Microsoft Ups Price For Xbox Live Subscription

[Dommyboy]

Good, they know Australians have no monies.

 

[Gunner 51]

SentUAMessage - I hope MS stops putting those two berks on to answer questions which can be solved with a 20 second trip to Google.

I'd actually become really sad if they cut SentUAMessage. I don't care much for the question, but I like their humour They always manage to make me laugh.

I always thought the humour in it seemed a bit shoe-horned in, at least to me anyway. But humour is a very subjective thing which varies from person to person.

 

[Jezzascmezza]

I just about had a heart attack when I saw the title for this piece of news.
Then I breathed a massive sigh of relief when I realised it wasn't happening in Australia.

 

[Rack]

The cost of running the Xbox Live system must have grown to enormous levels since it started, and the fact that Microsoft has kept the price the same for eight years shows how reluctant it is to pass that cost on to its subscribers.

For Peer to Peer they're looking at about nothing a year minus advertising revenues. Yeah I'm sure the inflation on that is just killing them.

 

[Eldritch Warlord]

The cost of running the Xbox Live system must have grown to enormous levels since it started, and the fact that Microsoft has kept the price the same for eight years shows how reluctant it is to pass that cost on to its subscribers.

For Peer to Peer they're looking at about nothing a year minus advertising revenues. Yeah I'm sure the inflation on that is just killing them.

Oh that's right. I forgot that maintaining servers for the terabytes of downloadables (about half of them free), maintaining servers for the data associated with millions of profiles, maintaining and upgrading network software, and providing technical support for users and developers cost Microsoft nothing. How foolish of me.

 

[Trivun]

Personally, I predict a lot of people will be complaining, but all things considered, given the economic climate, the popularity of Xbox Live, and the fact that the prices haven't already risen yet with inflation (while most other things, including game prices, have over the years), I see this as a sensible move from Microsoft. I'm happy to pay an extra pound sterling per month for XBL, and since I plan to get the 12-month subscription anyway when I do get around to having a permanent internet connection, it doesn't affect me anyway. But even then, as long as it wasn't a massive price hike (something like £10 extra would be fine, but any more would be pushing it and just plain greedy), I wouldn't have a problem with higher prices for the year subscription either. At the end of the day, XBL is arguably the best platform around for internet gaming that isn't to do with a PC, and the prices so far have been worth the cost. A small price increase is a small price, as it were, to pay for the great service Microsoft provides with XBL.

 

[Quiet Stranger]

I'm not affected at all, so good for me

 

[Rack]

The cost of running the Xbox Live system must have grown to enormous levels since it started, and the fact that Microsoft has kept the price the same for eight years shows how reluctant it is to pass that cost on to its subscribers.

For Peer to Peer they're looking at about nothing a year minus advertising revenues. Yeah I'm sure the inflation on that is just killing them.

Oh that's right. I forgot that maintaining servers for the terabytes of downloadables (about half of them free), maintaining servers for the data associated with millions of profiles, maintaining and upgrading network software, and providing technical support for users and developers cost Microsoft nothing. How foolish of me.

Not so much costs them nothing as "makes them a huge profit". If those are the things that cost money why are they free and the multiplayer is what they charge for? Yes there are costs associated but clear benefits in terms of profits on the downloads that you do end up paying for, and advertising from maintaining profiles.

 

[Iskenator67]

The rich get richer. A billion dollar industry created by a man that arguably has more money then Paul McCartney feels the need for more. Microsoft will continue to be the greediest bastards on the planet. Challenged only by Blizzard.

 

[Soylent Dave]

What this price restructuring does is finally fix things so that the UK market isn't paying significantly more money for fewer features (no Netflix, for example).

Now we get to pay roughly the same (£40 ~ $60) for less stuff. Which is almost fair pricing. If you squint at it a bit.

 

[Reep]

So uhh, Australia's fine..?

 

[Sef Salem]

The cost of running the Xbox Live system must have grown to enormous levels since it started, and the fact that Microsoft has kept the price the same for eight years shows how reluctant it is to pass that cost on to its subscribers.

For Peer to Peer they're looking at about nothing a year minus advertising revenues. Yeah I'm sure the inflation on that is just killing them.

Oh that's right. I forgot that maintaining servers for the terabytes of downloadables (about half of them free), maintaining servers for the data associated with millions of profiles, maintaining and upgrading network software, and providing technical support for users and developers cost Microsoft nothing. How foolish of me.

Not so much costs them nothing as "makes them a huge profit". If those are the things that cost money why are they free and the multiplayer is what they charge for? Yes there are costs associated but clear benefits in terms of profits on the downloads that you do end up paying for, and advertising from maintaining profiles.

As with any business model which involves "free" usage (access to day one DLC, tech support, profile logging...) those who do not pay are carried by those who do. My Gold account pays for people who have silver accounts. This includes my wife, so that's fine, and by extension I don't mind.

These things are all free because the multiplayer is what people pay for. Without it, we'd have a much reduced experience for everyone. In business, it's accepted that you overcharge those who will pay relative to those who won't, for your services. Compare how many people browse a shop compared to how many buy items. Every browser costs the shop money in terms of staff wages, air conditioning, computer power usage... I hope you get the idea.

As for myself, I don't use all of the XBL features, but I do use last.fm and zune regularly enough for me to see that others coudl use different features. As I understand the business model, and enjoy poking online multiplayer, I'm fine with the idea of increasing the price. I'm in the UK on a yearly subscription, so I won't be affected immediately, but I'm sure the price will change eventually. That's just life as a consumer.

 

[Rack]

As with any business model which involves "free" usage (access to day one DLC, tech support, profile logging...) those who do not pay are carried by those who do. My Gold account pays for people who have silver accounts. This includes my wife, so that's fine, and by extension I don't mind.

These things are all free because the multiplayer is what people pay for. Without it, we'd have a much reduced experience for everyone. In business, it's accepted that you overcharge those who will pay relative to those who won't, for your services. Compare how many people browse a shop compared to how many buy items. Every browser costs the shop money in terms of staff wages, air conditioning, computer power usage... I hope you get the idea.

As for myself, I don't use all of the XBL features, but I do use last.fm and zune regularly enough for me to see that others coudl use different features. As I understand the business model, and enjoy poking online multiplayer, I'm fine with the idea of increasing the price. I'm in the UK on a yearly subscription, so I won't be affected immediately, but I'm sure the price will change eventually. That's just life as a consumer.

Virtually everything here is true, the reasoning behind it is solid, the business logic works perfectly. Everything is sound except the revenue stream; the anaolgy to a store is just a little better than you realise. These things are all free because people pay for games. Some people buy Live arcade games, others buy boxed titles and the Silver version of the Live experience is paid for with this money. The Arcade browsers are subsidised by the Arcade shoppers.

Online players are a wholly different revenue stream, if they went away those stores would carry on making money, so they would remain. On the other hand if people stopped buying Live Arcade titles or stopped buying boxed games for the achievements all of these features would vanish.

I've got a Silver account but I've spent about $100 on MS points thus far. Do you really believe you are subsidising me in this case?

 

[Sef Salem]

As with any business model which involves "free" usage (access to day one DLC, tech support, profile logging...) those who do not pay are carried by those who do. My Gold account pays for people who have silver accounts. This includes my wife, so that's fine, and by extension I don't mind.

These things are all free because the multiplayer is what people pay for. Without it, we'd have a much reduced experience for everyone. In business, it's accepted that you overcharge those who will pay relative to those who won't, for your services. Compare how many people browse a shop compared to how many buy items. Every browser costs the shop money in terms of staff wages, air conditioning, computer power usage... I hope you get the idea.

As for myself, I don't use all of the XBL features, but I do use last.fm and zune regularly enough for me to see that others coudl use different features. As I understand the business model, and enjoy poking online multiplayer, I'm fine with the idea of increasing the price. I'm in the UK on a yearly subscription, so I won't be affected immediately, but I'm sure the price will change eventually. That's just life as a consumer.

Virtually everything here is true, the reasoning behind it is solid, the business logic works perfectly. Everything is sound except the revenue stream; the anaolgy to a store is just a little better than you realise. These things are all free because people pay for games. Some people buy Live arcade games, others buy boxed titles and the Silver version of the Live experience is paid for with this money. The Arcade browsers are subsidised by the Arcade shoppers.

Online players are a wholly different revenue stream, if they went away those stores would carry on making money, so they would remain. On the other hand if people stopped buying Live Arcade titles or stopped buying boxed games for the achievements all of these features would vanish.

I've got a Silver account but I've spent about $100 on MS points thus far. Do you really believe you are subsidising me in this case?

And I've probably spent about the same on MS points to use for renting videos, whereas I *never* buy new games. We're both subsidising the guy who buys second hand games and never buys MS points. I'm not taking you to task personally for your gaming habits, as I obviously don't know them! I'm just generalising for the sake of a clean debate.

My analogy is a metaphor for the Microsoft XBox system itself, so overall you and I are actually buying something somewhere along the line, but there are still people who aren't. Anyway, it's largely semantics from here on in
-Sef

 

[MercurySteam]

Given that this is the first rate hike since the service was launched, and that it's a far more robust service than when it started, a small price increase hardly seems unreasonable.

Too true. Of course while I live in Australia and it's not my concern, I did expect this to happen sooner. Inflation, finance problems, trying to do more with less, etc is probably what Microsoft is being faced with right now. But if it needs to be done then just do it.

 

[AgentBJ09]

I don't see any issue with this change.

I've never been disappointed by XBOX Live during the times I have played games online with others, regardless of how much time I have used. So long as Microsoft keeps up the trend of giving us great service, I'm all for this.

 

[Vyress]

What this price restructuring does is finally fix things so that the UK market isn't paying significantly more money for fewer features (no Netflix, for example).

Now we get to pay roughly the same (£40 ~ $60) for less stuff. Which is almost fair pricing. If you squint at it a bit.

lol

I guess you don't know how much the rest of the countries in europe have to pay for live, nya?
60 euros, which is 53 pounds or 83 dollars respectively.

It's not about 'fixing things' as you put it. (or they'd lower the euro price lol)
Microsoft raises prices because they can. People have paid for Xbox Live for years now and have been defending it so of course those people will defend a raise of 'merely' 10 dollars more a year even though every other platform doesn't charge for playing online.
It's hilarious.

And no I am not blaming Microsoft of raising the fee. They know their costumers don't mind throwing money outta the window. In some ways, they'd be stupid not to raise it. Having a ridiculously loyal fanbase to defend their move, Halo Reach being relatively fresh out and that 150 dollar fiasco on the way, why shouldn't they raise it?

It's just 10 bucks... right? :3

Mhm..

Goodbye xbox live.
I no longer require you.

I'm afraid not many will follow this example but I sincerely applaud this man.