Should Xbox Live Be Free Like PSN?

Added 10/06/2008 by Justin McBride

On November 15, 2002, Microsoft launched its completely unified online service for broadband connected Xbox owners the world over to chat and game with other like-minded gamers. Microsoft named their service Xbox Live, a name many gamers grew to love over the years. With a few standout titles at launch such as Unreal Championship, MechAssault and Ghost Recon and the fact that Xbox Live’s feature set and ease of use put it miles ahead of the competition. Compared to Playstation 2’s then current online offerings and the GameCube’s virtually non-existent online support, this made for a compelling package and seemed like an amazing deal totally worth the annual subscription fee.

Back then, that $50 was easily justified. Every game featured standard voice chat support along with an integrated online identity and friends list. This carried over across all your online games. Perhaps best of all, the network only supported high speed broadband connections which didn’t leave the door open to lag created by 56k dial up connections as was seen on other services. All of these things and what was often praised as the best library of online compatible games put Xbox Live far above other consoles’ services.
 
Now, things have changed. Xbox Live isn’t the only fully featured online service on the block. Sony has stepped up their game with the Playstation Network, a service intent on offering everything Xbox Live does, except it’s free. Even Nintendo is attempting to take their console online with the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection. While Nintendo has proven itself to be a lesser threat to Xbox Live’s dominance, Sony’s Playstation Network is steadily improving.  While it may not be as good as Xbox Live just yet, at the rate they’re going with upcoming services such as Life with Playstation and the long-awaited Home, Microsoft might have something to worry about in the near future.

On one hand, it can be argued that Xbox Live wouldn’t have seen as many updates as it has in its nearly six-year lifespan if Microsoft wasn’t charging for it. Microsoft continuously performs maintenance to the service in order to make sure things are running smoothly for the millions of gamers accessing the service on a daily basis.  Running Xbox Live servers has to be expensive. Quarterly updates keep a steady stream of improvements coming on a scale no other console online service can compete with.

On the other hand, Sony’s Playstation Network has been free from the day it launched in 2006 and has seen many substantial updates. Ranging from their “me too” online movie and television download service to numerous UI improvements; Sony certainly isn’t slacking in the update department. Once again, allow me to remind everyone that their online service is completely free.

What makes me question the cost of Xbox Live is the lack of something truly worth paying $50 a year for. Sony has taken a considerable step in the right direction by offering dedicated servers for some of its first party online games such as Resistance: Fall of Man and Warhawk. This is in stark contrast to Xbox Live’s client hosted servers. The host player will always have an advantage over the competition since everyone has to connect to him resulting in relatively zero lag for the host. A prime example of a particularly unbalanced host advantage is Gears of War. Many players have complained about the power of the infamous “Host shotgun” which seems adept at downing or instantly killing anyone that happens to wander into the host’s sights, even if they happen to be 20 feet away. If a team has a host that’s good at the game, generally that team will win unless the opposing team makes a concerted effort to decimate the host early on. But I digress. The point is, this could have been easily remedied if the game supported dedicated servers, where no player has such an advantage.

The key to Xbox Live’s success and Microsoft’s ability to charge $50 a year is entirely dependant on the consumers’ perception that it is miles ahead of other online services. It relies on the “you get what you pay for” mentality to stay afloat. The problem is, now that Microsoft has competitors in the online arena that can offer similar services for free, people are going to start wondering what makes Xbox Live so special and why it’s worth paying for. The New Xbox Experience Microsoft has been raving about since E3 2008, which launches this fall, does add some nice new features and enhancements to both the Xbox 360 dashboard and the core Xbox Live experience.  It remains to be seen if this will be enough to catapult Xbox Live as far ahead of its rivals as it used to be.

In the end, it all comes down to what you, the gamer, think. Should Xbox Live be free? I’m sure there are folks that could argue this point on both sides of the fence and there would be no clear winner. I, for one, hope that Microsoft steps up its game as far as Xbox Live goes if they expect people to keep paying for it. That’s not to say the service isn’t worth it, but I want them to give me a reason to continue paying $50 a year for it.