surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
No, baseball fans know that the season HASN'T kicked off yet. The games in Toyko were still Spring Training games. The season actually kicks off on April 6th.
Anyway, the 2-game-at-once thing is cool. But still, $125 at once (even if it lasts a year) is a terrible way to market this to the younger generation who would be using their consoles to watch MLB. If they would consider offering a monthly subscription or perhaps pay for each game ($1 a game seems reasonable to me), that might work. But I don't see a lot of people who don't already have MLB.TV suddenly getting it because you can watch it on consoles.
Bottomline, this is just a bonus for people who already have MLB.TV moreso than something attractive to people who don't already have it. Seriously, you need to low your rates. Or at least offer a reduced price to have access to only 1 team's games. Or like I said, allow people to just pay for each game individually. Otherwise, good luck getting the younger generation to take MLB.TV seriously enough to actually shell out $125 up-front. I mean in the day and age where people won't even pay $60 for some new games that they can keep forever, good luck convincing people to give you $125 for something that only lasts a year and probably won't use often enough to make it worth it since in the end their console will still be used mostly for gaming.
Anyway, the 2-game-at-once thing is cool. But still, $125 at once (even if it lasts a year) is a terrible way to market this to the younger generation who would be using their consoles to watch MLB. If they would consider offering a monthly subscription or perhaps pay for each game ($1 a game seems reasonable to me), that might work. But I don't see a lot of people who don't already have MLB.TV suddenly getting it because you can watch it on consoles.
Bottomline, this is just a bonus for people who already have MLB.TV moreso than something attractive to people who don't already have it. Seriously, you need to low your rates. Or at least offer a reduced price to have access to only 1 team's games. Or like I said, allow people to just pay for each game individually. Otherwise, good luck getting the younger generation to take MLB.TV seriously enough to actually shell out $125 up-front. I mean in the day and age where people won't even pay $60 for some new games that they can keep forever, good luck convincing people to give you $125 for something that only lasts a year and probably won't use often enough to make it worth it since in the end their console will still be used mostly for gaming.
As useless as this is to me personally, I can definitely see how Microsoft will rake in some serious cash with this.
Cla- Actually those Japan games were regular season games. Go ahead and check the MLB standings if you need proof. The price is set by MLB, not by Microsoft. This is just the regular subscription price for MLB.tv so this is more of an added bonus to an MLB.tv subscription.
Cla-Ron is right, those are regular season games the Mariners and A's played. I know because I stayed up until 6 am watching my beloved M's beat Oakland in the first game of the season.
@Cla: I agree that paying that much upfront is a tough sell to the younger generation, and some sort of variable, alternative pricing model could help, but let's not forget that the younger generation are not the largest demographic that uses their 360.
And I don't necessarily think the younger generation are the ones more likely to use this, given that accessing media (TV, movies, YouTube, etc.) through the 360 has eclipsed people playing multiplayer games.
And, what others said, those games count, keep up!
And I don't necessarily think the younger generation are the ones more likely to use this, given that accessing media (TV, movies, YouTube, etc.) through the 360 has eclipsed people playing multiplayer games.
And, what others said, those games count, keep up!
follow
