XBox720 $15/month extra

keithp

keithp

CAGiversary!
Feedback
10 (100%)
So I'm reading the rumor that the next XBox, the one that costs $300 (the cheaper model), will require a payment of $15/month extra. WHAT?! $180 per year on top of buying the console?!!! What the hell is Micro$oft smoking???!!!

Are you willing to fork over an extra $180/year for it?
 
I wonder if MS is going to do away with codes / cards that way they can put a stranglehold on Xbox LIVE subscriptions.

You are talking about LIVE, right?
 
[quote name='Brak']I wonder if MS is going to do away with codes / cards that way they can put a stranglehold on Xbox LIVE subscriptions.

You are talking about LIVE, right?[/QUOTE]

I'm talking about what's written here.

I would hope that $15/month includes or is equivalent to XBox Live Gold, but that's still a big jump from the current $40 per year to $180.

[quote name='Superstar']Rumors are facts, clearly. ;)[/QUOTE]


Didn't say otherwise, I'm simply asking what the CAG masses think about it and if anyone is willing to pay it.
 
I highly doubt that is true to be honest. If for some reason it ends up buying true I won't even bother buying a new Xbox. I always thought 59.99 for a year of gold was kind of crazy which I've always bought a little cheaper here and there. Most I ever paid for gold was 35-40 per year.


If it was really 15 bucks a month I couldn't afford that. I don't know a lot of people that game a lot that would want to pay out that much.
 
All of the rumors and leaks for the next gen xbox have either a) been negative or b) given me zero hype or excitement whatsoever.

If the new xbox is going to focus on call of duty, fps games, and xbox live (the current money maker and bread & butter of the xbox 360) I will be completely content with my current gaming systems.

I'll hold off judgement until later this month but at this time I have no reason to buy the new xbox and the CAG in me is actually grateful.
 
There is virtually nothing the xbox720 could offer me that I'd pay $15 a month for. Unless it had ESPN included without needing a cable provider, and some kind of PSN-style game collection.

And even then probably not.
 
Following the link, it seems that if they follow what they did with the 360, it might not be forever. If the comparison is correct in the article, the 14.99 a month they charged for the previous xbox 360 was for live and for a discount on the system itself for 14.99 a month for 2 years. 2 years of live service $120 (59.99 retail per year) + $100 discount on system. 14.99 a month x 24 (2 years) = $360. 360-220 = 140 extra bucks to MS. Basically they are going the rent a center route, they charge you more for the ability to not have to pay everything upfront. Good deal? Hell no. Will people buy it anyway because they cant afford to drop $500 upfront or are bad at math? Pretty sure this proves they think the answer is yes.
 
The problem with the always on model is that "we" don't trust Microsoft. If I were going to invest in a $300 digital only console, I would much rather spend it on a steambox then a new xbox. I feel like the majority of hardcore gamers feel the same way. Steam/Valve has the perfect chance to come in and steal a good chunk of microsoft's userbase.
 
These rumors are getting ridiculous. How about these people wait until May 21 when Microsoft truly speaks themselves...

Always 'on' and forced Xbox Live is just going to push a certain market out i.e. those without internet. These people will just go to a competitor. Microsoft isn't that dumb.
 
If they do that it just means that it worked well enough with the XBox 360 plan that is the same way. I can live with that option as it is just that, an option.

I just hope that all of the rumors are just put out there to get everyone to think the worst, that way when they just announce a normal video game console everyone will be happy about it.
 
Microsoft thinks most people will buy Xbox Live Gold with the $500 machine. Microsoft also thinks people are that bad with Math. So those on the fence about XL Gold will see this as a savings. They'd be getting it cheaper with a forced subscription. Except that it'll cost more in the long run. The only advantage is people who wouldn't buy XL Gold after shelling out $500, and who plan to keep the charge on their credit card indefinitley by only paying the mimiumm payment option and raking up interest (Which one should never do anyway). But would pay off the cheaper version and XL Gold subscription quicker.
Also, never underestimate the stupidity of people.
 
Yea, it is just a way to get the console cheaper up front and pay more on the backend. It isn't a requirement to pay $15 a month.
 
[quote name='lordopus99']These rumors are getting ridiculous. How about these people wait until May 21 when Microsoft truly speaks themselves...

[/QUOTE]

This.
 
yeah... it's just a couple weeks away. we don't need 50 threads of rumors.

but it wouldn't be weird to see a subsidized console with a higher per month subscription? do you want to pay $599 upfront like with the PS3 at launch? or would you rather play $300 upfront but pay $15/month for Xbox Live? I think most would take the subscription. especially since you're going to be owning the device far longer than that cell phone you just paid $2000 for (phone + cell phone bill over 2 year contract).
 
[quote name='lordopus99']These rumors are getting ridiculous. How about these people wait until May 21 when Microsoft truly speaks themselves...

Always 'on' and forced Xbox Live is just going to push a certain market out i.e. those without internet. These people will just go to a competitor. Microsoft isn't that dumb.[/QUOTE]

They aren't smart either with some of the decisions they made with Windows 8
 
Something with this rumor really doesn't add up. I thought I read it was $10 a month for 2 years. So that would push the price too $540 over the two years compared to $500 but then having to get two years worth of Live which would be roughly 70-80. So the 300 plus paying 10 a month is the better deal. If it's $15 a month then the numbers are $660 compared to $580-ish. So then paying all up front is probably the better option.

I wonder if it will be something where the 300 consoles will always need the 10-15 dollar plan to be on Live. You can't add Live through cards??

Again this is all speculation so who knows but this doesn't add up to me.
 
in almost every situation, paying up front is the better deal. but who wants to instantly pay $800-1000 for a cell phone? who wants to drop instant cash on a car or a house? nobody except the uber rich and even then, they usually don't because with the low interest rates, it's better to take that loan and either spend the money on other needs or invest the money not spent which can get you back more than the interest spent.

all conjecture on my part but if you're getting a subsidized console where you already paying for Live to get that subsidized price, then it'd be redundant to have Live cards and it would make them unnecessary for the person until the contract is up. but you'd still want to add them to your account so that once your contract is up, you still have Live time and Gold at a discounted rate (assuming you got that card because it was discounted).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top