If you don't have a Live account yet, you don't like games. This has already been proven. So this is non-news.
Just to be clear, if this is just to give the extra benefits of live as a service, and you'll still be able to play online without paying for live, I have no problem with it. But if they actually want to lock-out non-Live subscribers from playing games online, they're arrogant and it will either cost them money or keep developers from actually supporting it.
If you make an Xbox game, Live is the only game in town. That's not true of the PC. Why would Valve want to make their game so that MS had exclusive rights to charge Valve's customers to play Valve's game? How does that make sense for Valve (or any developer)?
Last edited by Frogacuda; 07 Mar 2007 at 12:39 PM.
Countdown to the de facto end of the console generation: 5 exclusives
Most recent: Deadly Premonition: Director's Cut (4/30)
Next up: The Last of Us (6/11)
Later: Puppeteer (9/10), Beyond: Two Souls (10/18), Rain (TBA), Until Dawn (TBA)
Now are Live Gold accounts on the 360 and PC seperate? I dont think Id ever find myself paying for an online PC game outside of an MMO (which thankfully ive kept out of since FFXI).
PC gamers don't even buy their own games...you think they'll pay for a service to play them?
This probably doesn't affect actually PLAYING a game, but instead incorporates the features that makes the 360 the best gaming platform out there for multiplayer gaming.