This.I bet they're just going to unite Live and Pass.
Second, you don't know how Sony feel about PS Now. Do you really think they're happy MS can boast asking five times more subscribers for their younger service? Do you think they're happy about all the Future of Gaming articles?
You've written a lot here to basically agree with me.
But I'm sorry, its much too early to worry about barred DLC. The idea that Microsoft will poison the chalice but Sony... Won't? Will, but Microsoft will do it first?
Either way, its just not relevant now. Nothing ever moves forward if you're scared about how bad actors might take advantage. Presume the best and react when there's something wrong to react to.
I don't think they really care about the "number of subscribers", especially since it's apparent that the majority got in on the frequent "dollar deals" Microsoft was running. They're more concerned about revenue and profit, rather than cheaply padding the "volume" statistic and pinning hopes on the notion that the users don't flee once full price kicks in.
I hope that neither party poisons the chalice. But Microsoft has a track record of executing such moves whenever they have a captive audience (or at least perceive that they have one).
Case in point: About a decade ago, when Netflix first offered streaming video services, Xbox 360 was one of the only devices that supported it, aside from PCs and maybe one or two other obscure devices). Sensing that they had "no competition" in the space under the TV set, Microsoft struck a deal to keep the service exclusive to their console for two years...and then proceeded to force Xbox 360 users to pay for an Xbox Live Gold subscription merely to have access to the Netflix app. (This was in addition to Netflix's fee...so these customers had to pay two fees.)
Even after the exclusivity period ran out, and the service became available to PS and Wii without paying an additional fee to the console manufacturer, Microsoft still kept their fee for a while. It was only that after published reports came out that Wii and PS3 became much more popular devices for Netflix viewing, that Microsoft finally removed the Xbox Live Gold requirement. They weren't acting out of generosity, but rather as an attempt to save face and prevent even more of their users from jumping ship.
I believe this is the most likely scenario. They removed a discount price for Gold that brings it in line with console only Game Pass. If they make online play free many people will opt to play online free and not bother with Game Pass which takes them out of Microsoft online services. If they roll people from Gold to Game Pass they are going to streamline their services, significantly increase Game Pass numbers (which helps in negotiations) and bring a value to those that they convert. I do not see Microsoft leaving the money on the table or more importantly risk shrinking the number of users on their services.I bet they're just going to unite Live and Pass.
We're going to fundamentally disagree on this, so I don't see much to gain from us toing and froing over details. What I will say is this: Sony isn't a forum fanboy - their execs don't spend all day reframing their rival's successes as losses.
You can bet your bottom dollar that between now and launch, PS Now will get a rehaul, and if not a big one, then certainly in that direction. If Gamepass IS the future of gaming, and we'll disagree on that, Sony won't want to be left on the starting line when it gets confirmed.
I think if we're looking to a decade ago, we could find dozens of anti - consumer moves from all of the big 3. I just don't see the value in presuming the worst.
Ms are playing up their pro consumerism, and rightly so. Its only because they feel they're on the cusp of a brand new and very profitable revenue stream. Enjoy a games company not nickel and diming you for a change, and hope that it lasts.
Let's hope this isn't what's actually happening...
Another one comes out to say free online is coming
gamepass ultimate is pretty expensive..people do not want to pay more than 40-50 for online.zero chance they bring back free online multiplayer. It's easy revenue. They are the reason this is industry standard in the first place.
Most likely they'll integrate it with Game Pass to extract more money per customer.
The fee is use the live ecosystem, its not that hard to conceive.I don't think they really care about the "number of subscribers", especially since it's apparent that the majority got in on the frequent "dollar deals" Microsoft was running. They're more concerned about revenue and profit, rather than cheaply padding the "volume" statistic and pinning hopes on the notion that the users don't flee once full price kicks in.
I hope that neither party poisons the chalice. But Microsoft has a track record of executing such moves whenever they have a captive audience (or at least perceive that they have one).
Case in point: About a decade ago, when Netflix first offered streaming video services, Xbox 360 was one of the only devices that supported it, aside from PCs and maybe one or two other obscure devices). Sensing that they had "no competition" in the space under the TV set, Microsoft struck a deal to keep the service exclusive to their console for two years...and then proceeded to force Xbox 360 users to pay for an Xbox Live Gold subscription merely to have access to the Netflix app. (This was in addition to Netflix's fee...so these customers had to pay two fees.)
Even after the exclusivity period ran out, and the service became available to PS and Wii without paying an additional fee to the console manufacturer, Microsoft still kept their fee for a while. It was only that after published reports came out that Wii and PS3 became much more popular devices for Netflix viewing, that Microsoft finally removed the Xbox Live Gold requirement. They weren't acting out of generosity, but rather as an attempt to save face and prevent even more of their users from jumping ship.
Getting rid of Xbox Live Gold makes sense for a lot of reasons
- They have a new, more universally loved subscription service (Game Pass) and they don't want to confuse consumers
- "Games With Gold" (four free games every month) is actually somewhat of a hindrance to Game Pass long term growth. The longer you're subscribed to Gold, the bigger your library of available games gets - and they can't remove them like they can on Game Pass. Long term subscribers to Gold will have less reason to want to subscribe to Game Pass.
- "Games With Gold" pt 2 - Users will expect to get free Xbox Series X games on the service when the console launches, and Microsoft would rather they just use Game Pass for this purpose
- "Games With Gold" pt 3 - Currently you get two BC games every month, and they're yours to keep forever. This was (from my understanding) a limitation with the digital storefront. My guess is with the store re-launch, where OG Xbox and 360 games are "modernized", they won't want to do this any more.
- Getting rid of the Gold requirement for online multiplayer brings feature parity with PC, something they've been pushing a lot lately.
- "Deals With Gold" could easily be phased out by having weekly store discounts available to everyone. Game Pass subscribers already get store discounts on Game Pass games.
- This will generate a lot of goodwill, and will make the total cost of ownership for the PS5 seem much higher by comparison
I bet they're just going to unite Live and Pass.
It's sooo fun to crossplay with people on xbox and ask them why the servers work for me even though I'm not paying.Free multiplayer on consoles? I almost forgot that it was a thing someday...
Think shocked would be more like. Mostly because it would make almost no difference in sales. Free multiplayer won't convince hardly anyone to move especially in Microsoft's worst area's main land EU abe the east. Be throwing money away for little gain. Spending the gold money on worthwhile studios would sell more consoles.I would be really surprised if Microsoft does make multiplayer free.
Having boxes under the tv sells subscriptions. PC users don't want it since lord gabe does not get a cut. Samsung tv owns won't care. The whole does not caring about selling boxes is laughable. Its taking things out of context to concern troll.I mean I see how that would help them sell more boxes, but everything Microsoft have been doing for the last two years or so has been to shift to a subscription model above even getting there boxes underneath TVs around the world
Think shocked would be more like. Mostly because it would make almost no difference in sales. Free multiplayer won't convince hardly anyone to move especially in Microsoft's worst area's main land EU abe the east. Be throwing money away for little gain. Spending the gold money on worthwhile studios would sell more consoles.
Having boxes under the tv sells subscriptions. PC users don't want it since lord gabe does not get a cut. Samsung tv owns won't care. The whole does not caring about selling boxes is laughable. Its taking things out of context to concern troll.
Think shocked would be more like. Mostly because it would make almost no difference in sales. Free multiplayer won't convince hardly anyone to move especially in Microsoft's worst area's main land EU abe the east. Be throwing money away for little gain. Spending the gold money on worthwhile studios would sell more consoles.
Microsoft definitely still wants to sell / focus on subscriptions though. They're just looking at all of the features they have currently and what they charge money forI'm asking a question, Microsoft want to be everywhere and their subscriptions are at the centre of everything and that plan goes beyond their hardware, it doesn't exclude it
So in effect they sort of direct the flow of revenue from Gold into a wider more encompassing "Next Gen" version of Gamepass, And jettison the Gold branding?Microsoft definitely still wants to sell / focus on subscriptions though. They're just looking at all of the features they have currently and what they charge money for
They have already announced that XCloud will be part of Game Pass subscriptions. As I mentioned above the Gold stuff could all be cut out of their service catalog by discontinuing the Games with Gold and Deals with Gold programs and providing people free online multiplayer. So that leaves two subscription services - Game Pass and All Access - both of which they're currently pushing hard. The All Access sub also includes Game Pass already, so it's not like you have to subscribe to multiple things.
- Online multiplayer (Gold)
- Four free games every month (Gold)
- Subscriber-only discounts (Gold)
- Catalog of console games (Game Pass)
- Catalog of PC games (Game Pass PC)
- Subscriber-only discounts (Game Pass)
- Game Streaming (XCloud)
- Rent-to-own console (All Access)
Honestly, owning an Xbox without subscribing to Game Pass should almost be a crime at this point. If they just converted everyone's existing subscription from Gold -> Game Pass while offering free online, I feel like most people would be pretty happy with that. It would also entice a whole lot of customers to buy an Xbox this Christmas instead of a PS5.
The mainland EU kept the ps3 afloat when it launched. Sony did everything but poop in the box but the mainland EU ate it up. The only reason we got humbled Sony was UK and the America's told Sony to get bent when presented with a shit sandwich. That loyalty is unbreakable. Sony could double psn fees in the mainland EU and Microsoft could go free and it make zero difference. That territory has blind loyalty.I don't know about that. If all other things are equal (or Xbox is cheaper), a bright sticker / box ad regarding free multiplayer would be a huge deal for people, especially parents, IMO. Any household with two systems would save 120 a year, paying for the console after a while.
The goes beyond hardware is just being a company early to the game. They know xcloud is a supplement to current gaming. If that changes they are there to take market share. A box under the tv will drive subscriptions for at least the next 5 years. It is all about not being late to the game if cloud gaming takes off.I'm not trolling
I said "above even selling boxes" I didnt say they didnt care about selling consoles they obviously do
I'm asking a question, Microsoft want to be everywhere and their subscriptions are at the centre of everything and that plan goes beyond their hardware, it doesn't exclude it
Oh I agree, I feel they are being very forward thinking and are taking some risks to carve out a new frontier in the industry(streaming/subscription)The mainland EU kept the ps3 afloat when it launched. Sony did everything but poop in the box but the mainland EU ate it up. The only reason we got humbled Sony was UK and the America's told Sony to get bent when presented with a shit sandwich. That loyalty is unbreakable. Sony could double psn fees in the mainland EU and Microsoft could go free and it make zero difference. That territory has blind loyalty.
The goes beyond hardware is just being a company early to the game. They know xcloud is a supplement to current gaming. If that changes they are there to take market share. A box under the tv will drive subscriptions for at least the next 5 years. It is all about not being late to the game if cloud gaming takes off.
Oh I agree, I feel they are being very forward thinking and are taking some risks to carve out a new frontier in the industry(streaming/subscription)
If it pays off in concert with bulking up the 1st party studios which they are, then the are a force in a whole new field of the industry.
I'm just interested whether the pivot is very pronounced like for instance them dropping bombs like "free online and it starts right now!" Or if it will be gradual like it has been to this point(on the front end at least, back end Microsoft have been looking for new angles on the industry basically since they got into it)
The only way I see this working out is if they just grant you a permanent license for all your GwG games for the Xbox One. Otherwise, they could possibly face some legal action and it would absolutely fly in the face of their "doing this for the consumer" mantra they've playing up.I'm just wonder if they actually do this what happens to your Xbox One GwG library. For the 360 and Xbox games those are apparently yours to keep and play even if you're not a subscriber. However they changed things for the Xbox One so it's more like Playstation Plus. You can only play Xbox One games you got from GwG if you're still a gold subscriber.
I'm just wonder if they actually do this what happens to your Xbox One GwG library. For the 360 and Xbox games those are apparently yours to keep and play even if you're not a subscriber. However they changed things for the Xbox One so it's more like Playstation Plus. You can only play Xbox One games you got from GwG if you're still a gold subscriber.
should work too, you have to use a vpn to redeem the code though.Would that work for a NA console or is that too wishful?