The delusion that paying for PS+ and XBL pays for multiplayer servers. Why do people still believe this shit?

[jett]

Third party publishers pay for their own matchmaking servers when they use peer-to-peer online. Obviously, they also pay for their own dedicated servers if they use them. Nothing is given for free. And despite customers paying en-masse for these bullshit services, it doesn't guarantee that the likes of Sony will maintain the server upkeep for their own games, as we have seen multiple times how they take them down. Sometimes they barely last a year, like with Gravity Rush 2.

That's it, that's the thread. Brought upon by the recent Xbox shenanigans.

 

[SliChillax]

I mean just look at PC online gaming, the answer is right there.

 

[impingu1984]

It's just a way to bleed money from the install base... That's all it ever was and all it ever will be...

The value proposition to the customer is becoming increasingly difficult to justify these days as the market has evolved..

 

[LumberPanda]

$60 per year apparently doesn't even go to keeping a database table up for leaderboards for first party games...

Edit: really should've read the whole OP before responding since we're talking the same game.

 

[DGenerator]

Xbox Live Gold was required to use non-gaming services like Netflix for YEARS. Who are these people that believe it's anything other than a gaming subscription/fuck you, got mine money-making scheme?

 

[Alvis]

People who insist that paying for online gaming is necessary because otherwise companies wouldn't be able to pay for the servers despite online play being free on PC remind me of people who say that universal healthcare is impossible in the US despite countless countries doing it lol

 

[Expy]

Naw, it pays for network infrastructure and support/development.

It's why I can now get Gigabit download speeds on PS5 off the PS Store.

 

[DailyCalmSpirit]

Sony makes a ridiculous amount from PS+ but shuts down all their servers early as fuck.

 

[Seda]

Do people believe that?

 

[riotous]

Third party publishers pay for their own matchmaking servers when they use peer-to-peer online.

Click to shrink...

Source for this?

These are definitely high profit margin services either way. But we also get the consoles under cost near launch, and w/ almost no profit most of the gen.

 

[Jogi]

To ease the pain of wanting to play with friends haha

 

[TechnicPuppet]

All the money they get just goes to everything they spend money on. Certainly there are server costs but they will be miniscule compared to what they are taking in.

 

[Dekuman]

Servers don't cost $60 per person to maintain. These platforms have a critical mass where maybe a few dollars from a sub goes to network.
It's pure profit and kickbacks to publishers who put games behind that gate.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

It's always been a garbage lie to justify keeping people wasting their money. From both of them.

 

[FTF]

Who actually believed this though?

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

It's always been bullshit and Microsoft should never have been given a pass on it and Sony and Nintendo shouldn't have followed them.

 

[kubev]

I think part of it does, though I suspect that a company as large and diverse as Microsoft likely uses it to subsidize other services such as Azure to keep pricing competitive, as well as for general infrastructure upkeep and whatnot. Sure, you don't "pay for online" on PC, but you do pay subscription costs for many games, not to mention stuff like battle passes that keep money rolling in. There IS a need to have some sort of continual revenue stream coming in to support multi-player servers and whatnot.

EDIT: Oh, for the record, you're not just paying for online play with either of these services. You ARE getting "free" games along with it, and you get more discounts, so I suspect that at least some of that money goes toward those Games with Gold deals in Microsoft's case and helps to offset some of the "loss" from promotions.

 

[Stopdoor]

Sony baffles me but I can still play niche Xbox games from like 2005 online like Banjo-Kazooie Nuts & Bolts, so I dunno, if a fee is keeping those servers up I'll pay it. I'm not sure you can directly compare Playstation's obnoxious behaviour with longevity to Xbox.

 

[2Blackcats]

Who the hell thinks that?

That's a totally separate issue to thinking it's worth the money.

 

[Fizie]

Not denying - just curious to see your source that publishers pay for they own matchmaking servers?

One improvement I'd like to see is a big increase in cloud storage for everyone - that would at least give some added value.

 

[Iron Eddie]

Third party publishers pay for their own matchmaking servers when they use peer-to-peer online. Obviously, they also pay for their own dedicated servers if they use them. Nothing is given for free. And despite customers paying en-masse for these bullshit services, it doesn't guarantee that the likes of Sony will maintain the server upkeep for their own games, as we have seen multiple times how they take them down. Sometimes they barely last a year, like with Gravity Rush 2.

That's it, that's the thread. Brought upon by the recent Xbox shenanigans.

Click to shrink...

You are essentially paying for convenience. Turn on your Xbox/Playstation/Switch, quick matchmaking with your friends, sync trophies/achievements. All at the press of a button. PC takes more work because you do not have one party controlling it all in a walled garden.

I think Sony is also more notorious with removing games and closing servers.

 

[Minthara]

It's weird, but for me I've never associated paying for PS+ as paying for online, since I've had the service pretty much since its inception. I've always associated it with PS+ discounts and the monthly game collection.

I think it's because I play online games so rarely.

Nintendo's plan on the other hand, I absolutely associate with online since I need it to play online games with my wife.

Never cared about Xbox Live, so no association there either way. I have Game Pass Ultimate and even that I don't associate with paying to play online.

I think I'm also way more desensitized to paying to play games online since technically I started doing that in 2001 with FFXI.

With all that said, I do wish online was free for those that play online games a lot!

 

[Genesius]

I mean if everyone canceled at once and stopped playing multiplayer games, the problem would go away.

 

[BasilZero]

Why would anyone believe that when the servers "you pay" for get closed (i.e. Driveclub).

 

[Jonscrambler]

Who actually believed this though?

Click to shrink...

Who the hell thinks that?

Click to shrink...

on this very thread lol

 

[Jaded Alyx]

People say this nonsense and then turn around and criticise EA or Blizzard etc when they can't login to battlefield/Anthem or overwatch on launch day. So it's not like they don't know, it's another example of defending a crappy practice by the maker of their favourite console.

And before someone says "it's not the same people", I've seen the exact same people do this.

You are essentially paying for convenience. Turn on your Xbox/Playstation/Switch, quick matchmaking with your friends, sync trophies/achievements. All at the press of a button. PC takes more work because you do not have one party controlling it all in a walled garden.

Click to shrink...

Steam/Steamworks can handle all of this just the same.

 

[Brazil]

You are essentially paying for convenience. Turn on your Xbox/Playstation/Switch, quick matchmaking with your friends, sync trophies/achievements. All at the press of a button. PC takes more work because you do not have one party controlling it all in a walled garden.

Sony is also more notorious with removing games and closing servers.

Click to shrink...

In what universe does getting online on PC "take more work" than on console

 

[Iron Eddie]

It's weird, but for me I've never associated paying for PS+ as paying for online, since I've had the service pretty much since its inception. I've always associated it with PS+ discounts and the monthly game collection.

I think it's because I play online games so rarely.

Nintendo's plan on the other hand, I absolutely associate with online since I need it to play online games with my wife.

Never cared about Xbox Live, so no association there either way. I have Game Pass Ultimate and even that I don't associate with paying to play online.

I think I'm also way more desensitized to paying to play games online since technically I started doing that in 2001 with FFXI.

With all that said, I do wish online was free for those that play online games a lot!

Click to shrink...

That's because this was how PS Plus was originally designed. It wasn't by accident memberships more than doubled when they put multiplayer behind a paywall.

In what universe does getting online on PC "take more work" than on console

Click to shrink...

The same universe I need to download my Blizzard app, my Rockstar app, my Epic launcher, my Steam launcher. Juts look at the hassle going on with Hitman 3. Do all of them have trophies/achievements? Do they all sync with one another? Does the PC have a built in app that once you add a friend in Steam it also works on those other launchers?

 

[Deleted member 46804]

Not denying - just curious to see your source that publishers pay for they own matchmaking servers?

One improvement I'd like to see is a big increase in cloud storage for everyone - that would at least give some added value.

Click to shrink...

Storage in the cloud is unlimited though.

 

[Fizie]

Storage in the cloud is unlimited though.

Click to shrink...

For screenshots though? I'm always getting notifications that I'm reaching my limit and I have to do a clear out.

 

[Azerth]

its kind of funny had sony not tied multi to ps+ ms would have probably un tied it from gold last gen for any kind of good pr

 

[Doctor_Thomas]

In what universe does getting online on PC "take more work" than on console

Click to shrink...

Like the 90s, maybe?

I don't think PC gaming has been anymore difficult than PC gaming since then and, hell, I'd argue PS2 online had a lot of the same issues I faced with PC online from around the same time.

 

[Jonscrambler]

There IS a need to have some sort of continual revenue stream coming in to support multi-player servers and whatnot.

Click to shrink...

Nobody's asking them to do it for free, but you know they get paid 30% on everything sold on the platform

 

[Deleted member 46804]

In what universe does getting online on PC "take more work" than on console

Click to shrink...

There isn't a unified architecture there with usernames, chat and so on. That's the difference.

 

[jett]

There isn't a unified architecture there with usernames, chat and so on. That's the difference.

Click to shrink...

You are essentially paying for convenience. Turn on your Xbox/Playstation/Switch, quick matchmaking with your friends, sync trophies/achievements. All at the press of a button. PC takes more work because you do not have one party controlling it all in a walled garden.

I think Sony is also more notorious with removing games and closing servers.

Click to shrink...

How is literally any different from Steam?

 

[Adulfzen]

it's the closest thing to "free money" for console manufacturers, it's kinda insane if you think about how much profits they must be making yearly.

 

[Night Hunter]

Because if you repeat something long enought, it becomes true for a lot of people.

 

[EggmaniMN]

Phones have people paying exorbitant amounts for "data" and people just accepted it and it's the same here. None of them need these extra fees to keep the lights on.

 

[Perfectsil]

People definitely think that. Just think when you play monster Hunter the game runs on capcom's servers, capcom is not charging you a subscription but you need to pay Sony/ms a subscription to play the game on capcom's servers

 

[medyej]

Paying for peer 2 peer multiplayer will forever be insane.

 

[jelly]

Yes and no. Xbox unifying things was beyond the PC at the time early on, even though I played PC games at the time, individual games, impressive yes but Xbox Live was kinda woah, that's neat, it all works and let's be honest it does cost money build and to keep the services running, yes you can argue buying their games, marketplace cut, fees, ads should be paying for things and I believe that to be the case as gaming is more popular than ever so online play should be free to access to broaden the user base to its maximum potential. An online paywall is a detriment to every platform.

 

[Raigor]

Steam does everything PSN and Xbox do with more stuff and it's free on top of hosting more games and having dedicated servers available for devs to use. FOR FREE.

The whole "they need that money to pay for servers and stuff" was bullshit 15 years ago and it's bullshit right now.

 

[Iron Eddie]

How is literally any different from Steam?

Click to shrink...

Steam works great, has all the features and more than consoles have and all for free. That wasn't what I was discussing, I was talking about how Steam links automatically with Epic/Rockstar/MMO games like Elder Scrolls/Blizzard titles and so on. When I turn my PC on does the PC just sync with everyone from all those launchers and I can voice chat or do I have to do extra work? Is there also one unified system for achievements or trophies from each of those launchers?

These are all things consoles are easier to implement.

 

[kubev]

Nobody's asking them to do it for free, but you know they get paid 30% on everything sold on the platform

Click to shrink...

They get 30% of digital game sales, with apps having two different tiers (15% for items found through in-store search and 5% for items linked from non-Microsoft sources, if I remember correctly). That said, I was already aware of that, and I suspect that even that cut of digital sales goes toward the other things I mentioned in some form, especially subsidies for other services, as Xbox is something that contributes to the growth of those other services.

 

[Lord Fanny]

Who actually believed this though?

Click to shrink...

Tons of people lol. That's like one of the go to defenses anyone comes up with when the topic is brought up

 

[snausages]

PC definitely doesnt take more work, in fact I build my PC cause of how much easier it was to use discord for FFXIV raids rather than the shitshow of talking at my phone while playing on PS4 and nobody being able to hear my timid irish nerd voice.

It is just a captive market thing, they do it cause they know it will be accepted.

 

[uptownsoul]

I always thought i was paying to get access to the games

 

[Deleted member 46804]

For screenshots though? I'm always getting notifications that I'm reaching my limit and I have to do a clear out.

Click to shrink...

I don't use that feature but it makes sense they put a limit on that and video storage. Game saves are minuscule in cost to store but screenshots and videos are expensive.

 

[Deleted member 5359]

120 a year for XBL is insane.

 

[reclaimerzzzzz]

For screenshots though? I'm always getting notifications that I'm reaching my limit and I have to do a clear out.

Click to shrink...

I believe screenshots and videos are uploaded to a OneDrive account associated to your xbox login and those have limited space, you can pay to have more but save uploads are different from media uploads.