Not an XBox or XBoL user.
If they’re running infrastructure that hosts game servers, while keeping all that standardized and cheat-free, that might be a bargain at $15/mo or whatever it costs. But if they’re just providing match-making, listing game servers, all while hosting matches on consoles, they’re just taking your money.
They’ve always run the infrastructure to have voice chat parties, host your screenshots/video clips and run moderation for accounts and games within the infrastructure. Cheat-free is a high bar, but its going to be less likely on an Xbox Live only game than on a user hosted server inside a PC game.
That makes sense. I forgot about voice, and the global moderation/banning features are a decent feature for something that everyone else would have to solve (with varying efficacy).
it might be a bargain… but actually they’re locking down hardware and software that you already paid for… so it’s a ripoff, not a bargain
i’d be fine with optional using their services.
btw, the game developers run the servers anyways.
If I remenber it well Apple was the first to push the monthly subscription model (not in gaming).
I believe it was Adobe with their CC software (photoshop, flash etc). Everone was talking how revolutionary it was and how it’ll change software selling forever.
correct
fuck Adobe
the worst part about it is that their software is a requirement for creative arts if you want to be hired by someone. Sure a freelancer can use whatever they want but if you want to get hired you better know photoshop, after effects, and premiere pro or you’re dead to employers
Remember when sony had a few database hacks and all the bootlickers were like “see paid services are better!” Fuckin idiots
good thing sony doesnt charge to play online 👍
Unsure if sarcasm, but iirc the hacks were mostly PS3 era, I think 09/10, and you’ve needed psplus to play online since PS4?
It’s why I went back to PC gaming. As an aging man with children, I am no longer interested in having a bleeding edge gaming machine so I went to consoles for a while. It was too painful keeping a subscription on something I don’t often play so I didn’t bother with a PS5 and got a steamdeck instead.
I can’t go back to consoles lol. I do so many other things on my PC and it just also happens to be great for running games. And you can play damn near anything you want. I setup Dolphin the other day just so I could play through SSX Tricky. I regularly play through Star Fox 64 or Streets of Rage. My friends and I will still randomly do a run through of L4D2. And then we can still play whatever modern games we want. Can’t do all that on a console.
I, too, sleep in a bed, lying down.
its inevitable under capitalism
Get a Steam Deck or build some SteamOS machine console.
It would have never lasted or been as good. P2P has plenty of issues. And servers would eventually need to be paid for. This would just lead to higher priced games, game specific subscriptions, ad funded online gaming or worse micro transaction per game.
Tbh, I’m not only blaming those corps but also the whalers for enabling it. It could have died but people funded it and now here we are. I mean paying subs for servers made sense, then they did game pass, microtransactions and all other stuff, and now it’s unplayable for me. Solo games on consoles, and multiple players on PC only if they’re worth it. Even with some trash games like CoD, I miss them when they weren’t subscription based. I bought CoD Vanguard out of nostalgic and it didn’t even take me a week to get turned off by game pass. I regretted it, I tried to have it refunded but I played a bit too longer past refund period.
It sucks so bad. I’m glad I kept my old consoles like n64, ps2, ps3, wii, wii u, GBA SP, DS etc. I still get hooked playing those old games.
I got switch, but only for zelda games, thankfully they haven’t mess with those type of games… So far…
Stop preordering, support Indi games.
This isn’t hard guys.
Problem is many indi games just don’t have the same appeal as AAA games. There are a few gems but I need to be in the mood.
personally AAA games don’t appeal to me most of the time. Spare for a few titles that are on my wishlist like Baldur’s Gate 3 and Elden Ring (for the reasons explained below) I don’t plan on buying any in the foreseeable future.
Most AAA games are plagued by the money curse - devs don’t get the freedom to do what they want to do, they are made to create what will make money. Innovation is a risk and will be shut down by the money men unless your name is big enough to sell copies on its own. Sure not all triple A will turn out to be bad or meh, but they are pricey and often so, so, bloated. I was on the fence with Starfield, DIYed myself a demo and that thing was like 95GB with nothing to show for it.
I feel like it’s two separate markets that are forced to share the same big tent known as “gaming”.
I never play AAA games. I’m not on some moral crusade, they just don’t appeal. I do not have the twitch reflexes for FPS, but smaller devs tend to make the sort of gameplay I like.
Right now the only indy game I can think of that’s truly competitive is Battlebit, and that’s only because everyone hates what became of Battlefield. Otherwise it’s just me and what feels like a half dozen other weirdos out here trying to build a bakery so we can feed pie to harpies, while 90% of the world is playing COD like it’s their job. It’s two vastly different people who do not have the same needs, is what I’m saying.
So maybe people need to deal with that and stop honking the “play indy” horn so much. If that was the solution, people would already be on it.
Yea I don’t play FPS games either. I enjoy the narrative story experiences like Horizon Dawn, The Last Of Us, Alan Wake, etc.
And raise the flag ⚓
How are the high seas for gaming nowadays? I know it used to be pretty hit and miss before since many titles didn’t work properly, crashed and had no support for updates without downloading a new copy.
Updates are still not worked out but most games work fine if you get a nice repack like dodi or fitgirl. Never had issues with those
I’ve never seen piracy as doing a lot to support indie games.
Generally, your principles should be more about who you’d like to build up than tear down.
Generally, your principles should be more about who you’d like to build up than tear down.
Why not both? Also, piracy isn’t really so much about tearing down, it’s more about the freedom to share.
I’m not sure what Xbox Live has to do with pre-ordering. These days if you have Game Pass you’re technically supporting a whole host of indies.
I’m old enough to remember free online gaming that required you to dial into the phone number of the server with your modem. It was a wonderful and glorious time.
I’m old enough to remember a time when you did actually have to pay extra to play games online through services like HEAT and TEN. That shit didn’t last long at all, though. Was mostly in the transitory state between when multiplayer was LAN only and the introduction of TCP/IP internet play. I had to use these for Shadow Warrior and Duke3D. Before that, CompuServe (the ISP that introduced me to the internet) also had games that had a separate charge in addition to the service itself, such as the original Neverwinter Nights (not the Bioware game).
One of my favorite stories from those days was trying to get Doom set up to play head-to-head via modem with a friend of ours. We had all kinds of trouble getting it to work, and I swear at some point we actually heard our friends voice coming through the computer speaker or somewhere from the computer! Lol
I remember having free Internet because my local library offered dialup service to everyone in the county.
It wasn’t fast, but no dialup ever was.
Paying to play exclusives online is fair game, servers need funding and all, but the fact that you need to pay for online games of third party devs who won’t see anything from the extra expense is bull.
There’s a lot of gamers in this thread too young to remember how overloaded and miserable the free console game servers were.
Microsoft was like “chuck us like ~$5 per month and we will put up enough servers so the games are actually playable”. At the time, it was the best deal available for console gaming.
Honestly an argument could be made it was the most economical way to play online, in general, at the time. The console cost was subsidized, and the online servers were arguably at-cost, and you really only needed to buy one copy of Halo to join the fun.
Idk. I was always a PC gamer, and think the old, often modded, independently run servers were much more fun than the soul-less matchmaking I see on most modern games. It was fun to play UT2004, and join a server where the arena was someone’s bedroom and all the sound effects were ripped from The Simpsons; or to jump into a clan’s open server and shit-talk them while they dominate me, or to join a server run by Beyond Unreal’s community, where the mods used were voted on by the community beforehand, IIRC. Good times.
There’s still yet another side to it. Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is still around today. Boot it up, and try joining a game. Five hours later, the mods finish loading, and you get a splash screen full of ads before you begin playing with bots.
At the time, it felt like there were a lot of hobbyists willing to shell out cash to run their servers, but ensuring you got a fair game low on mods was often more trouble than it was worth. I’m even a little bit grateful that Team Fortress 2 started hosting their own, even if they failed to fix the bot situations.
Very true. These things do still exist for a lot of games. It lost popularity a lot on CS due to the incessant need for “competitive” matchmaking, but they are still out there. Rust is a good game for heavily modded servers (if you like the game concept in the first place) and I think Arma (which a bit more niche) is basically all community servers, ranging from in depth military reality to role playing much more mundane stuff.
I was always a PC gamer, and think the old, often modded, independently run servers were much more fun than the soul-less matchmaking I see on most modern games.
Absolutely. If one was lucky enough to have a buddy with a server setup, that was by far the coolest option.
And this is why it was successful and still exists to this day.
excuse the fist shaking at the cloud
Kids these days literally want everything for free and don’t care that microtransactions and other monetization has pervaded every aspect of games.
Horse armour, man. Never forget the horse armour. Kids these days love horse armour.
It’s not a matter of age. You can play for free on PC now and it’s a better experience in many regards. There are also older games (even on console) where you could connect directly to a user through IP address or phone number and those will work to this day. Consoles are the domain of companies that want to have their little walled garden so they can overcharge for things like this.
It’s totally a matter of age. Kids these days have no idea how good they have it, and don’t realize they need to get off my lawn. Shakes cain in the air /s
Yeah but they don’t run the servers anymore. So I don’t know what I’m paying for really.
Some (Nintendo) even like using P2P instead of dedicated servers. Which makes it even crazier to pay for online.
When I pay for a game access to the whole game should be included and it is on PC (don’t bring up DLCs and all that).
There are more costs than just servers. I’m just saying, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be part of the upfront price of the game, though, and I agree with you.
Access to a router somewhere, apparently.
Yeah? Who pays for the servers that run your matches?
It may be unpopular to hear, but game prices don’t completely cover the cost of development and definitely don’t cover server operation costs every month.
And if devs raised prices, you’d be complaining about that too.
What year is it for you dude
The cost is minimal. There’s a reason why it’s still free on PC. Additionally, you could offer a free option by letting users host their own servers, but that would go against the walled garden bullshit that lets them charge so much for such a cheap service. In fact, I don’t know if it’s changed since the earlier days, but many console games had games hosted on user consoles anyway, it’s just the initial matchmaking which uses the company’s servers.
You don’t need dedicated servers for online multiplayer. Locally hosting games used to be the norm.
You don’t need them, but it’s much more desirable. A lot of PC multiplayer games run dedicated servers which someone pays for.
You don’t need to pay for your own dedicated server on PC either. You can do that for free, on your own computer, in your own house. Somehow game companies managed to convince people that all this has to be paid for. It’s just rent seeking behavior.
Would you rather have an unstable dedicated server running on someone’s home PC, or a stable paid for server that is up 24/7? It’s always been possible to run your own dedicated servers, but 3rd party hosting has always been there too, for good reason.
I don’t think it was the games companies that convinced people. There’s always been a demand. There’s a hell of a lot of games server hosting companies out there making money.
Yeah, you can host a game of CS for your friends, but do you really want to host a 200 player Rust server that needs 24/7 uptime on your home PC?
game prices don’t completely cover the cost of development and definitely don’t cover server operation costs every month.
Nope. while it might be true for small independent game developers it’s totally false for big company, like MS just a fifth of the profit they paid to shareholders is enough to run good server for like five years
Games from big companies, except the games that went flop, or F2P games, or the game that purposefully sell at low price in order to sell other forms of microtransactions, then most games are profitable
they don’t have to rely on monthly subscription to be profitable but the problem for them is “the profit is not high enough” and that’s why they do this
just a fifth of the profit they paid to shareholders is enough to run good server for like five years
Xbox doesn’t make nearly that much profit compared to MS as a whole. And the cost of building and running a low latency, graphically powerfull data centre in every major region is actually massive.
Then consider that the subscription not only pays for the data centre but also pays the game devs themselves, then you’ll see they’re not actually money grubbing super villains for this.
PC games do just fine without a subscription model (for the most part).
Not always. It feels like it’s pretty often I hear about an indie MP game concept I like, but due to low popularity, the servers were taken offline.
Granted, that’d be an issue anytime it’s unpopular, but at least a game with 2-digit playership can still just have some friends in the last remaining server.
They do cover it - The only thing you’re defending her are “shareholder profits”.
Normalize LESS of a win for the endless growth fucks. They’ll still win plenty.
What if the game is P2P?
I believe most of the games in the early days of Online, for consoles, were P2P (flashbacks of people shouting “host advantage!”)
lost connection to local host memories from black ops 2
Insecure (you get everyone’s IP addresses, if you find a vulnerability you may be able to execute code on user’s computers instead of just a server)
Prone to significant lag (one person’s bad internet can affect everyone).
I’m sure there’s quite a bit more reasons that I can’t think of now though
While this is true, the chances of it happening is pretty rare. Just because you have my IP doesn’t mean much. Sure you can scan for stuff like open ports and you can easily ddos in a lot of cases, but running a program on another players computer takes a lot more work.
Search news articles for “upnp”.
I don’t think the plethora of tweens and overworked parents are staying on top of issues like these.
As somebody with a PC, I don’t understand this. Does this mean that console games are only subscriptions now?
If you want to play anything online with a console, you have to pay for a yearly subscription.
Yep, that’s terrible.
