I find myself puzzling upon the idea that I am an Xbox Gold member and also play Sea of Thieves on PC. I notice that, naturally as it seems, if I stop paying for my Gold membership I can still access the game on PC without loss. But the console version of the game (and pretty much all the other Xbox games) is/are unable to continue access. Noting this I had to wonder:
What must it feel like to be a Gold member on console exclusively, especially knowing that games such as Sea of Thieves are inaccessible if your membership expires?
This got me looking more closely at the Gold membership and it's value as a service. Though I still cannot easily justify that a player should be expected to pay for the Gold service if their only interest is playing a single game such as Sea of Thieves, I can see clearly, there's more to Gold than access to this single game.
When paying for Gold back in the day.. it was much more clear that the value was put towards running game servers. Gaming was a much different playing field those years back. But we're not really in the place anymore - sure servers do incur costs, big ones, but that's only part of the hallmarks of the day.
Now we're looking at voice chat via parties, games with gold offerings, and discounts as the big offerings for Gold.
The list of games that a subscription to gold has offered for free is pretty darn long (as noted here) It could be said that with a bit of patience that the $60 website price for gold (not counting the cheaper cards I found online that were on sale for as low as $24 for a 24 mo. gold sub) for a year is quickly recouped when one looks at the titles they can get for free on gold. That alone tells me paying for gold is worth it even if you never play online at all, so long as you have a bit of luck in saying you actually LIKE the games they've offered. Depending on the type of gamer you are you could reasonably never buy a single game and simply play the free downloads that come monthly.
But what if your a player who doesn't give a rats nose hair about those freebies... you just want to play Sea of Thieves? Then yes.. the value is simply destroyed...
Then, there is the offering of discounts to consider isn't there. Well, let's see... most of them are remarked as 50% give or take 10%... not bad.. though the offerings aren't nearly as robust as one might hope, yet they are there still.
But again what if your just looking to play that one game online with friends and don't want to buy stuff.... again... IMO... not worth it. Obviously even if they offer a game for a penny as a sale each day if your just playing ONE game and have no interest in others it's a wasted penny you'll likely never spend.
So it could be said that the deals aren't important enough to justify the Gold fee.
Party chat? That's a big one... now I happen to have a gold sub and hadn't bothered to make a silver sub to test this, but from what I've been looking at you do need a Gold sub to use party chat. THAT alone could be worth the money. I couldn't imagine playing any game without party communication on any of Xbox console, PC, Sony or whatever... the ability to chat is a big deal - for me at least. Setting up a free chat server is simple on PC... but on console the tools simply aren't there. having it built in, moderated via ability to report players, and dedicated outside of games and usable at anytime even when simply staring at the wall.... that's worth a good bit.
So to wit I have to say that access to Sea of Thieves is not actually simply tied to Gold. We ALL can, if we simply choose to, access this game on PC without the gold price paid. If a player doesn't want to play using or doesn't have access to a PC that can run SoT that is entirely their own problem IMO. Because the game doesn't force a paid Gold membership in itself.
It's the console and MS who are forcing that part of the fee.
It's my hope that all players on all platforms be allowed to play online for free as many outside PC games do allow. Sure it'd be with potential exceptions for the few games such as MMO's which are specifically charging for access to the single title itself, as a service which includes server access as well as whatever content/development/etc they offer. But despite that, I have to say that the notion that in order to access the game online while playing on console requires a Gold sub annoys me....
I feel overall that Gold has evolved enough now that it's able to be stated fairly that there's more to the cost than merely multiplayer access. It's the users fault if they can't/won't/or don't want to appreciate the other aspects of the service they are paying for. Not to mention that at least in the case of Sea of Thieves or State of Decay 2... having the PC not require a gold membership to play isn't nearly as insulting as it may seem. Because the entire service the Gold fee offers isn't being offered.
I still hope that the requirement for Gold membership be waived in Xbox console, especially play-anywhere titles where access isn't a requirement of the alternative platform. But I can say equally that it's justified that the Gold exists as there is a lot more than mere access being provided, as I've said a few times now. Should PC specific players be charged for access in return? To that I have to say .... no... because the entire service isn't being offered. Instead the requirement should be lifted from console. Though, I don't see this happening since it seems by my perceptions that most players simply pay for gold to get online, and not for the freebies or discounts or party chat, and for MS to keep the Gold numbers up they need the gateway to remain... But, I still hope to see this change as more Play Anywhere titles are offered.
All that said, remember: If you don't want to pay for Gold or can't or won't or whatever... you can still play the game on PC. Even a total garbage PC runs SoT. It's part of Rare's "Potato promise" as it were, so don't think that 'console is getting kicked' no... consoles have been allowing themselves to be kicked long before SoT .... at least now thanks to Play Anywhere that's not nearly as true as before since players of at least a few games can play on the PC regardless of Gold membership, a sign to me, that server access isn't the hallmark MS is focused on as it used to be back when Gold was the norm.
Now, if we get more PC players or start offering the additional benefits of Gold to PC specific players... then asking for a Gold sub for any and all certainly makes sense. But with the numbers of PC specific players on Xboxlive being a low as they remain (There's only a handful of Play Anywhere Xbox titles after all) ... it seems unreasonable.
Recall that Play-anywhere is an answer not to simply attract PC only players... it's an advantage *every * player. Not to mention other Play Anywhere games that we are ALL allowed to play these games on either or both systems, as I have and still do after all... I play SoT on PC most of the time.. but when I am on my alt.. I'm actually usually on console. Not to mention that my family plays SoT here and there as well, often alongside me as I play SoT on PC, and they didn't even have to buy a copy of the game!.. THAT'S the REAL value of play anywhere IMO.
So whether you hate cross-play, hate that PC-centric players don't have to pay for gold to play, or love both these aspects are allowed and enjoy these points isn't the concern here. What the question would be is to ask is Gold worth it? Should Console specific players be limited to Gold as a requirement for access to SoT and other games? And so on....
Discuss as you may. I'm curious to the musings and impressions that others might have that games on console continue to expect paid memberships in order to play many games. Is it enough that access is only part of the reward for being a subscriber? Would it be worth it for PC only players to also pay Gold fees? Could that be justified? Not? What do you think?
