Gold Members: How do you put up with it?

[ad4m101]

Every game i have played has just picked a new host if the current looses connection.

 

[mighty_wambat]

A: If you do not like it do not pay for it (no offense)

I'm paying for Netflix in HD right now, which I do like, as $40 is cheaper than $300 for a PS3 (or even $150 second hand).

B: The host leaving is not Microsoft's fault

I'd say it is, I've never had that happen playing on the PC - because you connect to a server, not another client, and that's without paying any sort of fee for a "premium" service.

C: If you have a PS3 play that if you do not like paying for multiplayer

MP on Gold certainly isn't something I'm paying for, I'm just wondering why so many people do...

Depends on the game. If a game has a user host the game, like Call of Duty (Modern Warfare 2 had that lovely host switch though when the host left), then yeah, the game will end when the host leaves, but if the game is hosted by servers, I can't think of an example at the moment, then it won't quit. It's mainly a game flaw, rather than the service flaw. The PS3 has the same thing, Call of Duty 4, if the host left, the game quit, but in Socom, the servers host the game so it stays up. PC games have this too, but for the most part, 99% of PC games will have server hosting, or let users create their own servers (think Counter Strike: Source). Sometimes a developer just can't keep their servers open for a game when they aren't charging you for it, so they make it so the users host or eventually they shut down the servers.

That's what puzzles me. If the only way you can play online is with a Gold membership, shouldn't Microsoft be providing the servers? You can get servers without paying on the PC, so if you are paying shouldn't there be some guarantee that you have (even a non dedicated) server? That's what I'd expect if I were paying.

Your issue here is with Breach, not with Xbox Live Gold, you can't just play ONE game that is broken and then blame the system for it.

Since it's a problem I've never encountered before on PC....

As for the rest of you who don't know how to read, the Escapist would be a much better place if you could report people for not reading the OP.

this is an interesting point, the reason why you are able to understand just what xbox live gold is and is not, is perspective. most gamers have only 1.

many gamers are under 21, they did not spend 1200 bucks on there tv, there parents did. they do not understand the contrast between xbox live and steam or between jedi outcast and force unleashed
when you only have xbox live, its easy to put up with. after all, online gaming is amazing. now i will bet that the games you played in breach that did not foul up were at times, good. if you had never played counterstrike 1.6 then why not believe halo is the best shooter ever made? it might as well be the first shooter ever made.

i was once a pc gamer, now i am a console gamer, i feel i was almost coerced into this choice but it was in the end. a choice.
i miss lobbies, i miss 64 players, i miss real clans. i miss the accuracy of a mouse. but there were things i gained as well (left analog stick > wasd) but i digress. my point is i have perspective, i was a pc, then an xbox, then xbox live, now ps3 and xbox without xbox live.

one of the things i truly wish for is that people could perceive more then they do. but they can't.
i believe xbox live and world of warcraft are both doomed models. i think that people will wake up and realize that the same service is available for free and paid services will either become vastly superior in quality or cease to exist. just like what happened with starbucks and lulu lemon. in india they pay 200% less then the west (based on income and gdp, not adjusted dollars) on there cell phone plans. we will wake up one day and demand real competition.

so, how do they put up with it?
~ by not understanding that it is a vastly inferior service at an unreasonably inflated price.

will this change?
~ yes, i think it has to.

what can you do to insure that the invisible hand guides away from this inferior model?
~not support it. i suggest a PlayStation 3. it will pay for it self in 3 years on your current system, it looks great, and if you are missing games like uncharted 2 and heavy rain, you are missing out.

 

[alickst]

you're right, its completely ridiculous. too dependant on the xbl "community" (read: 12 year old morons) and its too expensive and generally quite a poor experience....i had it for around 2 years and i've recently sold my 360 so i can get a new pc.

xbox is not worth the hype, but i hear the ps3 is worse.

 

[RandomWords]

Sounds like bad luck, that has never happened to me

 

[stormcrow5]

I have never had any of the problems that u just said

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

Since it's a problem I've never encountered before on PC....

As for the rest of you who don't know how to read, the Escapist would be a much better place if you could report people for not reading the OP.

Seeing as there are literally hundreds of other games on Xbox that work perfectly well, telling me that your pc never has this problem does not immediatly condemn the Xbox.

The problem: the devs of Breach messed up their game by failing to add host migration.

Neither Xbox Live or the system itself is to blame for the ill-advised decision of ONE game developer.

P.S: just to clarify, i'm not trying to grief you or anything, it's just that you simply can't base your opinion of an entire console's online capability on only one of it's games.

 

[Danpascooch]

SNIP

What you're describing is a problem with the game, and not the XBL service.

Of course you won't see this response because you put me on your ignore list for disagreeing with you a year ago.

 

[Sentox6]

Don't blame xbox live because the one game you played online doesn't have host migration, that's the developer of Breach's fault.

Pretty much this.

The 360 makes communication, partying up, etc, a lot easier than my PS3 when it comes to gaming online, so I feel like it's worth the cost.

I mean seriously, I've often spent a quarter of my yearly subscription cost seeing one movie at a cinema. Over half of it eating one meal at a nice restaurant.

 

[scnj]

I got 99 problems, but Gold ain't one.

Seriously though, most games just shift the host as far as I'm aware. Although I hardly ever come across games where anyone leaves, let alone the host.

 

[Adultism]

I just pay for it because my friends use it. Its much easier to talk there instead of the phone. 6 IRL friends in one chat? Epic.

 

[Rakun Man]

The Crysis demo was a bit of a matchmaking mess. Most other games, it isn't that big of a problem.
Oh, and my thoughts for paying for the gold multiplayer experience are...
*LOST CONNNECTION*
*HOST LEFT*

 

[Double A]

It's $60 for the ability to play multiplayer on every game I have. While PS3s have that for free, my friends don't have PS3s and the console doesn't have as many exclusive games for it.

I like Halo Reach's multiplayer a whole lot. And if there's an annoying ***** of a kid, all I have to do is mute them.

 

[spartan231490]

I had the Xbox Live Gold trial for a month, and was thoroughly unimpressed. Bought a year in January because spending $1200 on an HDTV and then watching Netflix on a Wii seemed like a waste, so I've been trying out some online play. The Crysis 2 MP demo worked fine. I also decided to give Breach a shot since there was no PC demo. Half the matches I was in ended because the host left.

If I were actually paying for multiplayer (as opposed to getting HD Netflix rather than SD, in which case I'm getting what I'm paying for), I'd be pissed off! Having matches cut out because one person leaves isn't an acceptable "premium" gaming experience.

So to all you guys who love Xbox Live Gold, and I know you're out there, how do you put up with crap like that?

Doesn't happen to me. My games pick a new host. Maybe you should play something other than a demo?

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Having the match drop because the host left? That sounds like the game, not Xbox Live. For instance in CoD4 the host can manually end the match (which can get annoying). On the other hand, in MW2 if the host's connection is lost the match pauses for a bit, finds a new host, and then continues right along (all in less then a minute). So it's the game's fault not the system.

And if you're randomly getting disconnected then it's your internet connection. My internect connection is fine and I generally don't get randomly dropped from games.

As for the cost of it? It's not that much unless your really tight on money and although it would be nice for free service, not everything in life is so easy, so I pay the cost needed to keep playing my favorite games with friends online.

So my overall assumption? You've had a really bad experience and decided to blame it entirely on Xbox Live without finding out if that was really it.

 

[Sakurazaki1023]

I don't.

I got sick of dealing with Microsoft's shit and now I only use my 360 for the occasional exclusive (I don't even bother connecting the damn thing to the internet). If the PS3 provides the exact same service for free, why should I pay for the ability to be irritated by pre-pubescent homophobic racists. I know that Xbox Live has some advantages over PSN, but to me it's not worth the cost.

 

[strangemoose]

im not trying to sound like "LOL U FAGZ DONT HAVE MONEYZ LOLZ" but 60 a month isnt to bad for me i mean its just like 5 dollars a month

 

[Choppaduel]

and thats just one of the many reasons why I don't use live. Local only for me thank you, of course the only xbox360 game I've actually enjoyed playing is Crackdown; so its not a problem.

 

[kypsilon]

That really isn't a Gold problem per se, that's a jerk on the other end of your gaming experience. Not much you can do about that except fill out those little star things and blacklist a player. I'm slowly whittling down the human race from my Live experience...but I'm also doing the same on my PS3, so there you go.