Do you think we'll have to pay to play?

[Agamemnon]

The thought just crossed my mind; since with Halo 2 in order to play online you had to be a subscriber to XboxLive, which costs money, do you think that we'll also have to create accounts relevant to Windows Live and also play money to play H2V? I know Halo PC was free, mainly because there was no boastable feature for the Xbox that included online play, and what sold Halo PC was the fact that you could play online, but do you think it is possible that we might get screwed over?

Also, can anyone tell me if you know if we'll have to pay for a Windows Live account anyways?

[TheGhost]

I doubt it. Most online multiplayer FPS games you don't have to pay to use. It seems that the ones you mostly have to pay for are MMORPGs and the like, where what you're paying for is the servers and stuff that the company is putting up. In Halo 2 Vista's case, we will have dedicated servers and so the cost of that is up to the consumers, not the game company.

[Agamemnon]

A valid point indeed, but you never really know with Bungie. With Starcraft, Warcraft, and Diablo, you can host your own games because of battle.net, yet you don't have to pay to play online, yet with other games you must pay money to run a dedicated server. While hosting games in those three games isn't like a function as a dedicated server, it still acts as so, as in people can join the game, yet you hold no admin rules over it. I guess the other part about dedicated servers in other games is also the gametypes people play on, but in those three games you also have options to choose as being the host of a game. I just hope we don't have to pay to play; it's one of the reasons why I hate MMO's.

[legionaire45]

If Microsoft does do it then H2V will never sell. Microsoft is already making it expensive enough since you need Vista to play it, and im sure that they know that people will not want to pay for anything extra.

[Reaper Man]

The only reason you have to pay to play on the xbox is the fact that you are paying for xbl. Pretty much like paying for your computer's internet connection, cept damn expensive in comparison.

[thehoodedsmack]

Yeah, XBL covers most if not all online games. Not just Halo. I certainly hope I needn't be paying for H2V.

[Edward Elrich]

no, if we were meant to pay, we would have to in order to play halo pc online. And for XBL, that was for the subscription, which could be used for any game with online features, not just halo 2. And since we already know halo 2 vista multiplayer will not be against anyone using xbox live, but just pc's it will probably be free. (but hopefully not direct ip connect anymore, that got REALLY annoying wih setting up a static ip and configuring firewalls.)

[MereCatfish]

It would be incredibly lame if you have to, but I am sure we wouldn't pay without a fight. We managed to get hold of the HEK in the end, didn't we? Am I the only one who remembers when we all invaded the MS Newsgroups demanding the HEK? :lol:

[Teroh]

No way. This isn't a MMO.

[Patrickssj6]

No way. This isn't a MMO.
Not just MMO all games usually with a big server required to play cost $$$.

[Agamemnon]

No just MMO all games usually with a big server required to play cost $$$.
You honestly don't think Blizzard would lose money if they didn't have you pay for WoW? Blizzard can shit on a game and it can still turn out to sell billions of copies.

[Patrickssj6]

You honestly don't think Blizzard would lose money if they didn't have you pay for WoW? Blizzard can shit on a game and it can still turn out to sell billions of copies.

Not just MMO, all games usually with a big server required to play, cost $$$.;)
GuildWars is also free to play, you just need to buy it.:)

[Boba]

Someone change my vote to yes, I feel like being a rebel.

[Cortexian]

I hope not! That would just be stupid for MS to do, and make the game stupid...

[Agamemnon]

Judging from their recent update, paying to play is now much more of an issue.

[Boo Diddly]

I still don't think they will do that though. You may have to pay for any premium content they have, but they would be shooting themselves in the head if they required a person to pay for Live Anywhere.

[MereCatfish]

Oh dear. D=

[tikkshamur]

"Anywhere Live" sounds like something you'd pay for. Just my 2 cents.

[Chewy Gumball]

It might be included with Vista though. It could go either way.

[cls]

Even If I did start working again, I wouldn't pay to play a first person shooter online no matter how much money I had.

[Rosco]

I highly doubt it, (but then again, many people doubted halo 2 would come to the pc, :-P) only thing I could see them making you pay for is downloadable content created by the developers, which we had to pay for if we wanted to get it straight away via xbox live.

[Rescudo]

Downloadable content always became available to the public after a while anyway.

[Agamemnon]

Not really Rescudo. Take a look at Bethesda. Not only is Oblivion an unfinished game, which would explain why the game shipped with a toolset for PC, but then they have the audacity to charge people for mods that make the game better. Question: when you create a game, shouldn't you create it to the fullest potential? Another question: if you were trying to liven up the experience by including new content, wouldn't the $50 price tag already cover new experiences of things the company produces? Seriously, really sad, to be honest. I'll stick with tessource. I currently have 60+ mods installed for Oblivion to actually make it worth-while.

[Rescudo]

You're right, good point. *fails at making good points*

However, I'm pretty sure the downloadable content for Halo 2 was released to the public for free two or three months after the initial release.

[MereCatfish]

At least they have been honest in now saying there will be a payed option.

[TheGhost]

Halo 2 Vista multiplayer is free of charge (http://www.h2vista.net/forums/showthread.php?t=475).