What a Rip off this is:

 

Ya know I held back from buying another 12 month gold subscription card until a few days ago. While playing my Call of Duty black Ops combat training I notice that all the weapon scoring had stop this could only mean one thing that the game support is now ended for the Xbox 360 but MS still is selling its 12 month gold Subscription cards without any game support what a rip off this is.

 

 

I wonder how long before the MP game support will last before game scoring is shut down. The mistake MS just created is to allow selling any more 12 month subscription cards until the switch over then re-issue them on the open market. Really MS you taken my money and no I am not buying the Xbox-one either because of this type of practices you’ve shown me by Turning off game support before the switch over how rude you are to this customer and all customers. Also when I rented a game last week I notice I get the achievements but the game scoring is gone therefore gamer points are no longer added to my gamer score. Either you have a massive BUG or you are really cheating the public who has supported your company all these years being on live this is why I am heading over to the PS4 system as soon as I see how many BUGS Sony will have before I fork out my money.

 

 

I wish you lots of luck because I don’t think Microsoft cares enough about what gamers say these days your current actions show that to me. Oh while I am at it don’t say it’s my system it’s a new 360 bought lest than 6 months ago. Good thing I turned in all my games before that ended in two weeks where no 360 gamer will be worth anything as a trade in value. My COD BO is the only game I kept to give me soothing to do until I buy my PS4 which I am looking forward to. Again, thank you very much MS and XBL you really shown your stuff.

 

Discussion Info


Last updated July 4, 2018 Views 10 Applies to:

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

Learn to read the TOS for the GAME and the DEVELOPER.  Most of them clearly state that any and all online functions can cease at the developers discretion.

Likewise :)

Agreed, Mal.  It is never right when someone is being wronged by those who have the upper hand.  I do enjoy our exchanges.

@Klokkwork

No worries, I did not notice you breezed over it.  I think we have somewhat similar approaches to arguments, just differ in the viewpoints on many things is all.  It provides for an interesting discussion I am just more or less often find myself trying to argue for the underdogs here.

Does the main multiplayer work fine though? You're speaking of combat training, which isn't supposed to be tallied to your main multiplayer career or whatever you want to call it.

For the MP servers, absolutely 24hrs.  That's a phenomenal thing.  It's not going to fix things like 3rd party game stats tracking.  There's simply nothing Xbox can do about that.  When a 3rd party company drops its support of their game, that's pretty much it.  We're left to play with the carcass.  Cloud servers will keep that carcass as fresh as possible, though, prolonging the raw online gameplay aspect of it for as long as Xbox maintains their servers.  And that's as good as it gets.  Frankly, I've never been one for stats tracking anything.  Mostly because I stink at competitive shooters.  lol.  But for the hardcore gamers who take their stats seriously, it's a tragic thing.  It really is.  Best thing they can do is pick up whatever new titles are out, and build up their stats there.

-

Oh, hey, Mal, sorry if I breezed over the point about me not conceding or acknowledging a complaint or criticism.  I always try to acknowledge someone's criticism.  I will try to always state that they do have a valid opinion, because that's simply the truth of it.  But if I disagree with someone's expectation, I'll provide my input.  And I'll usually use an analogy, and someone will usually counter that analogy, forcing me to either further develop it or make up a new one.  It's just how I operate.  Not trying to offend or dismiss anybody's opinions or experiences.  I actually kind of enjoy exploring different paths as I'm forced to maneuver around the obstacles set in place by someone else's counter point.

Thats why its great MS has invested in servers fot X1.

Well, I have no misunderstanding of your logic, I just do not think it justifies a subscription fee when the access to online features of games is controlled by the developers/publishers just like on free services.  If the developer drops a game, I understand that, but if MS is going to take a fee there should be something in place to accommodate that.  That being said, that is the best way to put it and it is something that has been said by a couple others above, so I am just going to agree to disagree with you lest this go on for a page of rehashing the same points.

My point is that paying for Xbox Gold provides you access to the online services that exist at any given moment in time.  It does not guarantee that those services will always exist.  It cannot guarantee that, because those services are not governed by Microsoft.  If one game's service goes down, your Gold membership is still fulfilling its duty by providing you access to all the then currently available multiplayer services.  It's not the Xbox Gold Black Ops Membership.  It's not the Xbox Gold Rainbow Six Membership.  Whether you play it for one game or not, the Xbox Gold membership applies to whatever multiplayer titles are currently available on the network.

-

The idea that game companies are thinking about closing down their servers because, maybe their parent company made a business decision to close its doors, or maybe the server population is down and they can't justify the costs to maintain servers.  Businesses have decisions to make.  They can't have Microsoft calling them on the phone saying "Hey wait a second, guys.  You can't make any business changes because we've got people who just started their Gold memberships."

-

Now, if you're saying that this is a discussion about whether or not it's right for Xbox to charge for multiplayer, I can understand where you're coming from.  You want a gaming platform that delivers online multiplayer for free.  There are companies that offer this.  It's a perfectly valid alternative.  Xbox doesn't offer that.  We're all welcome to choose the platform that best fits our expectations.  I play on multiple platforms.  I'm glad the others are free, because if they charged, I wouldn't choose them over Xbox.  With PS4 charging for online multiplayer, I'm certainly not going to get a PS4.  I will choose Xbox over Sony in that decision.  But that's my preference, based on my opinions.  Companies are free to build the business model they want, and Xbox has been rewarded with many millions of customers who, like me, feel satisfied with what we get for our money.

-

As for analogies... seriously, they don't have to carry that far.  But I'd mentioned that a business might purchase the property where a bus stop was, changing the landscape, and the available activities at that former destination, thus no longer granting access to the route that one took before.  The idea of being dropped off a block and a half down the road was to liken it to "Sorry, Black Ops no longer has that functionality, but Black Ops 2 does."  As if a very similar experience on a slightly different game might be akin to being dropped off just a block and half away from where you're used to going.

See, the problem is you even mentioned in the analogy that you have to stop a couple blocks away... well this is still leaving you the opportunity to walk over to your destination with an extra step to the process.  That is not the case in these instances on XBox Live.  The "Live Bus" may not take you to the destination, but you are still able to reach it.  That is not the case on XBox  Live; you are no longer able to "reach your destination" in any way shape or form .... as if the bus stop was demolished with explosives and blocked off with police tape for for the rest of the time that the city exists.  At the very most, I will call it a stretched analogy.  Oh well it doesn't really matter since it does not necessarily dictate whether or not it is OK or not.

-

If you have periods in which you will concede to agree with or acknowledge a criticism or complaint, I have yet to see it in a fairly large sample size of replies, even including things like being hung up on by customer service.  I think we can both agree that MS makes mistakes and makes bad calls, and that the set up is not perfect, but I find charging a fee for "online multiplayer access" that may not actually be available and saying it is not MS's responsibility to provide that service in the absence of support form the developer, to me, seems very dismissive considering that is the purported service for which a fee is charged.  For that fee, I would expect that access to be delivered.  I feel that this is very reasonable as a request when you pay for a service.  I just don't think that it merit's a "go with it" response.  I mean, regardless of the OP's reputation or content of his post, this individual situation does not apply only to him.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.