Or lets not blame Sony because they had no fault in charging for online service. It's all MS fault.Yes and pigs can fly. Let's blame Sony because good guy MS didn't start charging for online back in the OG Xbox era
Sega Genesis had a rudimentary online service as well, but it was basically an online game streaming service ... which ... sounds crazy, but it was a thing in 1994. I remember being hyped for it and my parents (wisely) told me I couldn't subscribe, and thank god they did I would have been so disappointed.
Nah you changed my mind. Innocent Sony just started to charge for the exact same service they had been providing for free, so it's 100% Microsoft's fault since they created a new service with new features that didn't exist in the space at the time, and charged for it.Yes and pigs can fly. Let's blame Sony because good guy MS didn't start charging for online back in the OG Xbox era
Not to be a corporate shill but servers cost money to keep up. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
also most services offer "free games" or other initiatives to keep us hooked. This coming from the person who joined Nintendo online for the Fire Emblem 3H online functionality (need that free battlefield xp)
Almost none of these games had servers to keep up. You're the one hosting them for other players.
That's different now but for two full generations -- and a good amount of games even now -- these were peer to peer services.
Gravity Rush 2 had servers. Demons Souls had servers.
I loathe to think what an Overwatch ps4 or a Destiny 2 would play on a free peer to peer connection on PS4. Who pays for the man time to trouble shoot online issues? Or to implement upgrades to stability? I'm all for free stuff but $5 a month to make sure my online games run (most of the time..) is not a big deal to me.
when u think about this just remember that there's actually people that pay microsoft to use their gaming platfroms
Demon's Souls servers were not run by Sony, and were on a platform where you did not have to pay for online.
Gravity Rush 2 was on a paid service... and no longer has servers.
HahaHow did Pokemon fans accept a single game being released as 2 different games?
For the folks in the know... Is Stadia charging for multiplayer?
Thank you. I have to give Stadia a try. I want to support platforms that don't charge for online play.No, Stadia has a premium 4k HDR paid subscription and will add a 1080p service.
The 4k HDR streaming requires the paid package but anyone can use the 1080p service without paying for Stadia.
Edit: you'll need to buy games for Stadia of course.
Yeah. Nintendo does kind of get away with it for fully embracing the social aspect of those kinds of mechanics. It looks weird as hell from the age of "disc locked content" though.
Thank you. I have to give Stadia a try. I want to support platforms that don't charge for online play.
Oh.... ok. I can wait.Yeah, the one note is that the 1080p service will launch later in 2020 (aka the real launch)
It was a subscription service. And I'd say that it was still better than some modern day equivalents, as I don't recall another service that let you play games weeks before they hit retail, let you play some imports that had no plans for a proper localized release, and occasionally held speedrun contests on special promotional versions of the games.Sega Genesis had a rudimentary online service as well, but it was basically an online game streaming service ... which ... sounds crazy, but it was a thing in 1994. I remember being hyped for it and my parents (wisely) told me I couldn't subscribe, and thank god they did I would have been so disappointed.
That, and the handful of Mega Drive games that did have proper online play were direct-connect and didn't cost anything to run (other than what your phone company would charge you for the call).Sega Channel was a game subscription service.
Xbox Live Gold is an online multiplayer walled garden.
They have absolutely nothing in common.
First page came through in the clutch. Excellent work.Blame the ones that supported it when the other two had it for free
it bothers me no one is bothered with it, can somebody explain it to me? how did we go from free online to paying for it without any kind of backlash? even goddamn Nintendo got away with it and now we're stuck paying for console online for all time.
shouldn't we demand free online next gen?
You're still making this debunked argument. Did you read any of this thread at all? Companies that host game servers do not receive any of your Plus or Gold money. Your money is pocketed by MS/Sony while the game servers are hosted by the game's developer or publisher who sees none of it. It's why you have in-game microtransactions or DLC in addition to the online fee, and MS/Sony will take 30% off those purchases as well.
But the whole point is that your money is not going towards running the servers. Paying for Plus or Gold has no effect on your gameplay experience. The developer can't afford better servers with your sub money because they're not getting any of it.There is a cost for running servers - they are not free, whether the developer or publisher sees money out of Plus or Gold is irrelevant as the cost still exists.