Support NeoGAF

[H-I-M]

I actually have been paying attention. Here is Netflix's Net income for the last ten years:

2022	$4,492 (millions)
2021	$5,116 (millions)
2020	$2,761 (millions)
2019	$1,867 (millions)
2018	$1,211 (millions)
2017	$559 (millions)
2016	$187 (millions)
2015	$123 (millions)
2014	$267 (millions)
2013	$112 (millions)

They are certainly not losing money. I understand that other streaming companies are not the 900 pound gorilla that Netflix is, but that is why Microsoft wants to become the biggest first. Many of the other streaming companies which are losing money (especially Disney & Discover) have basically tried to loss lead their way into subscribers since they are so late to the game (Disney+ was launched 38 months ago, compared to Netflix's 17 years of streaming). This also means all of these companies trying to shortcut their way to the top are competing with each other for movies. shows, creators, etc and are driving prices up unreasonably. First to market has a ton of advantages

We all understand why Microsoft would want to be first, but that doesn't mean it's going to translate into actual success.
GamePass numbers haven't been shared in years.
Analysts are telling us that the market has stagnated.
Hardware sales are plummeting.

Just because Microsoft has the financial means, doesn't mean they can't fail (see HD DVD, windows phone, Surfaces laptop,...).

 

[hybrid_birth]

That will change once Call of duty releases on gamepass day 1 every year.

 

[Generic]

Well, Microsoft tried its best. But, just like their hardware and software sales, they couldn't make it work.

Otherwise, yeah, that was the plan. To increase GP's influence in the industry. And don't forget the very organized campaign we saw when almost every media outlet was writing articles like "PlayStation MUST put its games day one on PS Plus like Game Pass."

"PlayStation MUST put its games day one on PS Plus like Game Pass."

Yes, they should. It would be excellent for consumers.

 

[Astray]

One of their biggest mistakes IMO was not partnering with Steam to get GP on there.

Why would steam want GP though? It would just cannibalize their revenue.

 

[Generic]

the subscription model just kind of sucks for businesses and consumers. i don't really understand why companies push so hard for it. especially in gaming where (especially on the console side) it's not like piracy is a huge problem.

It's great for consumers. I saved so much money with PlayStation Plus Extra.

 

[Topher]

That will change once Call of duty releases on gamepass day 1 every year.

I doubt it. Game Pass is fine for those who want a library of game to play, but doesn't really do much for those who spend the majority of their game time playing Call of Duty.

 

[DaGwaphics]

How do they even have numbers for GP when MS doesn't provide those and the subscriptions aren't purchased at retail? Guesstimates? Information shared by developers that are being provided that info under NDA? Or is this just Sony/Nintendo information?

 

[DaGwaphics]

It's great for consumers. I saved so much money with PlayStation Plus Extra.

I agree. I can see where it is a lot more beneficial to the cheaper gamer that would normal play games after the retail price had dropped substantially than for the day one player that has already played the older games when they get added.

 

[hybrid_birth]

I doubt it. Game Pass is fine for those who want a library of game to play, but doesn't really do much for those who spend the majority of their game time playing Call of Duty.

Want to make an avatar bet?

 

[Generic]

I agree. I can see where it is a lot more beneficial to the cheaper gamer that would normal play games after the retail price had dropped substantially than for the day one player that has already played the older games when they get added.

Yes. It's great especially for people who live in underdeveloped countries where the dolar exchange is huge.

 

[demigod]

I've had GP Ultimate for 2 years with the conversion thing. But even that didn't interest me anymore as I didn't want to play anything that was available for it so I didn't renew last year. I'm not going to pay 15 euros for a sub. I'd rather buy a single game up front and play the shit out of that.

I love it when folks claim it’s the BEST VALUE IN GAMING and then proceed to sub to GP and also buy $70 games. You’re actually paying MORE to rent games than the folks that buys the games they want.

 

[kikkis]

I love it when folks claim it’s the BEST VALUE IN GAMING and then proceed to sub to GP and also buy $70 games. You’re actually paying MORE to rent games than the folks that buys the games they want.

Ps plus is more expensive than gp core and conversion.

 

[Solidus_T]

That will change once Call of duty releases on gamepass day 1 every year.

That won't happen for the same reason why Kotick was reluctant to release games on a subscription service. They would be forfeitting tons of revenue.

 

[demigod]

Ps plus is more expensive than gp core and conversion.

Who’s claiming PS Plus is best value? Who’s claiming you get Day 1 PS games? PS Plus isn’t needed.

 

[Shadowstar39]

At the end of the day, there is so much concurrent payments, leeching monthly/yearly off the bank account, the average gamer is willing to tolerate (gaming, music, TV, etc) and sub prices will only go up in the future. Paying $150-$200 per year with hope that the bone the company throws at you has some meat on it is pretty non-sensical to me.
There might also be some inverse-value thinking in it: "You give me 500 games for the subscription but I don't care about 450 of them and I'll never play them. I only care for 50 of them so why should I pay for the other trash?"
Add to the fact that most of the games in the premium subscriptions have an expiration date so you "feel" you lose value the less you play and if you don't hurry up you might not even finish the game. This is an advantage of the basic sub tiers like PS+ Essential and Live Gold since every game you redeem is always locked in your account. You might not like it now, you might not finish it now, but it will be there in one or five or ten years in the future.

Yep this is why I am still in psn plus basic. Have been since it came out. The locked in games is great for me. I don't have time to play as I have other hobbies, a wife, dogs, a career, family, friends etc... I got a series x for Xmas to complement the ps5 ans switch. I got the $1 game pass and first thing I did was cancel renewal. Took advantage and bought up all the og and 360 $2.99 game deals. Stuff I didn't play then as I had a ps3 or can't now because my ps3 is busted. No way am I paying $17 a month plus tax to Xbox. I don't play online and the games don't stay. What sucks is they took away all the goty, and season passes away so you have to pay full price for all the dlc.

 

[Valedix]

A lot of copium in this thread hahaha

 

[kikkis]

Who’s claiming PS Plus is best value? Who’s claiming you get Day 1 PS games? PS Plus isn’t needed.

If you play online you need it anyways on both platforms but gp is both cheaper and much better.

 

[Three]

Ps plus is more expensive than gp core and conversion.

Who has been claiming renamed Xbox live gold is "the best value in gaming" though? I guess because GP non-core is in fact more expensive than plus you had to go with something nobody has really ever said.

If you play online you need it anyways on both platforms but gp is both cheaper and much better.

Core certainly is not better than PS+ essential. Other tiers gp is more expensive. Pick one because it's not both.

 

[kikkis]

Who has been claiming renamed Xbox live gold is "the best value in gaming" though? I guess because GP non-core is in fact more expensive than plus you had to go with something nobody has really ever said.


Core certainly is not better than PS+ essential. Other tiers gp is more expensive. Pick one because it's not both.

"gp core and conversion" what is your reading comprehension?

 

[rhodesianshepard]

That will change once Call of duty releases on gamepass day 1 every year.

I really don't think it will. Most gamers only play a handful of games every year. Why would they pay over 200$ a year for subscription service to play the latest COD?

And, the price of 17$ will surely go up. I wouldn't be surprised if Gamepass is 22-25$ by the end of this generation. Which may still be good for hardcore gamers but terrible for your average gamer who plays only a few games a year

 

[T-800]

My own jeep wants me to pay for a subscription to be able to lock, unlock, start, set timing for charging my battery.

"BMW has dropped its plan to charge a monthly fee of $18 for heated seats" for now

 

[Three]

"gp core and conversion" what is your reading comprehension?

I thought you meant getting gp core and using some points or other country store for purchases or something . Didn't know you meant the 3:2 gp core conversion to gp regular. That wasn't clear from the sentence and I misread it.

 

[kungfuian]

Not sure I have much to add that hasn't already been said.

Microsoft's big plans to take over the industry don't appear to be working. They have deep pockets, a willingness to buy up large sections of the industry, and are able to play the long game with their competitors. But their entire plan is contingent on Sub growth. If their Sub services don't grow then the whole plan falls apart.

And that's what we are seeing. Sub stagnation. That lack of Sub Growth, combined with the damage they have done to the x-box brand (which I'm sure they anticipated, if maybe to a lesser extent) doesn't appear to be the game industry take over they planned.

The real question now, based on all the data coming in, is how long they will go down this path if all evidence points to it failing. How long till they pivot? In true Microsoft fashion, I would expect them to be preparing a new diabolical plan sooner than later. Not sure to what exactly, but big changes are coming if Game Pass doesn't see massive growth over the next few years.

 

[demigod]

I thought you meant getting gp core and using some points or other country store for purchases or something . Didn't know you meant the 3:2 gp core conversion to gp regular. That wasn't clear from the sentence and I misread it.

I’m talking about best value in gaming and bro out there decided to add in ps plus.

 

[StereoVsn]

Not sure I have much to add that hasn't already been said.

Microsoft's big plans to take over the industry don't appear to be working. They have deep pockets, a willingness to buy up large sections of the industry, and are able to play the long game with their competitors. But their entire plan is contingent on Sub growth. If their Sub services don't grow then the whole plan falls apart.

And that's what we are seeing. Sub stagnation. That lack of Sub Growth, combined with the damage they have done to the x-box brand (which I'm sure they anticipated, if maybe to a lesser extent) doesn't appear to be the game industry take over they planned.

The real question now, based on all the data coming in, is how long they will go down this path if all evidence points to it failing. How long till they pivot? In true Microsoft fashion, I would expect them to be preparing a new diabolical plan sooner than later. Not sure to what exactly, but big changes are coming if Game Pass doesn't see massive growth over the next few years.

Apparently the new big plan is to release Xbox Next in late 2025 or early 2026 according to the rumors and our own HeisenbergFX4 .

I am sure that’s totally going to work out for MS.

 

[havoc00]

 

[Three]

I’m talking about best value in gaming and bro out there decided to add in ps plus.

True, I'm not sure where PS plus came from. The best value depends on what's useful to somebody and that can vary from person to person. If you buy the games you like best and don't see the need for subs then you can save money. Same if you're ok with what's available on a sub and don't buy other games, but as you said often people end up spending more with these subs because they're doing both. They can spend certain months playing bought games they like and not using the sub while still paying for it.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

i hope he got paid for that shit.

 

[I Love Rock 'n' Roll]

The new sales don't matter is subs don't matter... what's next Phil?

 

[adamsapple]

Flat me up.

 

[havoc00]

Flat me up.

This is gonna be on repeat tomorrow for the Xbox presentation!

 

[Three]

Kidsmoove trying to get back into the ambassador program

 

[EverydayBeast]

Xbox Live and free psn was perfect, xbox live would be only 30 years old and was so good for gaming. Now they're looking to push subscriptions on you for everything.

 

[mayham2199]

Why would steam want GP though? It would just cannibalize their revenue.

No clue but Gabe seemed interested. If it didn’t happen it’s because what he wanted MS wasn’t willing to give. IMO they should have done it. I guarantee steam users would even pay more for it just to have it on steam. My guess is steam wanted 30% of the monthly and 30% all in game transactions and it was to much for MS.

 

[TheGodfather07]

This is precisely why Microsoft are now backed into a corner and forced to publish on other platforms. They fucked themselves by going all in on gamepass. They can't backtrack now and go back to the traditional model. They've totally murdered software sales on their platform. Releasing day 1 on gamepass was a massive mistake in hindsight. Once again, sony showing them how to do it. Sell your game first, put it on a subscription later. Microsoft really thought they could shift the entire industry to a subscription model? Lol

 

[Clintizzle]

I love it when folks claim it’s the BEST VALUE IN GAMING and then proceed to sub to GP and also buy $70 games. You’re actually paying MORE to rent games than the folks that buys the games they want.

I love the "LuLz YoU ArE ReNTinG GaMeS InsteAD Of OwNInG THeM" argument you people like to bring up.

Who the fuck cares? People know exactly what they are signing up for when they pay for GP/PSPlus/EA Play/Ubi+ ETC. You are not a better gamer if you pay full price to own a game.

 

[Three]

No clue but Gabe seemed interested. If it didn’t happen it’s because what he wanted MS wasn’t willing to give. IMO they should have done it. I guarantee steam users would even pay more for it just to have it on steam. My guess is steam wanted 30% of the monthly and 30% all in game transactions and it was to much for MS.

Yeah, I remember him saying it publicly. I dont know how this would have worked though. It might have just all been empty words.

I love the "LuLz YoU ArE ReNTinG GaMeS InsteAD Of OwNInG THeM" argument you people like to bring up.

Who the fuck cares? People know exactly what they are signing up for when they pay for GP/PSPlus/EA Play/Ubi+ ETC. You are not a better gamer if you pay full price to own a game.

I don't think he claimed to be a "better gamer". Just that in one scenario you don't have to keep paying more perpetually for access and actually own the game.

 

[woahwoahwoah]

Xbox fucked themselves.

A practice they've become exceedingly proficient at.

 

[ergem]

the subscription model just kind of sucks for businesses and consumers. i don't really understand why companies push so hard for it. especially in gaming where (especially on the console side) it's not like piracy is a huge problem.

MS wanted to crash the industry by their gamepass strategy. And gamers are resisting.

 

[poppabk]

Yeah, I remember him saying it publicly. I dont know how this would have worked though. It might have just all been empty words.


I don't think he claimed be be a" better gamer". Just that in one scenario you don't have to keep paying more perpetually for access and actually own the game.

Whoop de doo. I owned my VHS collection - I mean I guess I got to choose to throw it in the trash. Some things are fine being transient - do I need to own Gang Beasts forever - probably not. Would I be happier having spent $70 on a little Starfield icon in my Steam library - but only 5 hours of play?

 

[TheGodfather07]

Its all part of Microsoft's 300 year plan. They are targeting your grandchildrens grandchildrens grandchildren. They will be victorious one day.

 

[Generic]

This is precisely why Microsoft are now backed into a corner and forced to publish on other platforms. They fucked themselves by going all in on gamepass. They can't backtrack now and go back to the traditional model. They've totally murdered software sales on their platform. Releasing day 1 on gamepass was a massive mistake in hindsight. Once again, sony showing them how to do it. Sell your game first, put it on a subscription later. Microsoft really thought they could shift the entire industry to a subscription model? Lol

"Sell your game first, put it on a subscription later"

God of War Ragnarok was released 1+ year ago and still not on PS+. Last of Us II was released 3+ years ago and still not on PS+. And for some reason Sony removed Spider-Man from the service.

 

[Agent X]

The best value depends on what's useful to somebody and that can vary from person to person.

That's a good assessment.

I've got a PS Plus Premium subscription, and I'm satisfied with what it has to offer. I also understand that others might not find value in a subscription service.

I don't want subscriptions to "dominate" the industry, but I don't want them to vanish, either. We're starting to see what works well (for gamers and also for content providers) and what doesn't work. In the end, consumers will decide what's best for their needs, and the market should evolve accordingly.

 

[demigod]

Whoop de doo. I owned my VHS collection - I mean I guess I got to choose to throw it in the trash. Some things are fine being transient - do I need to own Gang Beasts forever - probably not. Would I be happier having spent $70 on a little Starfield icon in my Steam library - but only 5 hours of play?

Again, missing the point. Gamepass dictates what you play, it is not a good value because folks are subbing to gamepass AND buying games. Is that too hard for some of you to understand? If you wanted a rental service, gamefly is a better option. You can pick whatever game you want.

 

[Generic]

MS wanted to crash the industry by their gamepass strategy. And gamers are resisting.

Resisting paying less for games?

 

[Clintizzle]

I don't think he claimed to be a "better gamer". Just that in one scenario you don't have to keep paying more perpetually for access and actually own the game.

Yeah, the better gamer comment was just an exaggeration. As for access and owning the game, I don't think it's as important as most people like to make it seem. How many games that are not multiplayer can people claim that they play throughout the year and for multiple years? Sub services are designed for people who want to experience games and move on to the next one. This doesn't apply to multiplayer games that need a separate sub to keep playing.

 

[Clintizzle]

Resisting paying less for games?

Nah according to some on GAF, you actually pay MORE to not own games that you play once maybe twice.

 

[FrankWza]

When your own people come out and admit it cannibalizes game sales you know you've failed at conditioning your base.

 

[TheGodfather07]

"Sell your game first, put it on a subscription later"

God of War Ragnarok was released 1+ year ago and still not on PS+. Last of Us II was released 3+ years ago and still not on PS+. And for some reason Sony removed Spider-Man from the service.

This is deliberately from Sony to maximise sales. You don't want everyone to know that every game will come to a subscription after 12 months. That's why they randomly drop them. A year is just the minimum before it comes to ps plus, but for many games it will be longer then that because many of sonys games have long legs and keep selling for years. It's actually the perfect strategy and the right way to do it.

 

[Generic]

This is deliberately from Sony to maximise sales. You don't want everyone to know that every game will come to a subscription after 12 months. That's why they randomly drop them. A year is just the minimum before it comes to ps plus, but for many games it will be longer then that because many of sonys games have long legs and keep selling for years. It's actually the perfect strategy and the right way to do it.

"It's actually the perfect strategy and the right way to do it"

For Sony, yes, but not for people who subscribe to their service. Especially after increasing the price of PS+ while promising 'more quality games'. You would expect them at least to not remove their own games from the service.