In the futur we will have to pay to play multiplayer

[Nysuatro]

I just have heared from a friend that we will have to pay for an microsoft game account to be able to play multiplayer games from microsoft.

WTF

Where is the world going to ...

for dutch people, havnt found a eng site with this news

http://www.fragland.be/news.php?id=16472

[Pericolos0]

then dont pay for it? I never paid to play multiplayer, and I don't plan to do so in the future. There will still be plenty of games with free multiplayer.

Also ask your friend for a source because it sounds very unlikely it will happen.

[Dodger]

I ain't gone even ask about that

[KoKo5oVaR]

multiplayer games from microsoft.

yayyy halo :roll:

[Nysuatro]

what about gears of war, i would love to play that on pc

[Sindwiller]

No GoW linux port o___________O

EDIT: Good that I don't have any M$ games (except Freelancer, but its CD is broken, therefore...). I hope they won't force OL to use their sucky system

[Steppenwolf]

If its mmo games ok. But i will never pay extra for multiplayer like in current fps games.

[Thrik]

I think it depends on the service. If you also get a load of services and Microsoft host extremely fast game servers themselves then a small fee is understandable (especially with game servers becoming really expensive to run these days, meaning hosts have to pay like $100+ a month for them -- a fact many players happily ignore as it doesn't affect them), but if all you're paying for is a server browser then obviously it's not acceptable and they'll be boycotted. I heavily doubt that's the case though.

[Warby]

multiplayer games from microsoft.

yayyy halo :roll:

yeah who gives a fuck

[KungFuSquirrel]

My understanding so far is that this shares gold/silver status with your xbox live account... which is a lot less annoying for xbox owners at least.

Interested to see where they go with this. Xbox Live kicks ass, but not everything will seamlessly transfer to PCs. Standardization on the PC platform is generally a good thing in my book... hope it works out well.

[e-freak]

I think it depends on the service. If you also get a load of services and Microsoft host extremely fast game servers themselves then a small fee is understandable (especially with game servers becoming really expensive to run these days, meaning hosts have to pay like $100+ a month for them -- a fact many players happily ignore as it doesn't affect them), but if all you're paying for is a server browser then obviously it's not acceptable and they'll be boycotted. I heavily doubt that's the case though.

you do have a load of services and fast content servers at steam (and valve of course hosts some gaming servers as well - though not all of them public) - and it is all free (ok, ingame ads now in cs16 but that doesn't take your money from your account)

[Izuno]

hmm.....

Back when I was brand manager on Stalker and some other titles at THQ we got into this big discussion at E3 with friends from Activision and other pubs about how we can charge people access to playing MP FPS games. We talked...and talked...and talked...and realized that it just felt icky to attempt that.

Online ads for Buzz Cola in the middle of your counter-strike match? Sure...we had no problem with that. But paying for FPS play, nah.

However...

It's really not that inconceivable. However it would have to borrow from the MMO business. There would have to be some compelling reason to pay a monthly fee for a non-MMO FPS MP game. Maybe if the developers constantly added content or updates or something, then maybe it might catch on. The point is, we have all been trained on the Quake/Half-Life "free MP" constuct and by gar we like it! To change that and just start charging people for MP access would be quite jarring to the millions of PC FPS players who frag online.

However part 2...

kinda what Thrik said. Would sort of depend on the game...

Bottom line, at this point there has to be a clear value proposition for paying such fees and if publishers etc can't come up with them, the consumer won't buy into it.

[von*ferret]

If you're going to charge to play MP, then servers for MP games better be supplied and be more then badass in management and service. Furthermore, I dont care how much money it costs to service the servers, but if it is going to cost money to play the game, and the SP is anything but the best I've ever played, than I want the game dirt cheap.

[General Vivi]

I already have to pay for my fucking internet connection ... i dont want to have to pay to play the fucking games on my fucking internet connection im already paying for....

thats half the reason why i dont play games like wow that make you pay for a monthly subscription.

- 2:43 am

[ReNo]

For a lot of people this seems to be a disaster of epic proportions, but like KFS, it doesn't really bother me at all as I'm already paying. In fact, it almost seems like a good thing to me, as it means my annual fee is going to start covering services on not only the 360, but also the PC. £40 a year might sound a lot but I don't miss it - its well worth paying for Xbox Live in my opinion. Whether the service adds anything of worth to the PC is yet to be seen, but I imagine that it will if enough games use it.

Also, from my understanding of Microsoft's stance on Live! for PC, you can play multiplayer for free, you just don't get premium features such as achievements. At least that is what is happening with Halo 2, though it wouldn't be too surprising if that changed in the future.