't free.

Far from it. The Live fee is necessary, to keep out children and to provide adults with some kind of financial incentive not to act like an ass and get banned. I'm happy to pay it because it means I'm less likely to get matchmade with complete tossers, and that the 'file complaint' button actually does something.

[twistedsymphony]

I wonder how many times they had to practice saying that before they could say it with a straight face.

You make gold worth it by adding new features, not hindering the lower tier.

+1 to that... I've had a gold account for years now but I think simply barring silver accounts from marketplace content when it comes out is quite stupid... there are lots of features they could add for little cost that would make gold more worth having without simply taking candy away from the silver tier.

Far from it. The Live fee is necessary, to keep out children and to provide adults with some kind of financial incentive not to act like an ass and get banned. I'm happy to pay it because it means I'm less likely to get matchmade with complete tossers, and that the 'file complaint' button actually does something.

+1 to that as well.

if you can't afford the $50/year fee then my advice to you is: GET A JOB
if the fee does nothing more than keep out the ingrates then it's worth every last penny.... I have a feeling most of the people who complain about the $3.50 a month charge are the same people who would drag down service anyway

[redwolf]

if you can't afford the $50/year fee then my advice to you is: GET A JOB

err... if someone can't pay $50 they should look for another hobby... it's not about getting a "job" specially if someone working full time and has family. i play games mostly weekends. so i personally would prefer if there was a pay-as-go type service.

[Markus1712]

...if you can't afford the $50/year fee then my advice to you is: GET A JOB

Ahh, yes. We Europeans have to pay 1/3rd more because of € value and VAT. Besides one 1€ = ~4PLN (Polish currency). So - imagine yourself paying 160$ for Live or 230$ per game if you're studying 5 days a week. I can hardly buy 3-4 games per year and THEY WANT to charge me for demos. There wouldn't be any problem if they left it as it was or just cut off Silver users from demos permanently.

This post has been edited by Markus1712: Dec 5 2007, 04:16 PM

[SupaDawg]

people fail to realize that, as mentioned above, nothing has changed here. So don't get your panties in a bunch. So what if now, instead of not seeing the demos for a week, you see them, but they aren't available to you. I don't see a problem here.

I'm a student myself. I'm in school full time 5 days a week, and i work on weekends. $50/yr is pennies. I realize I'm paying for a service that is vastly superior to that offered by the competition. This is a business, and as long as there is a large enough satisfied customer base, the model will not change.

This post has been edited by SupaDawg: Dec 5 2007, 04:58 PM

[dmitri]

Far from it. The Live fee is necessary, to keep out children and to provide adults with some kind of financial incentive not to act like an ass and get banned. I'm happy to pay it because it means I'm less likely to get matchmade with complete tossers, and that the 'file complaint' button actually does something.

When did children stop playing video games?

[MrFish]

When did children stop playing video games?

They're welcome to play video games. Just not with me.

[jdsony]

Paying for live to keep the kids out is a myth. I agree with Redwolf because I don't find the $50 particularly expensive but I don't have enough time to play online a lot.

I'm the type that refuses to play for MMORPG's. I'm sure I'd have fun playing them but there's no way I would pay extra every month on top of the game price. I have other priorities.

This post has been edited by jdsony: Dec 5 2007, 06:06 PM

[axess68]

Paying for live to keep the kids out is a myth. I agree with Redwolf because I don't find the $50 particularly expensive but I don't have enough time to play online a lot.

I'm the type that refuses to play for MMORPG's. I'm sure I'd have fun playing them but there's no way I would pay extra every month on top of the game price. I have other priorities.

As time has gone by, I've "grown" into that way of thinking about MMORPG's. I have so many games that I hardly find the time to play them all -- much less find the time to play a MMORPG exclusively.

And you're right, kids are on Xbox Live more than they are on PSN, which is free. The money doesn't keep them out. Parents are more than happy to pay $50 a year for a 24 hour a day electronic babysitter to keep their obnoxious kids out of their hair.

This post has been edited by axess68: Dec 5 2007, 06:27 PM