Support NeoGAF

[Sanepar]

Even if it does go up to $25 per month, that's still much better than paying $70 for a game if you just want to play it one and done.

I think these companies love consumers like u with these deep knowledge of financial math.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

I think these companies love consumers like u with these deep knowledge of financial math.

Can you expand on this, please?

 

[Solidus_T]

Shocking. At the rate of these subscription price increases, it will probably end up being cheaper just to purchase the games.

Given how much time I spend on each game, it already really is.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

Why would you ever buy a game for full price if you only want to play it through once? Sales exist and the game will be probably less than $30 soon enough.

This is fabulous. Of all the arguments against Gamepass that have been aired, we're now arguing that getting to play a game you'll only play once for a fraction of the retail price is bad.

"Why not just wait a year or two? It'll fly by. Maybe take up pottery or knitting to pass the time."

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I think these companies love consumers like u with these deep knowledge of financial math.

Works for me when someone else might spend $70 on ten games per year, while I save money and get twenty games per year for $30 or so each.

 

[Sanepar]

Can you expand on this, please?

$25 per month is $300 a year for renting you own nothing in the end.
$300 is 4.2 $70 games or 6 $50 games or 10 $30 games.

A normal person on games market(95% or more of this market) has a job, family, scholl, college, friends. Games is just a hobby.

A console usually has an average of 8 games sold during a life cycle.

$300 per year represents 30 games during a life cycle. Most of people don"t play that.

Do u think is smart to pay $300 per year on renting for something u don't have time and don't want to give time for that?

Doesn't matter if it has 300-400 games. Regular consumers u not put enough time to make sense and considering 80% of top20 every year are not on subscription services.

 

[Solidus_T]

$25 per month is $300 a year for renting you own nothing in the end.
$300 is 4.2 $70 games or 6 $50 games or 10 $30 games.

A normal person on games market(95% or more of this market) has a job, family, scholl, college, friends. Games is just a hobby.

A console usually has an average of 8 games sold during a life cycle.

$300 per year represents 30 games during a life cycle. Most of people don"t play that.

Do u think is smart to pay $300 per year on renting for something u don't have time and don't want to give time for that?

Doesn't matter if it has 300-400 games. Regular consumers u not put enough time to make sense and considering 80% of top20 every year are not on subscription services.

At even 20 USD a month, you would have to be playing games non-stop to get the most out of it. Most people have lives outside of gaming, even if it is their main hobby.
For Elden Ring for example, I played nothing but that game for three months after buying it, revisiting it later for a couple more, and I played a lot of hours of that game in a short period of time - more than I usually would for a video game. At the end of 2022, I had 400+ hours in the game on multiple characters, with months spent playing nothing but Elden Ring and some other time for older games and one other new game I bought. If I was paying monthly, I would have effectively spent more than the MSRP just renting it. Rip off.

 

[Solidus_T]

Works for me when someone else might spend $70 on ten games per year, while I save money and get twenty games per year for $30 or so each.

I would love to meet someone who buys ten full priced $70 games in one year - and is somehow able to play them all. A parent buying games school child perhaps? Also, what games?

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I would love to meet someone who buys ten full priced $70 games in one year - and is somehow able to play them all. A parent buying games school child perhaps? Also, what games?

Well, according to some you find on gaming forums, they're giga chads with super model gf's and drive lambos, game on planes and have hollywood friends, plus all the time in the world to game. So ask them. Nah... we know they are liars.

Everybody is different, enjoys different kinds of games, has different budgets and varying amounts of free time. So that right there makes it ridiculous to judge others on how, when, where and why they game, wouldn't you say?

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I'll elaborate a bit on my personal gaming and purchasing style. I strongly prefer physical games, but I also buy/collect digital games as well, but I'm much less likely to spend higher amounts on digital games. I tend to get those games at significant discounts. I prefer aa and indie experiences to the big budget aaa titles, but I also like a few of them, and am willing to spend that $70 on those specific games on occasion.

When it comes to subscription services, I'm not a slave to them. Meaning I don't feel like I need to stock up on years at a time. I can just sub for a month or two, then cancel when I feel I don't have the time to game, and having years of a sub means some months will be wasted away in my specific case. I look at them as samplers, or rentals. Sometimes I beat them, like them, then wait for deep sales to own them. In other cases I'll try them, hate them, then be very glad I didn't buy them at all. That method has saved me thousands of dollars over time.

Of course to others, they likely see sub services as something else entirely and that's fine too.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

$25 per month is $300 a year for renting you own nothing in the end.
$300 is 4.2 $70 games or 6 $50 games or 10 $30 games.

A normal person on games market(95% or more of this market) has a job, family, scholl, college, friends. Games is just a hobby.

A console usually has an average of 8 games sold during a life cycle.

$300 per year represents 30 games during a life cycle. Most of people don"t play that.

Do u think is smart to pay $300 per year on renting for something u don't have time and don't want to give time for that?

Doesn't matter if it has 300-400 games. Regular consumers u not put enough time to make sense and considering 80% of top20 every year are not on subscription services.

Oh right, I thought we were talking about playing a "one and done" game that'd be done within a month, the inference being that you can pay $25 to pay a $70 game day one, plus any others you'd like to squeeze in.

Of course the top tier of Gamepass doesn't cost $25, it costs $16.99, so it seems weird to not inflate the cost of the $70 game by the same amount, but nevermind!

On the face of it $17 ($4.25 a week) seems fine to play the latest game for a month, doesn't it? You don't need to pay for a year.

I wonder if Blu Ray forums are full of people explaining what Netflix and AppleTV+ ought to sink into the sea?

 

[elmos-acc]

This is fabulous. Of all the arguments against Gamepass that have been aired, we're now arguing that getting to play a game you'll only play once for a fraction of the retail price is bad.

"Why not just wait a year or two? It'll fly by. Maybe take up pottery or knitting to pass the time."

I definitely was not saying that playing an older title in GamePass is bad by any means. I just don't think paying $25 to play something through once really saves you the $45 missing of the game's retail price.

I do think that the "$70 worth of value" is often an empty argument. Value is subjective, and the $70 price is completely artificial. The reason it gets discounted is that a lot of the potential consumers are not willing to pay the "hype tax" and find even a slight drop in price hard to resist. I personally would not spend $70 on a game unless I knew it had the potential to be a personal favorite, but everyone can spend their money, of course, however they want to.

 

[Solidus_T]

Well, according to some you find on gaming forums, they're giga chads with super model gf's and drive lambos, game on planes and have hollywood friends, plus all the time in the world to game. So ask them. Nah... we know they are liars.

Everybody is different, enjoys different kinds of games, has different budgets and varying amounts of free time. So that right there makes it ridiculous to judge others on how, when, where and why they game, wouldn't you say?

Calm down. Yes, some people, especially the super-rich, do basically nothing and have all of the time in the world. Some of those people may post here.
You "LOL" reacted my simple input on rental services costing more per game I play (which would literally be true for the games I play and how much time I spend on them) - you're so invested in other's responses, justifying it with this loose example of someone who plays ten or twenty $70 games in one year, yet you post following on your own habits and that it's "entirely fine" for others to see it differently:

I'll elaborate a bit on my personal gaming and purchasing style. I strongly prefer physical games, but I also buy/collect digital games as well, but I'm much less likely to spend higher amounts on digital games. I tend to get those games at significant discounts. I prefer aa and indie experiences to the big budget aaa titles, but I also like a few of them, and am willing to spend that $70 on those specific games on occasion.

When it comes to subscription services, I'm not a slave to them. Meaning I don't feel like I need to stock up on years at a time. I can just sub for a month or two, then cancel when I feel I don't have the time to game, and having years of a sub means some months will be wasted away in my specific case. I look at them as samplers, or rentals. Sometimes I beat them, like them, then wait for deep sales to own them. In other cases I'll try them, hate them, then be very glad I didn't buy them at all. That method has saved me thousands of dollars over time.

Of course to others, they likely see sub services as something else entirely and that's fine too.

What are you getting all bent out of shape for? Is it only fine when they subscribe?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well, according to some you find on gaming forums, they're giga chads with super model gf's and drive lambos, game on planes and have hollywood friends

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

What are you getting all bent out of shape for? Is it only fine when they subscribe?

lol what kind of childish response is this? You talk about my "lol" to your response, but you do that to me all the time. Then I give a thoughtful, civil response and explanation to my comments, and you say immature shit like "why u mad bruh"?

For some reason, you're just a hater and don't like anything I say and just want to be disagreeable. I see it was a waste of time engaging you in the first place, so go do your own thing, and stop quoting me if you're only desire is to troll speak.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I think these companies love consumers like u with these deep knowledge of financial math.

Your biggest error is assuming everyone buys years of subs. Truth is, everyone games differently.

 

[Solidus_T]

lol what kind of childish response is this? You talk about my "lol" to your response, but you do that to me all the time. Then I give a thoughtful, civil response and explanation to my comments, and you say immature shit like "why u mad bruh"?

For some reason, you're just a hater and don't like anything I say and just want to be disagreeable. I see it was a waste of time engaging you in the first place, so go do your own thing, and stop quoting me if you're only desire is to troll speak.

No, I don't LOL react your posts "all the time," I'm sure I have actually "liked" more regarding physical media, if not agreed. I did to one where you said it would be more worth it to pay 25 a month for a $70 game if you're going to "one and done" it, because you have to assume so much to come to that conclusion! "Well, you see if you play ten $70 games, it would be better to rent them!" There are much meaner people on this forum; don't spin my disagreement to make it personal. I am genuinely curious to see who has the time to play and complete 10 or 20 $70 games in one year.

 

[docchicken]

I would love to meet someone who buys ten full priced $70 games in one year - and is somehow able to play them all. A parent buying games school child perhaps? Also, what games?

Is there anyone on this board who has purchased ten brand new $70 games at launch and completed them within the last 2 years?

 

[Solidus_T]

Is there anyone on this board who has purchased ten brand new $70 games at launch and completed them within the last 2 years?

If I had to guess it would be the people who post their setups worth $4000+? Even then I doubt some of these people do that. I have a fairly decent PC and it's been nothing but Baldur's Gate 3 for months so far

 

[Mr Reasonable]

I definitely was not saying that playing an older title in GamePass is bad by any means

What I believe you were saying was that if someone only wanted to play through a game once, then paying the $25 (actually $17) price for a month of Gamepass wasn't worth it because that $70 game would be $30 soon enough.

That was my understanding.

There's a lot going on here.

1) Game is available today for $70 - that is locked and will not get more expensive no matter what year it is in this conversation.
2) in order to make Gamepass' value proposition seem worse, we have travelled forward in time to a point where Gamepass Ultimate has become 50% more expensive than it is today (but remember that despite jumping into the time machine, the price of games has not inflated by 50% too).

You said don't pay $25 (currently $17) to play the game once on Gamepass, why not just wait until the game has reduced to less than half price so it's only $5 more than a month of Gamepass (actually $13 more - almost double the price of Gamepass today). That way we can see that Gamepass isn't good value.

I replied that if you want to play the game today, you're a bit stuck so why not take up knitting so you can pass the year (or maybe more, maybe less) that it takes for the game to hit the bargain bin.

You then said it's ok to play an old game on Gamepass. I didn't really understand why.

So, the suggestion is buy (random selection for the sake of the conversation) The Calisto Protocol now for $30 (current price on Walmart), don't play it on Gamepass for $17, sorry, $25, last year when it came out.

Of course the Calisto Protocol hasn't been on Gamepass, now or in the past, so that's confusing.

On your other point, I agree with you, playing games at launch is more expensive, that's just how it goes, but that's the thing with Gamepass, some of the big titles are on there from launch day, and you can play them for $17, not having to pay $70. Of course, if you're only going to play that one game and want to play it for a year, the economics don't work out and nobody's arguing that. But if you want to play a game when it launches and don't want to pay $70 and think you'll be done with it within a month, $17 isn't the worst price to put on it, which is I think the original setting. Except that we have to increase the price to $25 for some reason.

 

[adamsapple]

Is there anyone on this board who has purchased ten brand new $70 games at launch and completed them within the last 2 years?

Probably not purchased, but with things like game pass and gamefly, i've definitely played more than that for full priced retail games at their launches

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

No, I don't LOL react your posts "all the time," I'm sure I have actually "liked" more regarding physical media, if not agreed. I did to one where you said it would be more worth it to pay 25 a month for a $70 game if you're going to "one and done" it, because you have to assume so much to come to that conclusion! "Well, you see if you play ten $70 games, it would be better to rent them!" There are much meaner people on this forum; don't spin my disagreement to make it personal. I am genuinely curious to see who has the time to play and complete 10 or 20 $70 games in one year.

You'd be surprised. At the end of the year, especially on Gamefaqs boards, I see lists that people beat that year and they are an eye opener that looks like a grocery store receipt. But yeah, for me with games like Starfield for instance, I'd rather just pay for a month, beat it then unsub until something else comes along I want to play on day one, but not pay $70 for. Like the upcoming Persona 3 Remake. Just makes sense for me to pay $11 and beat it, then unsub and buy it later when it's a fraction of the hype tax cost.

 

[Sleepwalker]

I find the cost comparisons stupid because out of those 10-15 games that hypothetical guy is buying at $70 (which is so many games, most people buy a couple lol) at least 7 wont be on gamepass day one. So hed have to settle for other games he doesnt wanna play to "save" money or wait years for them to show up, which by the that time will be cheaper to own.

Look at the highest rated and more popular games this year

BG3 not on gamepass
Totk not on xbox altogether
Resident evil 4 remake not on gamepass
Street fighter 4 not on gamepass
Metroid prime remaster not on gamepass
Sea of stars on gamepass
Starfield on gamepass
Dead space remake not on gamepass
Jedi survivor not on gamepass
DIablo 4, not on gamepass at launch
EAFC24 not on gamepass
Madden 24 not on gamepass
Hi fi rush on gamepass
FFXVI not on gamepass
Armored core 6 not on gamepass
Mortal kombat 1 not on gamepass

3/16 were on gamepass day one, 2 more may make it this calendar year (cod, diablo), 2 out of the 3 games don't even retail for a full $70.

 

[Deerock71]

Eventually it will cost $4,000 a year and people will still claim it’s the greatest deal in gaming.

What if that's true...in the future?

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I find the cost comparisons stupid because out of those 10-15 games that hypothetical guy is buying at $70 (which is so many games, most people buy a couple lol) at least 7 wont be on gamepass day one. So hed have to settle for other games he doesnt wanna play to "save" money or wait years for them to show up, which by the that time will be cheaper to own.

Look at the highest rated and more popular games this year

BG3 not on gamepass
Totk not on xbox altogether
Resident evil 4 remake not on gamepass
Street fighter 4 not on gamepass
Metroid prime remaster not on gamepass
Sea of stars on gamepass
Starfield on gamepass
Dead space remake not on gamepass
Jedi survivor not on gamepass
DIablo 4, not on gamepass at launch
EAFC24 not on gamepass
Madden 24 not on gamepass
Hi fi rush on gamepass
FFXVI not on gamepass
Armored core 6 not on gamepass
Mortal kombat 1 not on gamepass

3/16 were on gamepass day one, 2 more may make it this calendar year (cod, diablo), 2 out of the 3 games don't even retail for a full $70.

You forgot Lies of P.

 

[Sleepwalker]

Oh right, I thought we were talking about playing a "one and done" game that'd be done within a month, the inference being that you can pay $25 to pay a $70 game day one, plus any others you'd like to squeeze in.

Of course the top tier of Gamepass doesn't cost $25, it costs $16.99, so it seems weird to not inflate the cost of the $70 game by the same amount, but nevermind!

On the face of it $17 ($4.25 a week) seems fine to play the latest game for a month, doesn't it? You don't need to pay for a year.

I wonder if Blu Ray forums are full of people explaining what Netflix and AppleTV+ ought to sink into the sea?

Probably not but it is also not the right comparison to make, are the netflix forums full of people telling saying that its better value subbing to netflix and getting no control over the content you're served vs going to the cinema on release date and watching the movie you yourself picked?

You don't have to pick one or the other.

You forgot Lies of P.

I did but I only went 3 pages back on opencritic, lies of P was like 3 pages after lol.

 

[docchicken]

Probably not purchased, but with things like game pass and gamefly, i've definitely played more than that for full priced retail games at their launches

Did you complete or even near-complete ten brand new games after release? Almost everyone dabbles; we all have backlogs since games are being thrown our way for cheap or even free.

 

[adamsapple]

Did you complete or even near-complete ten brand new games after release? Almost everyone dabbles; we all have backlogs since games are being thrown our way for cheap or even free.

In the last 2 years? Yes, I've definitely completed more than 10 games in their launch windows.

By complete I don't mean I 100%-ed them, but definitely completed their story campaigns at least.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

Probably not but it is also not the right comparison to make, are the netflix forums full of people telling saying that its better value subbing to netflix and getting no control over the content you're served vs going to the cinema on release date and watching the movie you yourself picked?

You don't have to pick one or the other.

I don't think people subscribed to Gamepass are saying that it's always a better value proposition that must replace buying all your games. As a subscriber myself, I bought Armoured Core a few weeks ago, I'm about to jump back in on Cyberpunk, which I bought. I was playing Doom Eternal again recently and Lies of P, I spent some time with Starfield too, those are on Gamepass.

I don't have a problem with people doing whatever they want with buying games. I just don't know why people need to create bizarre circumstances where Gamepass is bad value.

"But what if I pay 50% extra and only play one game for a year? I own nothing at the end of the year and spent more than the game would have cost! Gamepass is a bad deal. Why not just wait until the game is less than half price? Gamepass is terrible value when you look at it like that."

That is the level of games industry analysis we're enjoying.

 

[elmos-acc]

What I believe you were saying was that if someone only wanted to play through a game once, then paying the $25 (actually $17) price for a month of Gamepass wasn't worth it because that $70 game would be $30 soon enough.

That is not what I meant. Of course paying $17 ( I did not originally bring up the $25 figure, but the post I replied to) is less than $70 and it can be worth to get GamePass instead of buying the game.

I am just kind of over the whole "Games are $70, so a year of GamePass costs the same as 3 games! I am saving money, it is the best deal in gaming!" talking point. Since you know, most games are not $70 and even if they currently are, they are probably not worth $70 (Like RedFall or Forspoken). If the selection is interesting and the subscription does not break the budget, it is a viable option for someone looking for a meaningful gaming experience.

 

[sendit]

lol what kind of childish response is this? You talk about my "lol" to your response, but you do that to me all the time. Then I give a thoughtful, civil response and explanation to my comments, and you say immature shit like "why u mad bruh"?

For some reason, you're just a hater and don't like anything I say and just want to be disagreeable. I see it was a waste of time engaging you in the first place, so go do your own thing, and stop quoting me if you're only desire is to troll speak.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

That is not what I meant. Of course paying $17 ( I did not originally bring up the $25 figure, but the post I replied to) is less than $70 and it can be worth to get GamePass instead of buying the game.

I am just kind of over the whole "Games are $70, so a year of GamePass costs the same as 3 games! I am saving money, it is the best deal in gaming!" talking point. Since you know, most games are not $70 and even if they currently are, they are probably not worth $70 (Like RedFall or Forspoken). If the selection is interesting and the subscription does not break the budget, it is a viable option for someone looking for a meaningful gaming experience.

But you literally replied to someone saying they thought that it was ok to buy a month of Gamepass to play through a $70 game and told them they should just wait until it's cheaper.

That didn't say anything about a year of Gamepass, or three games. They just said they could play through a $70 game for little outlay with Gamepass and you told them they should just wait until the game cost roughly w what 2 months of Gamepass costs currently.

Why? Nobody knows.