Xbox live silver offers everything but online play, but it does say that mmo games will require an extra fee, whether using live silver or gold.
Basically, you will have to pay for the mmo experience, but you do not require to have xbox live gold too.

Basically, we will have to pay for Final Fantasy XI and WoW if it makes it through.

Huxley is no exception.

yeah

Thanks for the constructive feedback lol.

np hehe...i was just backing up your statement heh

Bah I just posted this in the FF thread before I read this haha, owell it needed it's own thread anyways.

Huxley Simply can't wait....

Hopefully the online payment to play huxley online won't be too vigorous since it IS a console exclusive.

Do you mean console exclusive as in only on 360 and not any other console or as in only on console? because it is also on PC
http://pc.ign.com/articles/617/617966p1.html
I think the game will be $15 a month although it could easily be more seeing as how extensive this game sounds, it could take alot of money to produce and keep running smoothly. It sounds so awesome, big cities filled with your team you can trade items and develope your character having it evolve and gain new abilities. Sounds truly amazing, GOTY material. The only thing is, it sounds so great I wounder if they can really pull all this stuff off. I sure hope so.

Double payments will always suck specially most of us getting the Gold package but atleast xbox finally get good MMOs wich is gonna be nice playing FF online and other RPG online titles

Well that's shit! You have to pay for Xbox live gold then pay to use the game online too.
What they hell do M$ do with the subscriptions.
If this extra payment is required then $ony are gonna kill xbox live because their service it free.

Get your act together M$, people have payed for xbox live for years and it has given you profit don't make us have double the subscription!

you have to pay for FF with ps2. its just like the comp. i think the only games that will have to pay is the MMOs.

Yes, you have to pay on the PS2, infact all MMO's you have to pay for, M$ doesn't see any of the extra charge, it goes to the company who developed the game so they can pay to keep those huge servers online and do maintenance and release patches and fix bugs. I have always hated paying an extra $10-15 a MONTH, it makes it seem like so much money.

I thought I had already cleared up the MMO vs. Gold subscription fee confusions

The Fees are completely exclusive of each other. Meaning you can have a MMO subscription without a Gold subscription. Also meaning your Gold subsciption doesn't contribute to the MMO games

Why you ask?
Simple... the Servers

MMO games require massive dedicated servers. Most of the time these servers are not run by MS but the company that published the game. Ms on the other hand runs the XBL servers. So how exactly would money you sent to MS make it into the hands of a MMO game publisher? It wouldn't, and thats why the fees are exclusive.

This doesn't necessarily mean that all MMO games will have subsciption fees. They very well could be hosted right on the XBL servers meaning that you could play online with a Gold subsciption. more often than not it will be separate simply because of the bandwith MMOs require over a reguar game.

Having owned and operated several servers of my own both game and websites. IMO the $10 a month they charge for MMO games is a rip off while the XBL subscription fee is a bargain if you actually use it frequently. Ultimately it comes down to this: Things are only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. If most gamers weren't willing to pay $10 a month subscription fee they they would have to lower there prices... publishers will always squeeze as much out of you as they can, that's just what they do; if you don't like it then speak up with your wallet.

I think the main reason people are complaining of the fee ontop of the gold fee is because they plan to get gold anyways and don't see why they have to pay an extra $10 while they also pay M$ for XBL, if you were explaining why you are paying for extra $10 like I think you were, then nvm.

???
How is ms going to pay the devs for their service? You make no sense.

Ms isn't going to take a percentage of their live profit and give it to the devs because it's their money. Everyone has to make their own money. If you don't like it, buy another game. Hey, wait, we shouldn't pay 60 buck for a game, we already spent 350 bucks on your console!

Geeze, calm down.

actually no the game could very well be FREE once you understand the methods behind its gameplay and servers then you realize it could be free.

basically it uses a system similar to guild wars and joint ops, while they both require dedicated servers, you are not interacting on the same level as a normal MMO, for instance in one section/map in FFX1 you might have hundreds, even a thousand people, with Huxley there are several severs at 5000 each, similar to guild wars which at split into two distinctive safe zones, outside of these safe zones it a mostly seemless world, however the actual FFS fighting takes place in "battle zones" these battle zones hold a maximum of 128 players each, and can actually be supported by much smaller servers similar to joint ops. thus the real "interaction" in terms of fighting only takes place in specialized zones so a faster larger server is not needed.

so again it may very well be free however in exchange you arent fighting 5000 people at one time.

Actually, Sony says their service (Online) won't be free anymore.

What I'm saying is why for, MMO games, do we have to pay for M$, if we're no using thier servers what is the subscription for? What do we pay them for when we aren't getting anything from them?

We are paying the company.. not MS..

You pay.. so the company can keep the servers running...

The extra fee goes straight to the developer and M$ doesn't see a penny of it, the developer then uses that money to pay technicians to tweek the servers and work on patches and release updates along with keeping those MASSIVE dedicated serves online which costs a ton of money. You aren't paying an extra fee to M$ at all.

Yes exactly... like Final Fanstay on Sony Playstation..

I HATE MMO FEES! THEY SHOULD DIE! especially if we are already paying for gold.

They could offset cost by showing ads during loading screens, but they'll probably do that and charge you for it.

But yea, you people really don't want m$ to have a larger share of the console market. Cus if they did, don't you think their approach would be a little more like thier approach in the software market? Copy the little guy, make it proprietary, then charge more when you've got the market. As thier market share grows, so will the price of everything game related.

M$ IS EVIL!!! , . I think they are tryin for another Monopoly . Lol, to Bill its just a board game he has to win. Well, they do make some good stuff, some good stuff

Every company shoots for a monopolistic market share, thats how you get rich

sony buys more companies all the time you just dont hear about it.

talk about monopolies, why can sony buy all these movie companies, like recently they got MGM. If MS did that, it would be all over the news for weeks, the courts would step in and say Hell No we arent letting this happen.

Now sony owns columbia/tristar/MGM, and a few others. Thats a good chunk of the movie undustry right there.

Im actually very surprised MS hasnt bought more developers. Tecmo would be high on my list, too bad Itagaki San doesnt have a say.

if MS is evil, then EA is the devil, period.

look what they are doing with ubi soft. Ubi soft and MS have a great relationship. Thats another studio that Id snatch up if I was Uncle Bill

We need a new EQOA on XBox 360........ but that will never happen because Sony makes it. I heard a long time ago that SWG was suppossed to be on PS2 and XBox, but that never happened either. Horizons and Lineage II would be cool along with WoW, Huxley, and FFXI.

Yah I know but Sony made Playstion, They dont count, LOL IM JUST KIDDING, Sony is also EVIL, MONOPOLIES ARE ALL EVIL

The reason M$ doesn't buy more developers is because developers are rarely for sale, you can't just walk in and buy them for a specific price. They have to be willing to sell.

As for monopolies. Sony has no where near a monopoly over the movie industry they control a small share compared to M$'s monopoly. The suit was filed when MS controlled 95% of the market. There was no other real viable choice if someone couldn't get windows. Other operating systems weren't as advanced or use friendly so you have one and only one choice. M$ strong armed competitors and threatened all PC vendors if they sold PC's without their Operating system pre-loaded (which then eliminates any worry of it being pirated) that they wold increase the price of the operating system by alot. Another monopolistic characteristic is they could raise the price substantially without loosing an unacceptable amount of customers. Their pricing pattern also showed they had a monopoly. They didn't look at competitors prices instead they increased their price to ridiculous amounts and forced people to buy them. Anyways M$'s monopoly was horrible it was literally impossible for any OS developer to break into the market because they couldn't sell their product so they couldn't get money to develop it and they died out.

I bet M$ could get more developers to want to sell if they just put enough money down on the table. I mean they have A LOT of money.

since this thread was already bumped, i figure i might as well reply to this. your not double paying unless you want to. MMO games can be played with an xboxlive silver account, therefore you only pay the MMO fee. and those MMO fee's go directly to square/blizzard/whoever makes the game.

on a side note, i AM pretty curious as to if there will be a fee for MS's first party MMO game with all the marvel characters or if that will just run though live gold.

What i want to know is why the hell are we paying MS for Xbox live in the first place?, i mean it was free on the DC, it was free on the PS2, and it is free on the PC to play online, so why does MS charge us?, don't say for servers, as MS doesn't use servers for hosting games, it works the exact same way it does on the pc, each user hosts their own games, so why the hell are they charging us?.

Maybe everyone should Boycot Xbox live, so we can try to get it free, just as it should be.

I totally agree with u m8t! If they do make us pay "extra" fees, than I am personally not getting any of the game such as GoW (because of the "extra" fee), and YES ps3 online will kill xbl [even if we know that ps2's (future to be ps3's)online service is shit].

Pay what.

Xlink Kai is free.

Fuck XBL.

When they initially launched, they originally wanted to make games "Require" XBL. Meaning if you didn't have Live, you couldn't play thier game. Think Phantasy Star Online. But then, when one of the greatest games ever didn't sell worth a shit, they realized they couldn't quite do that yet. So they're easing us in. One day, your video games will be payed on a subscription basis whether you play online or not. Much like you have to pay for Windows Server 2003 on a subscription.

yes they do use servers............

for the service that you get, i dont mind paying

I'm fairly certain SegaNet was NOT free... I remember paying about $22 a month when it first came out (I think the price dropped as low as $10 a month).

WAY more expensive than XBL and not nearly as many features.

XBL is worth $50 a year for the downloads and voice messaging alone... you'll be getting both of those FREE with the 360's Silver account.

If you really don't want to pay then go play on one of the free Network based services. and if you have complaints about those... well that's why XBL is worth the $50

Go keep track of how much you play online with XBL and then tell me how much it would cost for other forms of entertainment for the same amount of time, like renting a DVD, going to an arcade, or taking your lady friend out to dinner...

XBL costs less than $1 a week... please I probably spend 10 times that on Soda alone and that's not nearly as entertaining.

ur right twisted, seganet WAS not free. it was 20 bucks..........i use to subscribe to it.

Im not talking about Seganet, im talking about playing games such as quake 3 online on the dc, Segas DC online service was free.

And about keeping track of how much i play online on live, well that would be all 000's as i dont play online with live, if i want to play online with my xbox i use Xlink, and then you ask why am i complaining?, see it's simple XLink only works with games that use system link, so other great games such as DOAU, and SFAC wont work with it, so if i wanted to play them 2 games i'd have to give MS €60 a year, and for what?, to give a service that you can get for free on the pc , fool yourself all you want by saying it's worth it, you know as well as i do it's not, and it should be free

As far as value goes... things are only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for them. I find XBL to be of great value, to me $50 is pocket change, I have more than that in my pocket as I type this, I spend more than that taking my girl out to dinner and a movie on the weekend and that only provides a few hours of entertainment. I've paid much more for much less with other services and the lack of hassle and (relatively) reliable servers XBL provides is worth it to me.

I wasn't one of those people who went on a waiting list or Beta tested XBL Infact I didn't even have it until last year. I didn't play it at all until there was a few games that I really wanted to try, and THEN I signed up for a 2 month trial. At the end of the 2 months I decided it was well worth the $50 for a full years subscription that I bought it. I've played XBConnect/Xlink Kai/PC games online and they all work well for JUST playing games but things like messaging, invites, downloadable content, ease of use, reliable servers, and (comparatively) less cheating is what brought my wallet out.

If you have a problem with games not supporting network play bring it up with the developer not MS, MS created a service and developers can choose to use it or not. They're not stupid, they know that things like Kai exist and if they choose not to support them by not including network play, well that's their own fault.

I Second That!

i still cant believe people complain about online costs for xbl. $50 a year for the 200+ live ready games. thats pennies per game, granted most only play 3-4 online. $50 is nothing, well worth it

The point is not about it only costing $50 a year, im sure that everyone knows that is only pocket change, as you would really have to live in a very poor place not to be able to give $50 a year, plus im sure that anyone that has a pc and comes to xbox scene would be able to give $50 a year easy, but like i said that is not the point.

The point is is that MS shouldn't be charging for something that should otherwise be free, they are not using their own servers for games, so imo they shouldn't have the right to charge other people for using their "own" bandwith to host games.

Huxley Online related...

http://www.xbox365.com/news.cgi?id=GGuGiLPGuL07191012

That was real arrogant. Good for you twisted.........You have more than $50 in your pocket as you typed that.

Yeah, I forgot that I never pay to play Half-Life, Half-Life 2 Deathmatch, Counter-Strike, Counter-Strike Source, Day of defeat, etc. I also forget how reliable the servers are. I seem to keep forgetting all the updates, new maps, weapons, and whatever other downloads valve gives to me almost every week. I also seem to forget how Steam collects all of these together in one program, like XBL. Valve has not asked for a dime since my purchase...............

As far as server hosting
Battlefiled 2.........................
So let me get this straight. M$ wants me to pay because I am using their servers. If EA can run the servers free(all ranked B2 servers are controlled by EA), someone please explain why M$ needs to charge me?
I can explain why. They are monopolistic. If the people are willing to pay............

I would agree... if you were correct.

MS owns and operates all of the XBL servers... every game played on XBL is played on those servers. The only exception is EA games. If you remember EA refused to use XBL for quite some time... they bitched about it so much that MS added in extensions so that they could use XBL as a front end and run on a 3rd party server.

Aside from EA... if you're on XBL you're on an MS server

Also, would you not still need to log onto live, which is a ms server to play BF2?

I dunno, I play games on my pc and my Xbox.

I have a better experience on Xbox live then with steam. Counter-strike is cool and all though.

I dont give a shit what servers are played on, just signing into Live is worth the $$. It doesnt get any simpler than that. You sign in hence youre using their service. If people think thats ludicrous, by all means stick with pc and ps2 gaming. Live is by far the easiest, most convenient system out there.. worth every penny and then some.

I personally think the current subscription price is kinda low. They could raise it and I along with everyone else thats used it for the past 3 years will keep signing up.

how ya doin there deftones, havent seen you in a while

I agree with you man, the service is great for mw, and for me it is so worth the price.

Do you mean in your opinion? The PC version of Battlefield 2 requires you to sign in. It save your name and password, everytime you load the game you just connect to EA's server and it free.

Have you even used Steam? Someone please explain how that is not conveinient. I can even run mods through it.

The whole point is, M$ the worlds richest company, has to charge for online play when other smaller companies don't.


Nice to see you too Deftech, I am in a craby mood today if you couldn't tell.

It's nice to see someone agrees with me , and i agree with you 100% about steam.