YouGamers.com

Articles

Windows Live - one man's thoughts

Windows Live - one man's thoughts

Claudio Todeschini, a highly experienced author in the gaming industry, takes a stance on Windows Live - the forthcoming gaming service for Windows Vista users only. Here's what he thinks about it and why he's okay with Windows Live fees.

During a press event prior to the Game Developers Conference, Microsoft anticipated to Game Informer the pricing scheme for Windows Vista Live, the multiplayer service that will basically replicate on PC what Xbox owners already know. As for the console counterpart, you'll have two membership to choose from, Silver (free) and Gold (subscription based).

The Silver membership will basically allow to have a gamer tag (the unique name that identifies the player on game servers) and play for free against PC opponents - write it down, guys: multiplayer between PCs will still be free. The Gold membership will offer a lot more: you'll be able to play against PC AND console opponents for titles that will support cross-platform matches (such as Shadowrun); you'll get multiplayer achievements (Halo 2 for Windows Vista); the great matchmaking feature and presumably access to all the post-release content of a game.

Microsoft themselves officially confirmed all of this today, putting all of the rumours to rest.

The amount of money you'll have to cough up is the same as an Xbox 360 owner: a Grant (50$) for a year, a Jackson (20$) for three months, and five solid brand new dollar coins for a monthly subscription. If you already own an Xbox Live Gold account, you won't pay a penny, and you'll be able to use it for your PC online gaming sessions as well. The two platforms will share the same gamer tag, achievements and who knows what (the buddy list, what else?).

So, everybody's first reaction might well be: "WTF? Do I have to pay for something that's always been free? What's wrong with Micro$oft? Do they HAVE to suck us up dry?" Well, just for once let me say that this might not be too bad, after all. Don't get me wrong: I'm not enthusiastic at the idea of paying to play. But this, compared to the Xbox Live service, may just improve our quality of gaming. The quality of what we could play.

It's all about market, after all. And about what Microsoft will do to convince us to put a hand into our always-too-thin wallet. If you own an Xbox, you have no choice. Want to play online, download the cooler demos, meet your buddies and matchmaking with someone who's just as a looser as you? Show me the money, please. As a customer, I have no choice. My opinion? It sucks.

For PC it's a whole different story. You have MMORPGs that you can play for a fee with or without buying the client, tons of games with free multiplayer support (or completely free games), you can even create your own server and invite friends to brawl with you. No extra fees. Unless Microsoft will be able to patent TCP/IP or a make us pay every time we connect to something, there's a big market out there. If Microsoft wants to take a slice of the pie, they'll have to come up with some cool ideas, something worth our money.

If they fail, and present us with something lame or feeble, we'll just look somewhere else. The world is big, and so is the multiplayer market. PC gamers will keep on fighting against each other like they did in the last century or so, and so will Xbox 360 players.

It couldn't be any simpler than that.

So - do you agree or is Windows Live a flawed concept? Whatever your thoughts, please visit the forums and discuss the topic with panache and wit! (Registration not needed)

Related Stuff

Tags