Support NeoGAF

[DeepEnigma]

Your post doesn't make any sense. I know it's some sort of "my Sony games are the best", but if that were the case game pass would be dead since it's only on pc and Xbox One.

That’s why it makes to sense to you. You have Sony living rent free in your head on here, so you try to see it in everything contrarian or what think you don’t agree with.

Could’ve meant just as much Nintendo, which Vawn has been cheerleading for quite some time.

Rent. Free.

 

[Vawn]

That’s why it makes to sense to you. You have Sony living rent free in your head on here, so you try to see it in everything contrarian or what think you don’t agree with.

Could’ve meant just as much Nintendo, which Vawn has been cheerleading for quite some time.

Rent. Free.

I'm a Nintendo fanboy now?

 

[wolffy71]

The idea that game pass will dissuade people from buying new $60 games because people will wait til its the service must have missed the rise and fall of gamestop. A place where you could buy a game used and the devs make zero dollars, nearly gone. In its place, a service where devs can still get value for their product. Win win, consumer and dev.

 

[DanielsM]

See? Look at this nonsense. All these words to literally say nothing. And he does this in every MS thread I’ve seen recently. He deserves pity, not mocking.

Look a small amount of words that says your butthurt. I'm going to give you one more chance before I put you on ignore. Either you want to discuss or you continue to attack like a child.

Your response are protecting. if you wish to discuss than you have to provide something of value from which a debate can happen.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'm a Nintendo fanboy now?

Gaming fanboy. We all are gaming fanboys.

It was meant to defend you (tongue in cheek), since the “go to default” is always “Sony Sony Sony” to select people, even when it’s not even apparent.

 

[DanielsM]

Your post doesn't make any sense. I know it's some sort of "my Sony games are the best", but if that were the case game pass would be dead since it's only on pc and Xbox One.

Microsoft literally could fund the losses to the service probably as long at they want, they have business/enterprise cloud service $$$$$$ that comes in bunches. What do you think has been funding all the gaming losses? Saying something would be dead when its clear Microsoft is funneling money into it from their bank roll.... isn't really a fact one should really put their hat on.

I would say once Xbox as a Hardware meets its final resting spot, than the service blows up... of course I don't see anyone paying more a few bucks a month for it anyway, kind of like PS Now. Once we are talking PC only.... the major publishers avoid Microsoft. So, at best MS will be able to rent their games and maybe have some tag along indie devs..... Humble bundle rental service.

I don't really see a business model here especially on PC. Its simply a video game rental service, I don't see it as anything other than a small revenue stream at best..... kind of like all the other rental services. Once they are down to just PC than there is competition everywhere.

 

[Moogle11]

I find this hilarious considering on of the most common retorts directed at fans of other platforms is the fact that the available exclusive games are typically defined as "one and done games", as if that's the worst thing in the world.

The above is not directed at you directly by the way, just more of a general observation. Also if you can personally justify the DLC purchases then I don't have a problem with it even if I personally wouldn't do it (who am I to say otherwise, live your life how you wish).

The reality is that by design gamepass makes games even more "disposable" than they ever were, and it's greatly ironic to see such fervent support from people who have historically gone around saying they hate "one and done" type games and have no interest in ever playing them.

Oh I definitely get that would be a hypocritical for people to make both those arguments. I certainly wouldn’t as I have no loyalty to any of these companies and in terms of playtime this generation PS4 and Switch are way ahead of PC where I have Gamepass currently and play the few Xbox exclusives that have interested me this generation.

Moreover, one and done single player games are far and away my main jam and Sony’s first party stuff is at the top of the list for me the last two generations. The only other things I occasionally play are some co-op loot games with friends and a few pick up and play things like Mario Maker and what not. So that’s where my views come from.

The cheaper and more disposable a method for accessing media the better for me. I’ll never repeat the mistake I made of buying a bu of it like I did with movies in my younger days and now have a few binders with a Few thousand dollars worth of DVDs/Blurays that have mostly been watched once or never (if it was something I saw before buying). Those binders haven’t been opened in the two plus years since I tossed the cases and got rid of my movie shelves.

If they can both iron out latency issues and get to to where most every game is playable on streaming services I’d happily go thst route like I have for music and movies and not have to buy media or dedicated hardware to access it.

 

[Afro Republican]

How is Gamepass "bad" for gaming and why are people assuming that Microsoft is "losing" money on it? Didn't we have this very same thread long ago and the conclusion was Microsoft wasn't "losing money" on it? I also don't see how it's "bad" for the industry, if anything this could be a good way to push crap indie games on people.

 

[DanielsM]

The cheaper and more disposable a method for accessing media the better for me.

Oh sure, the problem is you're not really paying the full cost of what the service needs to make to be a real business.

Right now for game rentals the only services that I have seen to have any measureable paying customers is EA Access and PS Now.... and the money is not good nor the subscription numbers. Of course, if someone gives people free shit they might consume the free shit..... but giving away free shit forever probably isn't going to work forever either. Developers are not making large money on this any more than they are making large money on PS+ and Xbox Live Gold free games, which is really just another rental service.

I see nothing wrong with any of this but it will never bring in large amounts of money for game development. Old games are cheap. Most people don't even pay for Xbox Live Gold/PS+ at say $40-60 a year, the chances of people throwing down another $80-100 is not good... which is what Sony found out with PS Now.

- Enjoy the free shit while it lasts
- Nobody is going to pay the prices Microsoft wants... all they have to do is ask Sony
- Once Xbox as a Hardware is put into final resting spot than the real business is basically done.... MS really doesn't have a PC business as far as digital distribution - which is what this is about Steam, in part
- Large developers/publishers generally avoid MS on PC, and already have their subscription services, and even the indies are already on Steam

Phil quietly retires.

In the meantime, it could be a very small revenue stream for devs/pubs on Xbox as a Hardware, but its not a real business. It simply a rental service.

 

[Hendrick's]

Why anyone would buy dlc for a game they don't own is beyond me, but here we are.

I'm happy to spend a few bucks on DLC when I don't have to buy the game. I'm not worried about the game leaving Game Pass because by then I will have finished playing it and moved on. If for whatever reason I feel I can not live without the game, I will just buy it at a discount and will have lost nothing. In fact, I will have spent less on the total purchase than if I had just bought it outright. It's a win-win situation, and that, along with excellent and timely content, is why Game Pass is so great.

 

[Outrunner]

No one ones how much a Gamepass dev makes, but it cuts out the middle men aka Amazon, disc manufacturers and shippers who take a sizeable chunk of revenue. A physical $60 game, a dev makes about $27 of that.

I can’t imagine Gamepass is paying devs substantially worse than that per download.

Gamepass just gets blown up as starving game devs by the Sony defense force because PSNow is dog shit and there’s no incentive to buy it.

Retailers get very little money from sales of new games. Publishers, like Microsoft, take the biggest slice.

 

[Nikana]

Oh sure, the problem is you're not really paying the full cost of what the service needs to make to be a real business.

Right now for game rentals the only services that I have seen to have any measureable paying customers is EA Access and PS Now.... and the money is not good nor the subscription numbers. Of course, if someone gives people free shit they might consume the free shit..... but giving away free shit forever probably isn't going to work forever either. Developers are not making large money on this any more than they are making large money on PS+ and Xbox Live Gold free games, which is really just another rental service.

I see nothing wrong with any of this but it will never bring in large amounts of money for game development. Old games are cheap. Most people don't even pay for Xbox Live Gold/PS+ at say $40-60 a year, the chances of people throwing down another $80-100 is not good... which is what Sony found out with PS Now.

- Enjoy the free shit while it lasts
- Nobody is going to pay the prices Microsoft wants... all they have to do is ask Sony
- Once Xbox as a Hardware is put into final resting spot than the real business is basically done.... MS really doesn't have a PC business
- Large developers/publishers generally avoid MS on PC, and already have their subscription services, and even the indies are already on Steam

Phil quietly retires.

You once again represent these services in non fair and frankly wrong ways. Revenue is not only calculated by the monthly fee. But you choose to ignore anyone that challenges you.

 

[Moogle11]

The idea that game pass will dissuade people from buying new $60 games because people will wait til its the service must have missed the rise and fall of gamestop. A place where you could buy a game used and the devs make zero dollars, nearly gone. In its place, a service where devs can still get value for their product. Win win, consumer and dev.

This is a great point. A lot of people who use Game Pass to play things they would have previously bought are probably people like me who often buy used or on a steep discount and then eBay it when done. That’s taking a potential sale (or two if I bought used and then sell to someone else) away whereas with Game Pass that at least get some money from me and don’t have me taking a potential sale away when I Ebay my copy.

Plus no one is forcing devs/publishers to put their games on Game Pass or to do it from launch. I’ll still buy games I want to play, including some I want to play day one, as it will never be the case that everything is out day one on such services. Just like there's a long wait for many movies to hit streaming services. Game devs/publishers don’t have to ever put their games on such services, or they can wait and do so when sales have severely slowed (most games are very front loaded and sell most of their copies in the launch window) and have another revenue stream for their titles that they didn’t have before.

MS is gambling by having all their games launch On the service as they want to build a subscriber base. It will either be more profitable for them to keep doing so or we’ll see them eventually change course and delay putting games on their until later dates when sales have slowed. So there‘s not a ton of risk there either IMO.

In any case, gaming has to adapt to younger generations, and older folks who also changed habits, who are used to not owning media and paying for cheap streaming subscriptions to have access to a ton of content rather than buying media or paying a lot more for cable/satellite. Outside of hardcore gamers a lot of people are just wanting to have fun and fill free time cheaply and I know a few people who quit gaming as they just viewed it as a waste of money vs Netflix and chill. That’s a worrying thing if it becomes a trend with his high game budgets are and they will continue to rise as hardcore fans scream for 4k and 60FPS.

 

[DanielsM]

MS is gambling by having all their games launch On the service as they want to build a subscriber base. It will either be more profitable for them to keep doing so or we’ll see them eventually change course and delay putting games on their until later dates when sales have slowed. So there‘s not a ton of risk there either IMO.

I would say they want to be the middleman where no middleman is really needed, meaning outside of Xbox as a Hardware. Without the closed eco-system, the large publishers/devs already have their own distribution channels and services. So, its a small revenue stream potentially for some devs on Xbox as a Hardware, once that is gone than really no purpose that I can see... more like a traditional publisher... if they choose to continue.

(slightly off topic)

 

[Hendrick's]

GamePass's whole premise is to get people to pay less for games they don't want, so they'll be less likely to pay full price for the games they DO want (which are, for the most part, on other platforms).

Genius revelation. Microsoft is putting together a service full of games we don't want yet brainwashing us into paying for it anyway. It's like MK-Ultra level shit happening over at Redmond, WA. This is how they will finally destroy their nefarious competition.

 

[DanielsM]

Genius revelation. Microsoft is putting together a service full of games we don't want yet brainwashing us into paying for it anyway. It's like MK-Ultra level shit happening over at Redmond, WA. This is how they will finally destroy their nefarious competition.

But you're not paying for it. I would have to put you on Voost level if you are paying $9.99-14.99 a month. Nobody was paying any of that, which is why they went to the $1 thing. They're trying to buy their way into a market which has very few funds.

I say its cool.... free shit, but anyone buying hardware for that.... well, I have no empathy for you i.e. Stadia Voost.

If I were to guess what is going to happen.... Office 365 Consumer or Entertainment Premium subscription.... or something similar.

- Office 365 Consumer (Word, Publisher, Excel, Outlook, Access, OneDrive, Xbox Live Gold) say for $149.99 a year
- Office 365 Entertainment Premium (Word, Publisher, Excel, Outlook, Access, OneDrive, Xbox Live Gold, Xbox Game Pass, and xCloud) say for $239.99 a year

And this is why Microsoft needs to be broken up, not that they are competing but they are using areas where there is a monopoly and than bundling in services to kill competition, imo. Basically what they are trying to do to Slack and Zoom, imo.

For the record, I don't think this will happen in gaming.... I expect gaming revenue to continue to go down for MS generally but there could gain during the Fall and Xbone Sexy (probably yoy from the low levels this last year for a few quarters after that).... I have no idea why someone would buy Xbox as a Hardware at this point, but there will be some hold outs so expecting a yoy gain in the fall.... service revenue will never be able to pickup enough to even come close to filling in the gap... gaming at Microsoft will have to shrink once Satya figures it out drastically.

Microsoft is trying to crush small rivals like Slack and Zoom, but it probably won’t face antitrust scrutiny

Microsoft is trying to crush Slack and Zoom by essentially giving away Teams for free.

www.vox.com

Phil has probably got say 2-4 years to find some real growth in subscription services or it will all get the axe, axeman cometh. Brave souls buying Xbox hardware, if you're not buying hardware or purchasing off the MS Store than no worries. They don't need people to find a dollar under the sofa cushions, they need 10s of millions of people paying real money per month or annually.

The axeman strikes again: Microsoft has real commitment issues

Yet another product cull raises questions about Microsoft's commitment to... anything, really

www.theregister.co.uk

 

[Nikana]

But you're not paying for it. I would have to put you on Voost level if you are paying $9.99-14.99 a month. Nobody was paying any of that, which is why they went to the $1 thing. They're trying to buy their way into a market which has very few funds.

I say its cool.... free shit, but anyone buying hardware for that.... well, I have no empathy for you i.e. Stadia Voost.

Plenty of people are paying that. You can say they aren't over and over but that doesn't change the fact they are.

 

[Moogle11]

I would say they want to be the middleman where no middleman is really needed, meaning outside of Xbox as a Hardware. Without the closed eco-system, the large publishers/devs already have their own distribution channels and services. So, its a small revenue stream potentially for some devs on Xbox as a Hardware, once that is gone than really no purpose that I can see... more like a traditional publisher... if they choose to continue.

(slightly off topic)

I mean I think they know the days of dedicated gaming hardware are on the decline and that media consumption will be increasingly disposable and by younger generations who have little or any experience with, or interest in, owning content or paying high prices for single games, movies etc. Game Pass isn’t causing that trend, it’s been building for 20+ years from Napster to Netflix to Spotify etc.

That’s why they have their games and game pass on pc and are working on Xcloud to get those games and game pass to people who won’t buy gaming consoles but have smart tvs, Rokus etc that could download an app and buy a controller As a way to expand their reach.

A middle man is needed as things move to streaming, just like people use services like Netflix and Spotify rather than paying movie studios or record labels monthly fees to stream just their content. Of course Disney+ is an exception to that, but I think the movie/tv industry will shoot them selves in the foot if they launch too many separate platforms. Cord cutters dropped tv/satellite to keep costs down and having to pay for a bunch of services to get the content they want defeats that purpose. So many will just stick with one or two and just not care about missing the other content or bum people’s log ins etc.

In any case, Microsoft’s aim is to get a leg up as things shift more and more to digital rentals (Gamepass) and streaming (Xcloud) like Netflix did back in the day by getting on the streaming bandwagon early when they first made it free for their discs in the mail subscribers.

 

[DanielsM]

I mean I think they know the days of dedicated gaming hardware are on the decline and that media consumption will be increasingly disposable and by younger generations who have little or any experience with, or interest in, owning content or paying high prices for single games, movies etc. Game Pass isn’t causing that trend, it’s been building for 20+ years from Napster to Netflix to Spotify etc.

Oh hardware sales are not really going down over 20 years, its just Microsoft sales of devices have gone down or have gotten no real traction.... hence, they cut it.

They also thought nobody would buy an iPhone.

That’s why they have their games and game pass on pc and are working on Xcloud to get those games and game pass to people who won’t buy gaming consoles but have smart tvs, Rokus etc that could download an app and buy a controller As a way to expand their reach.

Exactly, they can join all the other losers that have been in the loser game streaming market.

A middle man is needed as things move to streaming, just like people use services like Netflix and Spotify rather than paying movie studios or record labels monthly fees to stream just their content. Of course Disney+ is an exception to that, but I think the movie/tv industry will shoot them selves in the foot if they launch too many separate platforms. Cord cutters dropped tv/satellite to keep costs down and having to pay for a bunch of services to get the content they want defeats that purpose. So many will just stick with one or two and just not care about missing the other content or bum people’s log ins etc.

A middleman is not needed, which is why the large publishers already have their own digital distribution channels, subscriptions and virtually all of them have announced they were working on streaming (which is a loser market anyhow).

In any case, Microsoft’s aim is to get a leg up as things shift more and more to digital rentals (Gamepass) and streaming (Xcloud) like Netflix did back in the day by getting on the streaming bandwagon early when they first made it free for their discs in the mail subscribers.

Game streaming is not in the early days, the early days were 2009.

Where do you guys come from?

Basically, they lost in devices and are trying leverage their other business i.e. services, but the problem with that.... is there is very little need, demand or desire for the things they could offer in gaming. If they want to be a traditional publisher (developer), of course, they can do that.... but its a pipe dream thinking the average joe is going to pay for all these services, which are not really needed at all.... and that all the major publishers either offer themselves or will.

The large publishers generally want nothing to do with Microsoft on PC or other platforms, as Microsoft isn't needed as a middleman... .the close eco-system of Xbox as a Hardware, they have to work with MS.

What you are suggesting is wishful thinking by Microsoft, I agree that is what they think, but there simply is no reason to include another middleman where one is not needed..... which is why nobody used Games for Windows Live (RIP) or the Microsoft Store.

 

[Vawn]

Genius revelation. Microsoft is putting together a service full of games we don't want yet brainwashing us into paying for it anyway. It's like MK-Ultra level shit happening over at Redmond, WA. This is how they will finally destroy their nefarious competition.

Yeah, brainwashed by continuing to drop the price all the way to $1.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

A subscription service offering specials and deals and practically giving the service away when the service is in its early days, nope never heard of that before.

Oh wait Netflix, Apple Music, Apple TV, Spotify, Youtube Red/Premium, Hulu, XBLG, PS+, PS Now, EA Access, etc etc etc Y’all need to reach harder

 

[Nikana]

A subscription service offering specials and deals and practically giving the service away when the service is in its early days, nope never heard of that before.

Oh wait Netflix, Apple Music, Apple TV, Spotify, Youtube Red/Premium, Hulu, XBLG, PS+, PS Now, EA Access, etc etc etc Y’all need to reach harder

Nah bro it's different. It's M$ so it can't work. Fucking moron.

 

[DanielsM]

A subscription service offering specials and deals and practically giving the service away when the service is in its early days, nope never heard of that before.

Oh wait Netflix, Apple Music, Apple TV, Spotify, Youtube Red/Premium, Hulu, XBLG, PS+, PS Now, EA Access, etc etc etc Y’all need to reach harder

Its not the early days, we're almost 3 years in.

They are actually in some cases giving a way the service up to 3 years or close to it. For the record, I see nothing wrong with it per se, but no there really is no growth in it... basically some of the stuff you listed is actually proof of that i.e. EA Access and PS Now. Actually, I would say some of these stuff you listed is incorrect, Xbox Live Gold was bam you're paying from day one..... I know I was a subscriber in 2002 Of course, there has been get a free day, or get a free month card, or deals... .but nothing like giving it away basically for years.

PS+ was free as Sony didn't have intention of every charging for it, they eventually started charging for it at the PS4 release, although there might be some deals, they don't give it away for free for years. Generally, the only service I have seen gamers really pay for long-term in mass is probably online access for consoles i.e. XBLG/PS+... and really only about a 30-50% of the users will pay for it at say $40-60. The rest of subscription based services are very niche imo, if you could something like WoW membership.

My issue (or what see as their issue) is there is no reason to use MS, its really a dead end road, imo. Most gamers are lucky to purchase a few games a year, and even fewer even complete those games.... heck even through XBLG you get like what 4 games a month? How many games can people actually play?

Phil sold Uncle Satya (with the big wallet) Bullshit as a Service (BaaS), it'll get him closer to retirement. Enjoy the free stuff I say, but this makes about as much sense as when they tried to charge PC users (Xbox Live Gold Fees).

 

[Sugarmonkey]

Haven't read through the entire thread to see if this has been brought up yet, but it's something I've been thinking about for a while now. The used game market provides no revenue to anyone but the companies buying used games and reselling them.

Wouldn't developers stand to make more money by taking a check from Microsoft to feature their game for a finite period of time in addition to normal game sales? Possibly a large percentage of the amount they have been losing to used game sales?

Also, I wonder how many movie buffs who were sitting on giant libraries of Criterion DVD's felt that Netflix was diluting their experience and were worried that streaming was going to bait and switch people from 9.99 a month to $100 a month.

Seems to be a lot of concern trolling against what someone who has actually seen the numbers is saying about the viability of game pass and its positive benefits among game devs. Not us armchair quarterbacks. Honestly, the whole concept of getting excitable over sales figures and thinking we know more than people in charge of giant corporations is such a weird thing to me, but whatever.

 

[Moogle11]

A subscription service offering specials and deals and practically giving the service away when the service is in its early days, nope never heard of that before.

Oh wait Netflix, Apple Music, Apple TV, Spotify, Youtube Red/Premium, Hulu, XBLG, PS+, PS Now, EA Access, etc etc etc Y’all need to reach harder

Exactly. These deals will be gone in a year or two. And people will bitch and moan and eventually mostly pay up. Just like when Netflix streaming switched from being a free perk of the mail service to a separate subscription. Look how that worked out.

Times are rapidly changing and more and more people don’t want to pay to own media (or pay for cable) they’ll rarely revisit and are increasingly used to filling their free time with relatively cheap subscription services. Wi many being no cost as they mooch others’ logins.

Gaming has to adapt or die as they can’t make profits on the huge budget 4K60 AAA games people expect from the declining market of gamers willing to pay $60. Especially for one and done single player games as people can more easily justify the price for an MP game they’ll dump hundreds of hours into (and also justify MTs and DLCs). It’s harder to justify for a single player game, especially shorter ones, which is why we see more super long (and often bloated IMO) SP games that also get DLC.

That’s one way to adapt. Another is rental and/or streaming services that can generate revenue from people who wouldn’t buy a 10-20 hour SP game. If this leads to more of those types of games I’ll be very happy. I want more games like A Plague Tale, Outer Worlds, Uncharted etc. Not more super long, content packed games lie AC Odyssey, Fallout 4 etc. Variety is the spice of life and I’d rather play a lot of short to medium length games than a few super long ones and those types of games have diminished in number in recent years at the AA and AAA level.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Its not the early days, we're almost 3 years in.

They are actually in some cases giving a way the service up to 3 years or close to it. For the record, I see nothing wrong with it per se, but no there really is no growth in it... basically some of the stuff you listed is actually proof of that i.e. EA Access and PS Now. Actually, I would say some of these stuff you listed is incorrect, Xbox Live Gold was bam you're paying from day one..... I know I was a subscriber in 2002 Of course, there has been get a free day, or get a free month card, or deals... .but nothing like giving it away basically for years.

PS+ was free as Sony didn't have intention of every charging for it, they eventually started charging for it at the PS4 release, although there might be some deals, they don't give it away for free for years. Generally, the only service I have seen gamers really pay for long-term in mass is probably online access for consoles i.e. XBLG/PS+... and really only about a 30-50% of the users will pay for it at say $40-60. The rest of subscription based services are very niche imo, if you could something like WoW membership.

My issue (or what see as their issue) is there is no reason to use MS, its really a dead end road, imo. Most gamers are lucky to purchase a few games a year, and even fewer even complete those games.... heck even through XBLG you get like what 4 games a month? How many games can people actually play?

Phil sold Uncle Satya (with the big wallet) Bullshit as a Service (BaaS), it'll get him closer to retirement.

These services are already showing signs of cutting back features they launched with.

EA Access for one. Went from all games having free trial, to picking and choosing depending on hype factor.

 

[Nikana]

Its not the early days, we're almost 3 years in.

They are actually in some cases giving a way the service up to 3 years or close to it. For the record, I see nothing wrong with it per se, but no there really is no growth in it... basically some of the stuff you listed is actually proof of that i.e. EA Access and PS Now. Actually, I would say some of these stuff you listed is incorrect, Xbox Live Gold was bam you're paying from day one..... I know I was a subscriber in 2002 Of course, there has been get a free day, or get a free month card, or deals... .but nothing like giving it away basically for years.

PS+ was free as Sony didn't have intention of every charging for it, they eventually started charging for it at the PS4 release, although there might be some deals, they don't give it away for free for years. Generally, the only service I have seen gamers really pay for long-term in mass is probably online access for consoles i.e. XBLG/PS+... and really only about a 30-50% of the users will pay for it at say $40-60. The rest of subscription based services are very niche imo, if you could something like WoW membership.

My issue (or what see as their issue) is there is no reason to use MS, its really a dead end road, imo. Most gamers are lucky to purchase a few games a year, and even fewer even complete those games.... heck even through XBLG you get like what 4 games a month? How many games can people actually play?

Phil sold Uncle Satya (with the big wallet) Bullshit as a Service (BaaS), it'll get him closer to retirement. Enjoy the free stuff I say, but this makes about as much sense as when they tried to charge PC users (Xbox Live Gold Fees).

Saying they gave away the service for three years is a straight lie.

 

[DanielsM]

Exactly. These deals will be gone in a year or two. And people will bitch and moan and eventually mostly pay up. Just like when Netflix streaming switched from being a free perk of the mail service to a separate subscription. Look how that worked out.

Netflix is still giving away free shit (see under my user name), its all being funded by the junk market, they can't turn on the fees. Netflix to make positive cash flow would probably have to come close to lower end cable bills. Enjoy the free shit while its here, thank the Federal Reserve for pushing this zero or negative interest market - its fiction.

Gaming is already cheap, there is no way to make it cheaper and still fund development - duh. What you guys are suggesting is actually less efficient, make a middleman where no middleman is needed... large publishers/developers really don't need Microsoft outside of the closed environment of Xbox as a Hardware.

That’s one way to adapt. Another is rental and/or streaming services that can generate revenue from people who wouldn’t buy a 10-20 hour SP game. If this leads to more of those types of games I’ll be very happy. I want more games like A Plague Tale, Outer Worlds, Uncharted etc. Not more super long, content packed games lie AC Odyssey, Fallout 4 etc. Variety is the spice of life and I’d rather play a lot of short to medium length games than a few super long ones and those types of games have diminished in number in recent years at the AA and AAA level.

You actually exposed the problems with pay as you play model, the single player games have no ability to earn back development costs as they are paid on a per hour basis.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Its not the early days, we're almost 3 years in.

They are actually in some cases giving a way the service up to 3 years or close to it. For the record, I see nothing wrong with it per se, but no there really is no growth in it... basically some of the stuff you listed is actually proof of that i.e. EA Access and PS Now. Actually, I would say some of these stuff you listed is incorrect, Xbox Live Gold was bam you're paying from day one..... I know I was a subscriber in 2002 Of course, there has been get a free day, or get a free month card, or deals... .but nothing like giving it away basically for years.

PS+ was free as Sony didn't have intention of every charging for it, they eventually started charging for it at the PS4 release, although there might be some deals, they don't give it away for free for years. Generally, the only service I have seen gamers really pay for long-term in mass is probably online access for consoles i.e. XBLG/PS+... and really only about a 30-50% of the users will pay for it at say $40-60. The rest of subscription based services are very niche imo, if you could something like WoW membership.

My issue (or what see as their issue) is there is no reason to use MS, its really a dead end road, imo. Most gamers are lucky to purchase a few games a year, and even fewer even complete those games.... heck even through XBLG you get like what 4 games a month? How many games can people actually play?

Phil sold Uncle Satya (with the big wallet) Bullshit as a Service (BaaS), it'll get him closer to retirement. Enjoy the free stuff I say, but this makes about as much sense as when they tried to charge PC users (Xbox Live Gold Fees).

There is no timeline on what the early days are, that is judged by the amount of users, not an actual time frame. I’m surprised a supposed expert like yourself would make such a rookie mistake. If MS is still offering huge deals for the service then it must not be at the membership numbers they want.

Also PS+ cost money from day one. It was optional on PS3 but it wasn’t free. You’re confusing PS+ with online play, another rookie mistake.

 

[DanielsM]

There is no timeline on what the early days are, that is judged by the amount of users, not an actual time frame. I’m surprised a supposed expert like yourself would make such a rookie mistake. If MS is still offering huge deals for the service then it must not be at the membership numbers they want.

Also PS+ cost money from day one. It was optional on PS3 but it wasn’t free. You’re confusing PS+ with online play, another rookie mistake.

I'm no expert at anything.

You’re confusing PS+ with online play, another rookie mistake.

Not sure what this means, on PS4 you need PS+ to play most online functions at least on my PS4. Yes, they had PS+ during the PS3/Vita days and you got what - rental services i.e. a 4-6 games a month.

There is no timeline on what the early days are

Obviously, there is no growth and they're 3 years in.... either way its hard to see a real business model here.

 

[DanielsM]

These services are already showing signs of cutting back features they launched with.

EA Access for one. Went from all games having free trial, to picking and choosing depending on hype factor.

Well, what you are seeing is the equivalent of the Last Days of Windows Phone repeated - delusional thinking. So, lets say we agree with these Xbox (I'm not sure what they thing that is but) guys, and services/subscriptions are going to take over the video game world. Than you tell them, but Microsoft isn't needed as a middleman and the publisher/developers avoid them like the coronavirus, than they get mad all over again. LOL

Even if you somehow agree with them on one portion, its still a dead end for Microsoft, unless they want to be a traditional publisher.

Now that hardware is about to get buried they are on step 3, bargaining... so now they are setting themselves up for yet another 5 steps as they constructing a strawman services thing.... they'll have to go through all the steps again.

5 Stages of Grief After Facing a Loss

Exploring these 5 stages of grief could help you understand and put into context your or your loved one's emotions after a significant loss.

psychcentral.com

I say enjoy the free shit while it lasts, be very careful on hardware as I'm not going to feel sorry for anyone on this.... just like the people buying games from the MS Store. If people don't buy hardware or buy software from them... nothing of long-term value is lost.... less risk.

 

[VertigoOA]

Witcher 3 had sold thru 20 million units before appearing on gamespass. Oh my god, look at the sales they lost. Gamespass is the harbinger of death in gaming for sure!

Give me a fucking break. Gamespass is great. It’s not hurting the industry at all.

Did stores selling used games kill the industry? At least now these games get something for licensing when their products get featured on gamespass for a cycle... ya know... 3 years after they’ve exhausted their sell-thru potential at full price and heavy discounts.

Only MS’ own published efforts will be appearing Day One and Gamespass is a better way to reach their consumers undoubtedly. I wouldn’t have ever bought Halo 5, Sea of Thieves, Crackdown 3, or Gears 5... but gamespass enticed me to at least try them... regardless if I think they were all shit.

 

[wolffy71]

Idk why people are so butthurt about gamepass. My advice is to get used to it. Times changes and its happens to almost every media. Movies - netflix, music - spotify, books - amazon, audible whatever. Even print media has been drastically changed. Once gaming can be done via the same methods as these, it will. Thats more choice, easier accessibility, and more freedom to move providers.

I dont think a free to play streaming service thats ad supported like youtube is even out of the question.

Some company or companies are gonna figure it out but someday the idea of putting a cd in your discman just goes away. It will happen to gaming as well.

 

[VertigoOA]

I’d imagine it’s the same people scared of buying games digitally. I do not sympathize for their complaints one bit. The increased availability and distribution of software has made gaming better.

I remember when games had limited runs. FZERO GX was a fucking bomb. Sold under 100k, and is difficult to find. Now there is no such thing... Only collector’s care because they can sell their game for 150$.

Speaking of I still have my copy of FZERO GX. I’m selling it for 500$.

 

[Moogle11]

Witcher 3 had sold thru 20 million units before appearing on gamespass. Oh my god, look at the sales they lost. Gamespass is the harbinger of death in gaming for sure!

Give me a fucking break. Gamespass is great. It’s not hurting the industry at all.

Did stores selling used games kill the industry? At least now these games get something for licensing when their products get featured on gamespass for a cycle... ya know... 3 years after they’ve exhausted their sell-thru potential at full price and heavy discounts.

Exactly. It’s a great way to make some more revenue from games that have been out a while and weren’t seeing many new copies being sold at high prices anymore. Something like GTA5 that has crazy legs or series like CoD where they want to move gamers on to new games and DLCs each year don’t have to come to such services.

The only risk is launching things on there day one as they do lose some sales. I’ve used Gamepass to play things like Gears 5 and Outer Worlds that I would have bought otherwise (though not at $60). But that model doesn’t have to continue and they can go to delayed additions if it ends up not profitable enough. That’s still appealing to folks like me that play many games well after launch and may make them more money for us nit buying used copies which we turn around and sell or trade in and then take another potential sale away.

 

[SleepDoctor]

Idk why we keep getting the same threads over and over. Same Sony fanboys that "dont care about gamepass" still show up in every thread to spout the same exact shit over and over lol.

Its a neverending cycle here. Same pro gamepass compliments vs same "idc bout gamepass..... but derrr derrrr derrr".

8 more pages of the same exact arguments from the same fanboys on both sides. Its like groundhog day in these gamepass threads every time.

 

[Moogle11]

Idk why we keep getting the same threads over and over. Same Sony fanboys that "dont care about gamepass" still show up in every thread to spout the same exact shit over and over lol.

Its a neverending cycle here. Same pro gamepass compliments vs same "idc bout gamepass..... but derrr derrrr derrr".

8 more pages of the same exact arguments from the same fanboys on both sides. Its like groundhog day in these gamepass threads every time.

Welcome to game forums. It’s no different than the repetitive threads that have gone on for years about digital vs physical a games, same old tired console warrior threads about sales figures etc.

We only have ourselves to blame for continuing to click threads and engage. Site owners aren’t going to moderate or away as those are the highest trafficked threads that generate the most ad views.

It just is what it is. Most very active posters still on forums are argumentative types rather than positive folk just chatting about things they enjoy about their hobbies (it’s not at all exclusive to gaming). Social media, discord, group chat threads in various apps etc. have pulled folks away from forums and let the negative and argumentative voices dominate.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Gamepass has saved gaming for me. No way was I willing to put any more money in to the MTX AAA cookie-cutter loot fest shite, that has been released this gen. This gen, the poorest gens I've ever lived through.

Now I get access to some solid B tier games with the odd AAA cast-away, for dirt cheap prices. Sure, most games aren't worth more than 30 minutes, but the gems I have found have been worth every second.

However, the day I go back to giving a FUCK about this industry, is the day this industry crashes and re-invents itself as the industry of yesteryear; the love of the art, not the love of money.

So yeah, I hope Gamepass does crash the industry. We will have some casualties, but the big name shite-hawks needs to go under for the good of all of us. Burn it down, so we can rebuild anew.

 

[Nikana]

Idk why we keep getting the same threads over and over. Same Sony fanboys that "dont care about gamepass" still show up in every thread to spout the same exact shit over and over lol.

Its a neverending cycle here. Same pro gamepass compliments vs same "idc bout gamepass..... but derrr derrrr derrr".

8 more pages of the same exact arguments from the same fanboys on both sides. Its like groundhog day in these gamepass threads every time.

Report them. Only way we will get it fixed

 

[SleepDoctor]

Welcome to game forums. It’s no different than the repetitive threads that have gone on for years about digital vs physical a games, same old tired console warrior threads about sales figures etc.

We only have ourselves to blame for continuing to click threads and engage. Site owners aren’t going to moderate or away as those are the highest trafficked threads that generate the most ad views.

It just is what it is. Most very active posters still on forums are argumentative types rather than positive folk just chatting about things they enjoy about their hobbies (it’s not at all exclusive to gaming). Social media, discord, group chat threads in various apps etc. have pulled folks away from forums and let the negative and argumentative voices dominate.

Very good point about highest trafficked threads. Never looked at it like that. Its pretty obvious moderating is selective at best by now. The same ppl shitposting maybe get a 'warning' after like 30 offenses and they just carry like the warning was a joke.

Like 80% of this forum is more about "you like ps? Ps sucks lolz" and vice versa. The other 20% is actual civil discussion about games and stuff we like.

 

[Azelover]

Jesus Christ, this thread has gotten toxic.

 

[DanielsM]

The only risk is launching things on there day one as they do lose some sales.

Actually you destroy the business. Media is front loaded especially games, games generally make all their money in the first 3-6 months. People are not going to pay the amount of money it would take to fund the games by rental on day one unless the quality sucks. Of course publishers like EA, Ubisoft, Sony and Microsoft will experiment but the amount of subscriptions they would need to beat physical and digital distribution is not going to work. As a rental service for mostly older games, it will work... heck Redbox works... just not going to generate any real huge money.

EA is generating $5b of revenue a year with only a few games released per year for instance. Heck, Sony is probably generating $1b per big release over a year. All one would do is under cut the bigger margin sales, especially digital sales.

As the games become older... than rental services make more sense and bundling as they aren't worth much i.e. smaller revenue stream.

The publishers have done the math, which is why you don't really see any big push for this.... they make more money via digital sales (and physical sales secondary).... digital sales has the best chance of ROI, after 3-6 months than rental services for scraps can be useful.

Most people are really lucky to buy a few games a year, and even less of them will finish a few games a year... having access to 1 billion video games doesn't really help anyone, its a marketing slogan that has no place in the real world. How many services does a person need, heck if one only has access to Xbox Live Gold or PS+ you're already getting more games than you can possibly play in a year. Most of this doesn't really make sense in video games, although I don't see anything wrong with it.... I mean why in the fuck would I pay $9.99 a month to play 900 games through PS Now, if I struggle to complete 2-5 a year?

I don't think its bad for the industry... its more or less a nothing burger which Microsoft is trying to market way to hard as Phil promised Satya services and subscription. Everyone should enjoy the deals while they last. If this is Microsoft's plan as their primary gaming business, they better have a a plan to rapidly shrink in size.

 

[Nikana]

Actually you destroy the business. Media is front loaded especially games, games generally make all their money in the first 3-6 months. People are not going to pay the amount of money it would take to fund the games by rental on day one unless the quality sucks. Of course publishers like EA, Ubisoft, Sony and Microsoft will experiment but the amount of subscriptions they would need to beat physical and digital distribution is not going to work. As a rental service for mostly older games, it will work... heck Redbox works... just not going to generate any real money.

EA is generating $5b of revenue a year with only a few games released per year for instance. Heck, Sony is probably generating $1b per big release over a years. All a day one would do is under cut the bigger margin sales.

As the games become older... than rental services make more sense and bundling as they aren't worth much i.e. smaller revenue stream.

The publishers have done the math, which is why you don't really see any big push for this.... they make more money via digital sales (and physical sales secondary).... digital sales has the best chance of ROI, after 3-6 months than rental services for scraps can be useful.

Most people are really lucky to buy a few games a year, and even less of them will finish a few games a year... having access to 1 billion video games doesn't really help anyone, its a marketing slogan that has no place in the real world. How many services does a person need, heck if one only has access to Xbox Live Gold or PS+ you're already getting more games than you can possibly play in a year.

Most of this doesn't really make sense in video games, although I don't see anything wrong with.... I mean why in the fuck would I pay $9.99 a month to play 900 games through PS Now, if I struggle to complete 2-5 a year?

Right that's why EA and Ubisoft along with Sony and Microsoft are doing it.

 

[pr0cs]

Its like groundhog day in these gamepass threads every time

For something so hated by a company that is clearly last this Gen its baffling to me that this thread can hit 400 posts.
Either the hate for it is unfounded or it really is a compelling service.

 

[Vow of Silence]

Game pass proves that sometimes socialism actually does work, it just needs a company richer than most states doing it.

 

[DanielsM]

Right that's why EA and Ubisoft along with Sony and Microsoft are doing it.

Actually, Sony isn't doing it. They don't put their games on the service day one. As far as I know, EA give early access and to the vault, I don't think day one... but even if they did, the numbers would make less sense.

EA revenue is around $5b annually, people are not signing up for EA Access in mass with only about 3m at $30-50 a year. So, say they lower it $10 a year or $15 a year to get more subscribers... they would need 300-500m annual subscribers to reach that revenue number, generally speaking to cover new game development. Revenues would crash, they're simply is no 300-500m users for them to get. Lets say they get 25m users to for games day one at $50 a year, that is only $1.25b. (its a loser business model) Even if you can some how get some stupid idiot to spend $100 a year at 25m subscribers that is only $2.5b.

Most people are not going to pay a subscription for games that get rapidly cheaper after 3-6 months.

Upfront sales is where the money is generated especially with repeat users and whales... rental services are fine for small revenue streams for older catalog.... I think EA Access is generating around $100m in revenue, barely enough to cover marketing for one big game.

- Games are generally cheap, they are definitely cheap after initial release... boardline worthless after a year
- Gamers really only play a few games a year
- Gamers really don't need access to 100s of games for rental... as they can't play them
- where gamers would pay for subscription on say day one rentals.... the publishers would be losing money vs. sales
- digital sales is easily the best business model, although game rentals can make sense for older titles

As far as Microsoft, I see no reason for them to be the middleman other than the closed system called Xbox as a Hardware, which is why the major publishers stay away from Microsoft in anything other than Xbox as a Hardware, generally speaking..... additional middlemen seems very inefficient.

Even if you believe in services and if you believe in efficiency.... I'm unsure why you guys would want Microsoft involved. I'm so confused.

 

[Vawn]

A subscription service offering specials and deals and practically giving the service away when the service is in its early days, nope never heard of that before.

Oh wait Netflix, Apple Music, Apple TV, Spotify, Youtube Red/Premium, Hulu, XBLG, PS+, PS Now, EA Access, etc etc etc Y’all need to reach harder

The discussion was about how these subscription services affect the industry and the quality of future AAA games. Not if companies can make money with monthly subscription fees.

 

[DanielsM]

The discussion was about how these subscription services affect the industry and the quality of future AAA games. Not if companies can make money with monthly subscription fees.

I would think talking about "money" is or could be part of the "bad", just my take... it all comes down to the money.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

But you're not paying for it. I would have to put you on Voost level if you are paying $9.99-14.99 a month. Nobody was paying any of that, which is why they went to the $1 thing. They're trying to buy their way into a market which has very few funds.

I say its cool.... free shit, but anyone buying hardware for that.... well, I have no empathy for you i.e. Stadia Voost.

If I were to guess what is going to happen.... Office 365 Consumer or Entertainment Premium subscription.... or something similar.

- Office 365 Consumer (Word, Publisher, Excel, Outlook, Access, OneDrive, Xbox Live Gold) say for $149.99 a year
- Office 365 Entertainment Premium (Word, Publisher, Excel, Outlook, Access, OneDrive, Xbox Live Gold, Xbox Game Pass, and xCloud) say for $239.99 a year

And this is why Microsoft needs to be broken up, not that they are competing but they are using areas where there is a monopoly and than bundling in services to kill competition, imo. Basically what they are trying to do to Slack and Zoom, imo.

For the record, I don't think this will happen in gaming.... I expect gaming revenue to continue to go down for MS generally but there could gain during the Fall and Xbone Sexy (probably yoy from the low levels this last year for a few quarters after that).... I have no idea why someone would buy Xbox as a Hardware at this point, but there will be some hold outs so expecting a yoy gain in the fall.... service revenue will never be able to pickup enough to even come close to filling in the gap... gaming at Microsoft will have to shrink once Satya figures it out drastically.

Microsoft is trying to crush small rivals like Slack and Zoom, but it probably won’t face antitrust scrutiny

Microsoft is trying to crush Slack and Zoom by essentially giving away Teams for free.

www.vox.com

Phil has probably got say 2-4 years to find some real growth in subscription services or it will all get the axe, axeman cometh. Brave souls buying Xbox hardware, if you're not buying hardware or purchasing off the MS Store than no worries. They don't need people to find a dollar under the sofa cushions, they need 10s of millions of people paying real money per month or annually.

The axeman strikes again: Microsoft has real commitment issues

Yet another product cull raises questions about Microsoft's commitment to... anything, really

www.theregister.co.uk

/Thread

 

[Nikana]

Actually, Sony isn't doing it. They don't put their games on the service day one. As far as I know, EA give early access and to the vault, I don't think day one... but even if they did, the numbers would make less sense.

EA revenue is around $5b annually, people are not signing up for EA Access in mass with only about 3m at $30-50 a year. So, say they lower it $10 a year or $15 a year to get more subscribers... they would need 300-500m annual subscribers to reach that revenue number, generally speaking to cover new game development. Revenues would crash, they're simply is no 300-500m users for them to get. Lets say they get 25m users to for games day one at $50 a year, that is only $1.25b. (its a loser business model) Even if you can some how get some stupid idiot to spend $100 a year at 25m subscribers that is only $2.5b.

Most people are not going to pay a subscription for games that get rapidly cheaper after 3-6 months.

Upfront sales is where the money is generated especially with repeat users and whales... rental services are fine for small revenue streams for older catalog.... I think EA Access is generating around $100m in revenue, barely enough to cover marketing for one big game.

- Games are generally cheap, they are definitely cheap after initial release... boardline worthless after a year
- Gamers really only play a few games a year
- Gamers really don't need access to 100s of games for rental... as they can't play them
- where gamers would pay for subscription on say day one rentals.... the publishers would be losing money vs. sales
- digital sales is easily the best business model, although game rentals can make sense for older titles

As far as Microsoft, I see no reason for them to be the middleman other than the closed system called Xbox as a Hardware, which is why the major publishers stay away from Microsoft in anything other than Xbox as a Hardware, generally speaking..... additional middlemen seems very inefficient.

Even if you believe in services and if you believe in efficiency.... I'm unsure why you guys would want Microsoft involved. I'm so confused.

Origin Access premier does exactly that. Same as game pass and Uplay plus. My point with Sony was that they too are using a subscription service.

Your calculations like I have said many times also aren't fair with game pass considering we don't have numbers plus it offer additional benefits like 10 percent off purchasing games which you never include.same with EA access. Subscribers get additional money off which is generated by the EA access membership. It's more than just the flat sub fee.

It's been discussed many times why your other points don't make sense but you don't even reply to them so I'm not going to continue to reply to those points.