• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Is Game Pass Genius or am I overthinking it?

Mmnow

Member
Jun 16, 2020
500
621
265
I don't see how it's sustainable to put brand new games on it, if people can essentially pay a dollar for a month, play the whole game, and immediately stop subscribing. Say Starfield comes to GamePass day and date... where do they get back the hundred million dollars plus that it cost to produce it?

Having said that, 15 million subscribers brings in a lot of cash a month. But then what are the differentials between revenue and profit? I don't think anyone can say whether GamePass is sustainable or not, unless we get those figures.
How many people who would never have paid for a single a Microsoft game will now pay for Gamepass one month at a time?

The cost of making games hasn't changed, but income has.
 

Arkam

Member
Jan 21, 2012
3,809
2,886
750
Here, Now and maybe later
I don't see how it's sustainable to put brand new games on it, if people can essentially pay a dollar for a month, play the whole game, and immediately stop subscribing. Say Starfield comes to GamePass day and date... where do they get back the hundred million dollars plus that it cost to produce it?
It only becomes sustainable (then does so easily) when sub numbers get high enough. The salt in the wound will be that you could always have gotten MORE money with the traditional content model (with quality AAA). However this model does have the benefit of lower standards so you can deliver lower content often and still be acceptable as no one game makes/loses money really. So it becomes the easy money when achieved. Will it ever get to that number? Maybe, maybe not. The model is well known and many are trying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zzpaff

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
2,751
10,744
810
It only becomes sustainable (then does so easily) when sub numbers get high enough. The salt in the wound will be that you could always have gotten MORE money with the traditional content model (with quality AAA). However this model does have the benefit of lower standards so you can deliver lower content often and still be acceptable as no one game makes/loses money really. So it becomes the easy money when achieved. Will it ever get to that number? Maybe, maybe not. The model is well known and many are trying.
I start to sound like a broken record on this, but Amazon will determine how well GamePass and Xcloud does in the longer term. Sony are actually incidental to it all. Microsoft purchased Bethesda, because they knew what Amazon were up to, and it was a good move from them to counteract what is likely to be industry wide disruption when Luna gets released. It will not fail like Stadia. The subscription gaming model is going to be a battle between Msft and Amazon going forward. Msft have to hope that Amazon don't fully leverage the 150 million Prime subscribers they have, and don't fully take advantage of the huge lead they have in cloud service technology. GamePass won't look like that great a deal, if across the way you have a cheaper, easier service to subscribe to, with much the same games. Nobody will have to buy a console or PC for Luna. If the games run well and the cloud functions as it should, GamePass could find its market share shrink considerably.
 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Member
Aug 14, 2014
2,751
10,744
810
How many people who would never have paid for a single a Microsoft game will now pay for Gamepass one month at a time?

The cost of making games hasn't changed, but income has.
True, but does that cover the loss of income that all those games incur by being on a low cost subscription service? None of know the answer to that.... yet.
 

Wizz-Art

Member
Aug 20, 2012
376
487
640
How long will it take to recoup the 7.5 billion purchase of Bethesda when their consoles sell at a loss, they won’t move 1st party software at full price because people will play for a small amount via gamepass, millions have gamed the system to get three years of game pass for a pittance, and they have to subsidise 3rd party games on the platform.
I've checked it out for you. Microsoft own Xbox and has an annual gross profit of 90+ billion. So I would say less then two months.
 

Arkam

Member
Jan 21, 2012
3,809
2,886
750
Here, Now and maybe later
I start to sound like a broken record on this, but Amazon will determine how well GamePass and Xcloud does in the longer term. Sony are actually incidental to it all. Microsoft purchased Bethesda, because they knew what Amazon were up to, and it was a good move from them to counteract what is likely to be industry wide disruption when Luna gets released. It will not fail like Stadia. The subscription gaming model is going to be a battle between Msft and Amazon going forward. Msft have to hope that Amazon don't fully leverage the 150 million Prime subscribers they have, and don't fully take advantage of the huge lead they have in cloud service technology.
Well that record might be broken, but that was the first time I heard that viewpoint on GamePass/Amazon rivalry. I can definitely see a world where that is possible. Sony doesn't seem as committed to this battle (Yet) so they may become another "Nintendo" who just does their own thing. (assuming the Sub model is long term success). Cool.
 

Men_in_Boxes

Member
May 31, 2020
2,014
3,737
400
Can someone help me understand this?

Doesn't the average PS4/XBO owner buy 1-2 games per year? I thought I read the PS4 has like a 9.6 game attach rate.

So if Sony is bringing in $120 (2 games) per year + $30 for PS+... that's on average $150 dollars per year.

GamePass at $15 per month it's $180 per year.

It seems like it's a more sustainable business model. What am I missing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stitch1

MiguelItUp

Member
Feb 24, 2015
4,741
3,330
545
Honestly it's one of the smartest things I think their game division has done in YEARS. So much so that I firmly believe they've created a new standard that others may attempt to follow. I understand Sony has PSNow, but the thing that makes Game Pass truly special is the fact that they'll include launch titles as well. It's wild to me, honestly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stitch1

Kuranghi

Member
Apr 17, 2015
1,753
3,476
670
People should try calculating the actual value of the games they have played (and at least mostly finished or be honest if you wouldn't actually have bought it if you couldn't try it for free) on Game Pass and see if they actually saved money over the subscription or not.

I did and I would've paid out £750 for 5 years of Game Pass (At UK base price, I'm on PC so need Ultimate for the best titles) instead of the ~£850 I spent on ~35 games in that time and I wouldn't own any of the games. That £100 extra is well worth it to me to have constant access to titles so I can replay them down the line.

I even used the RRP when I usually get games 10-25% cheaper than that via cdkeys so its not even a fair comparison in my case.

edit - Wizz-Art Wizz-Art points out below that the loophole was 3 years max. So I've updated the figures here.

I understand a lot of people used the "Gold upgrade deal" loophole and got 3 years for £50 a year. So those people have gotten 3 years of Game Pass for £150. Then £300 for the following 4th and 5th years, giving a total of £450 for 5 years. Obviously that is a big saving over what I spent.

Think about this though, I can choose to buy or not buy games that I want (over the next 5 years) as they come out, or even wait for them to drop in price and buy them heavily discounted. You've given MS ~£150 up front and will spend another £300 for the 4th and 5th years together. I'm guessing most people will end up buying at least some games through the service down the line because they aren't part of the subscription.

These games are marked up by 10-25% over other online stores so you aren't making a saving at all and its locked to the terrible Windows Store if you are on PC. Do that 10x (in 5 years, so 2 games a year) and you've spent MORE money than I have but you own 10 games instead of ~35. So its fine if you don't intend to buy any AAA/full-price games outside of whats on Game Pass, but lets me honest there will be AT LEAST one game a year thats not on it that most people want, like Cyberpunk 2077, or the latest AC/Far Cry as examples.

The majority of the extra games I own will be the smaller indie games that I paid ~£15 each for (~£350). I'm much more likely to actually replay those games since they are shorter as well so I really do want to own them more so than the AAA titles.
 
Last edited:

JawaSaysUtinni

Neo Member
Aug 23, 2020
23
27
110
I am very curious to see how Game Pass shapes up. On paper, it sounds like a fantastic deal, which gets even better if you make use of the cheap deals available.

It is obviously too early to tell how Game Pass will end up. We are going fresh into a new console generation, so naturally there is a lot of momentum.

I know there are have been a lot of Netflix and Amazon Prime comparisons, which I think is understandable considering the type of model that Game Pass is. I think the one thing to watch will be 3rd party studios and whether Game Pass will be able to retain them. Continuing the theme of the comparisons, there is a huge drive for original content from many of these subscription models. A lot of these streaming services lacked when it came to non-original content (i.e. programmes and films made by other studios). You never really had a true selection, rather you had a bit here and there, and they were always timed and would disappear without much notice. I think that’s in part why Disney+ was so successful; they had a huge array of popular movies all in one place.

My point being that 3rd party studios will want to get a good deal, and it will be interesting going forward whether 3rd party studios will continue/start to bring their blockbuster games straight to Game Pass, or whether you are going to have to wait an arbitrary amount of time before it comes to the service. I think GamePass will eventually be defined by its exclusive games as I feel original content will drive any subscription model. Not quite the same ball pack, but look at Apple’s Arcade. A service which reports indicate only has a modest amount of subscribers considering the install base of Apple owners, with many believing that the lack of diverse and high quality content being one barrier.

It’ll be interesting to see the state of play a year from now. Nevertheless, it is a compelling offer, which nearly had me rebuilding my PC to make proper use of it. However, I often think I have more time than I do, so I‘ll be sticking with the one next gen console and getting through the backlog I have accrued.
 

Wizz-Art

Member
Aug 20, 2012
376
487
640
People should try calculating the actual value of the games they have played (and at least mostly finished or be honest if you wouldn't actually have bought it if you couldn't try it for free) on Game Pass and see if they actually saved money over the subscription or not.

I did and I would've paid out £750 for 5 years of Game Pass (At UK base price, I'm on PC so need Ultimate for the best titles) instead of the ~£850 I spent on 35-40 games in that time and I wouldn't own any of the games. That £100 extra is well worth it to me to have constant access to titles so I can replay them down the line.

I even used the RRP when I usually get games 10-25% cheaper than that via cdkeys so its not even a fair comparison in my case.

I understand a lot of people used the "Gold upgrade deal" loophole and got it for £50 a year or something like that. So those people have gotten 5 years of Game Pass for ~£250. Obviously that is a big saving over what I spent.

Think about this though, I can choose to buy or not buy games that I want (over the next 5 years) as they come out, or even wait for them to drop in price and buy them heavily discounted. You've given MS ~£250 up front and I'm guessing most people will end up buying at least some games through the service down the line because they aren't part of the subscription.

These games are marked up by 10-25% over other online stores so you aren't making a saving at all and its locked to the terrible Windows Store if you are on PC. Do that 10-12x (in 5 years, so ~2 games a year) and you've spent the same amount of money I have but you own 10-12 games instead of 30-40.

The majority of the extra games I own will be the smaller indie games that I paid ~£15 each for (~£350) for I'm much more likely to actually replay those games since they are shorter.
That so-called loophole had a max of 3 years.
 

amstradcpc

Member
May 26, 2009
2,483
350
930
Is genius, you hardly pay anything for 300 million dollars games. The question is when its creator will realize is being taken for a ride.
 
Last edited:
Oct 16, 2017
1,318
1,964
405
The latency is the only thing holding back game streaming, when that obstacle is overcome the sky is the limit.

Giants in this field are working on it, some one will crack it.
Do you even know what you are talking about?

If this is the level of understanding necessary for someone to actually believe in the future of game streaming, then clearly game streaming is doomed.

And even if we managed to invent faster-than-light communication, that would just mean you can make local PCs and consoles even FASTER by building the mechanisim into a console. That would mean streaming would be like today while normal local gaming become many times more powerful. You would never "catch up" to local hardware with streaming. But keep believing that if it makes you feel better. Especially since Xbox as a brand NEED game streaming to actually survive next gen.
 

Iced Arcade

Member
Oct 3, 2013
2,430
1,761
800
Canada eh
Its running at a loss, I believe
just pulling that out of the air, I believe lol
People should try calculating the actual value of the games they have played (and at least mostly finished or be honest if you wouldn't actually have bought it if you couldn't try it for free) on Game Pass and see if they actually saved money over the subscription or not.

I did and I would've paid out £750 for 5 years of Game Pass (At UK base price, I'm on PC so need Ultimate for the best titles) instead of the ~£850 I spent on ~35 games in that time and I wouldn't own any of the games. That £100 extra is well worth it to me to have constant access to titles so I can replay them down the line.

I even used the RRP when I usually get games 10-25% cheaper than that via cdkeys so its not even a fair comparison in my case.

edit - Wizz-Art Wizz-Art points out below that the loophole was 3 years max. So I've updated the figures here.

I understand a lot of people used the "Gold upgrade deal" loophole and got 3 years for £50 a year. So those people have gotten 3 years of Game Pass for £150. Then £300 for the following 4th and 5th years, giving a total of £450 for 5 years. Obviously that is a big saving over what I spent.

Think about this though, I can choose to buy or not buy games that I want (over the next 5 years) as they come out, or even wait for them to drop in price and buy them heavily discounted. You've given MS ~£150 up front and will spend another £300 for the 4th and 5th years together. I'm guessing most people will end up buying at least some games through the service down the line because they aren't part of the subscription.

These games are marked up by 10-25% over other online stores so you aren't making a saving at all and its locked to the terrible Windows Store if you are on PC. Do that 10x (in 5 years, so 2 games a year) and you've spent MORE money than I have but you own 10 games instead of ~35. So its fine if you don't intend to buy any AAA/full-price games outside of whats on Game Pass, but lets me honest there will be AT LEAST one game a year thats not on it that most people want, like Cyberpunk 2077, or the latest AC/Far Cry as examples.

The majority of the extra games I own will be the smaller indie games that I paid ~£15 each for (~£350). I'm much more likely to actually replay those games since they are shorter as well so I really do want to own them more so than the AAA titles.
should make another edit... the "loophole" to upgrade gold to ultimate can only be done once per acct. (just ran into it myself this week and even spoke to xbox support to confirm)
 
Last edited:

Kuranghi

Member
Apr 17, 2015
1,753
3,476
670
just pulling that out of the air, I believe lol
should make another edit... the "loophole" to upgrade gold to ultimate can only be done once per acct. (just ran into it myself this week and even spoke to xbox support to confirm)
Do you mean you can't add a year of Ultimate with the upgrade deal and then add another year later on, you have to do it all at once?
 

Kuranghi

Member
Apr 17, 2015
1,753
3,476
670
I keep posting my experience with Game Pass because I want people to genuinely think about if they are saving money or not. Fair enough if you don't care and want the convenience Game Pass brings but please stop saying it saves you all this money.

I have a subscription to Netflix to watch about 5 shows. I've had it for 3 years now, so I've spent £100+ every year to be able to watch these 5 series when I want to, on many devices.

What a total fucking ripoff lol I could've bought each series on disc + a decent 4K BD player to play them on for much less than that, but I keep it because its split 3 ways with flatmates so its like "Its only £3 quid a month..." but it REALLY adds up and you should actually check you aren't being hung out to dry with how you use the service.
 

sn0man

Member
Nov 23, 2013
980
524
495
Same with game pass. Games can suddebly disappear, you don't own anything or streaming is of lesser quality by lag compression artifacts or just gaving to be at the whim of a long download before anything can be played.
I’m a game ownership advocate but gamepass allows you to download and run the game on your machine. It’s full quality. Xcloud had reduced quality.
 

Mmnow

Member
Jun 16, 2020
500
621
265
True, but does that cover the loss of income that all those games incur by being on a low cost subscription service? None of know the answer to that.... yet.
I think people overestimate how many games get bought full price and underestimate how long a tail titles have.

Looking at something like Starfield, I'd expect a few million sales within the first three months and then many more than that over a decade. Most of those people will be paying around $15 anyway.

The only difference is the marketing potential of "new games for nothing as part of a collection" (which allows for scale) and the fact that you're getting all the money in at once.

It's a gambit, but not as big of one as it seems when you factor everything in.
 

Jagz

Member
Feb 13, 2018
104
41
220
Game Pass has really disrupted the console game buying market . From a value perspective, you just need to buy the Xbox console and a GP subscription and you instantly have a ton of games to play on day 1. It's a much better value to the average gamer compared to the PS5 and its $70 exclusive games. On day 1 of PS5 ownership, most people will only be able to afford on average about 1 or 2 games.
 

Iced Arcade

Member
Oct 3, 2013
2,430
1,761
800
Canada eh
I keep posting my experience with Game Pass because I want people to genuinely think about if they are saving money or not. Fair enough if you don't care and want the convenience Game Pass brings but please stop saying it saves you all this money.

I have a subscription to Netflix to watch about 5 shows. I've had it for 3 years now, so I've spent £100+ every year to be able to watch these 5 series when I want to, on many devices.

What a total fucking ripoff lol I could've bought each series on disc + a decent 4K BD player to play them on for much less than that, but I keep it because its split 3 ways with flatmates so its like "Its only £3 quid a month..." but it REALLY adds up and you should actually check you aren't being hung out to dry with how you use the service.
......even at full price it still has saved me money every single year. will be even more now with the bethesda acquisition
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
11,095
1,037
1,120
SC USA
Do you even know what you are talking about?

If this is the level of understanding necessary for someone to actually believe in the future of game streaming, then clearly game streaming is doomed.

And even if we managed to invent faster-than-light communication, that would just mean you can make local PCs and consoles even FASTER by building the mechanisim into a console. That would mean streaming would be like today while normal local gaming become many times more powerful. You would never "catch up" to local hardware with streaming. But keep believing that if it makes you feel better. Especially since Xbox as a brand NEED game streaming to actually survive next gen.
I don't understand what you're getting at. Making streaming work doesnt require faster than light communication. It mainly needs an acceptable level of upstream input latency and appropriate stream compression technology to be viable. The local technology doesn't have to be super powerful. It does need to be able to quickly and accurately decompress the stream from the host. It's already proven technology otherwise we wouldn't have been streaming PS4 games to Vita over wifi years ago and PSNow would have never been a thing.

What makes you think that Microsoft needs it to survive this generation? Their main play is gamepass, not xcloud. And there are certainly enough capable PC's out there to support gamepass.
 

Chittagong

Gold Member
Jun 8, 2004
19,044
4,280
2,075
The Game Pass math is actually surprisingly straightforward.

Say you have a console in active use for 4 years. Microsoft gets for

Game Pass 4 * 12 * $15 = $720.

Let’s assume their platform fee for third party games is $10 on average, and their take home amount for first party games is $35 on average. That $720 would translate to

Tie Ratio of 72 third party games or 20 first party games.

If I am not mistaken, consoles typically have a tie ratio of 10-15, consisting of a mixof 1st and 3rd party.

Hence, Game Pass massively increases Microsoft’s revenue from the gaming business.
 

bender

Bending Rodríguez (22, 1,729)
Apr 12, 2010
6,222
5,922
1,260
The Game Pass math is actually surprisingly straightforward.

Say you have a console in active use for 4 years. Microsoft gets for

Game Pass 4 * 12 * $15 = $720.

Let’s assume their platform fee for third party games is $10 on average, and their take home amount for first party games is $35 on average. That $720 would translate to

Tie Ratio of 72 third party games or 20 first party games.

If I am not mistaken, consoles typically have a tie ratio of 10-15, consisting of a mixof 1st and 3rd party.

Hence, Game Pass massively increases Microsoft’s revenue from the gaming business.
I guess I would ask what the cost is to maintain the library (currently 390 titles: 249 Xbox, 210 PC)? Your math also assumes a user stays subscribed for four years which I'm not sure is reliable. It would be fascinating to know subscriber count is needed to break even.
 
Last edited:

DeVeAn

Member
Feb 4, 2009
2,939
23
920
I find myself buying way less games and waiting. Katana zero was a game I was planning to buy on switch. It’s currently on gamepass and I got to try it and now I’m glad I didn’t buy it.
This has happened to me a few times. Gamepass is sweet.
 
Nov 22, 2019
248
400
240
Yes yes Microsoft makes a lot of money by renting access to old games. Big deal
Oh fuck off, more than once have I been surprised by getting day one releases of third party titles, most recently Star Renegades and Carrion were games I wanted to buy but came to game pass immediately. The amount of salt in this thread is unbearable. The desperation in downplaying how good game pass is has reached the level of spreading bald faced lies.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mmnow
Nov 22, 2019
248
400
240
Yes i do. But i know i don't own those films. The picture quality is lesser and thus not a suitable replacement for me. Same with game pass. Games can suddebly disappear, you don't own anything or streaming is of lesser quality by lag compression artifacts or just gaving to be at the whim of a long download before anything can be played. I do understand why people like it but the picture implies ownership.
That picture implies value. Your copy of Demon's Souls will forever be Demon's Souls even when you get bored of it. Games you get bored of on game pass go away and are replaced with new ones. Odds are if you don't get bored of a game on Game Pass after the entirety of it's run, you can pick it up on a deep sale since it's been out for 6 months to year.

The fact that games are constantly changing in that stack only makes the service even more compelling than a game I will likely get tired of in a month. No one is stopping you from turning the games you love on Game Pass into games you own and you are still saving money in the long run by only buying games you care about.

Unless this is a weird "I must own a physical copy of everything for my wall of virginity" fetish you have, which guessing it is since you immediately started overvaluing the idea of owning a bunch of games you will probably never play again instead of looking at the bigger picture.
 

Jigsaah

Gold Member
Jan 31, 2018
4,868
4,722
660
From a business stand point, it's left to be seen, but it is undoubtedly genius from strictly a consumer perspective. GamePass is the best thing in gaming right now for consumers, period.
 

jose4gg

Member
May 7, 2020
608
4,113
470
This image is super interesting to me, right now, I have Gamepass on PC, and I'm not playing anything constantly on it, In fact, I'm waiting for Demons Souls with my PS5 preorder...

It's not like Gamepass is bad, but for me, that love the new Demons Souls remake, that is going to buy the new Assassins Creed, and Cyberpunk, there is a moment where the quantity of the games is simply not important as the games I want to play. This is where gamespass usually fails, I have a lot of games on it, but a lot of times I don't have the games I want on it.
 
Last edited:

Kev Kev

Gold Member
Oct 25, 2012
2,322
3,854
905
33
Daytona Beach, FL
It’s the best move either company could have made. Sony needs to follow suit or they are going to get trampled

does Sony have something like this in the works? I honestly do not know

couldn’t care less about the console wars, but the writing is on the wall here folks: streaming has a big big future in gaming
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bonfires Down

lastmessiah

Member
May 14, 2020
1,084
2,279
410
It’s the best move either company could have made. Sony needs to follow suit or they are going to get trampled

does Sony have something like this in the works? I honestly do not know

couldn’t care less about the console wars, but the writing is on the wall here folks: streaming has a big big future in gaming
Right. It's funny that Sony fanboys are directing all their ire at MS when it is Amazon and Google that is really going to put the final nail in the coffin for them.

I honestly expect Sony to taper off their hardware division and put all their games on PC while they develop some kind of streaming/subscription web portal that will debut the generation after this one.
 
  • Thoughtful
  • Like
Reactions: Kev Kev and Kadayi

The Pleasure

Member
Jan 8, 2019
2,705
3,692
460
It’s the best move either company could have made. Sony needs to follow suit or they are going to get trampled

does Sony have something like this in the works? I honestly do not know

couldn’t care less about the console wars, but the writing is on the wall here folks: streaming has a big big future in gaming
Playstation now? Has hundreds of ps4 games you can download onto the system. It's cheaper then gamepass too at 60 a year. But like gamepass it doesn't have the games people want so they might use it for a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kev Kev

devilNprada

Member
May 2, 2019
641
756
330
It’s the best move either company could have made. Sony needs to follow suit or they are going to get trampled

does Sony have something like this in the works? I honestly do not know

couldn’t care less about the console wars, but the writing is on the wall here folks: streaming has a big big future in gaming
People should realize PS+ has 41+ million subscriptions already, which at anytime they can sweeten the pot with day one games and/or bundling in movies and music.

But Why?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kev Kev

Balducci30

Member
Mar 11, 2020
582
510
365
Imagine this scenario - Gamepass, it's great. People love it. Loooooove it.

Suddenly, Microsoft begins to release 23 Stellar, Quadruple A, 5 Star games on this platform a year. Games with a critical Consensus of 10 or 100% Ratings across the board.

They begin to release 23 titles like this every 2 years, all Games with 80+ Hours of Gameplay Held to nothing short of Critical Acclaim on the GamePass platform.

But then 2 year's later those 23 games are slowly replaced by the previous 23 games (which you were also addicted to) that were also rated just as extravagantly.

And suddenly all First Party Games on GamePass are Considered must own titles for any gamer.

Suddenly, GamePass is no longer the bastion of 100's of games to play for the Hardcore gamer - As that Hardcore gamer will only ever possibly be able to invest his time into completing perhaps 7 Stellar titles a year through GamePass if they are in fact this good.

Meaning the incentive to buy games has returned... as GamePass is no longer home to all 23 of those critically acclaimed games released 2 years before.

And Suddenly, GamePass... to the common gamer who want's to play the best titles and also sample all titles - is only good to play about 7 games a year not because you wouldn't play the other games on offer - but why??

Those 7 titles are all you could possibly sink your time into - since they are so good - due to this - GamePass loses it's utility as the Netflix of Gaming.

Gamer's are again forced to buy games, as there are too many GamePass games and they are all better than any title that came before it... too many to choose from.

Too many to ever play within the 2 year release window it takes Microsoft to swap out it's roaster.

Or maybe, they just put all titles on there anyways knowing no gamer could ever possibly play more than 7 games a year in totality... because they are all soooo long and all stellar must play experiences.

Imagine.

Or maybe, you will be forced into buying more games than you ever considered possible... as GamePass got you addicted to a particular set a games but has replaced them all with an new set of 23 stellar offering's... all of which you are also getting addicted to.

Imagine.
Gesundheit
 

Denton

Member
Mar 11, 2014
6,115
943
595
It is good and I am using it, but..

1) I hope they drop the asshole idiotic file encryption on PC

2) I hope it never becomes default way to play games (same with cloud) because I actually want game ownership to be preseved
 

lastmessiah

Member
May 14, 2020
1,084
2,279
410
It is good and I am using it, but..

1) I hope they drop the asshole idiotic file encryption on PC

2) I hope it never becomes default way to play games (same with cloud) because I actually want game ownership to be preseved
The file encryption is necessary or else people would just download and steal the games.
 

Balducci30

Member
Mar 11, 2020
582
510
365
If you think video streaming is the same as remote processing of game data, you are making a big mistake.
And if Microsoft think video streaming is the same as remote processing of game data, Gamepass is doomed.

Here is what i know; despite Disney's success with almost everything video, their gaming attempts had been massive failures. There is a reason for that.
"It would be just like Netflix" is the same old lie that Xbox uses. The application of false analogies. Like "having a much weaker Series S is fine, PC already does this!". One again, a lie that doesn't make sense if you know anything about the subject.

I am just preparing the schadenfreude. I love it when smoke and mirrors dissipate and people are forced to see reality. Only a few more months to go.
Why is it a false analogy?
 

jose4gg

Member
May 7, 2020
608
4,113
470
Right. It's funny that Sony fanboys are directing all their ire at MS when it is Amazon and Google that is really going to put the final nail in the coffin for them.

I honestly expect Sony to taper off their hardware division and put all their games on PC while they develop some kind of streaming/subscription web portal that will debut the generation after this one.

Have you ever heard of PS NOW?
 

NullZ3r0

Member
Jun 8, 2017
891
2,009
465
150m then substrac off operating costs(servers, salaries, data, etc)

Then marketing budget

Then other costs.


And then they have to divide the rest for +100 games to pay devs/owners.


I could imagine that one launch AAA title costs them full months or more of profits.

Gamepass is kind of a scam/trick to get something you dont need, it sells the image that you need it.

Like "hey, one bag of candy is 2€, but why dont you subscripe and get 200 bags/year for 10€/month? You save hundreds?" Deals

On paper it looks that you get lot with little, but in reality most will pay hundreds in a gen and play only 1-5% of what they offer. And in the end you just needed the one bag

GP ultimate is 13€/month = 155€ year. That is fucking expensive as subscription service to many.

When looking at statistics, doesnt average gamer buy only like 4-6games/gen?

Less than 1/year.

So having hundreds for cheap goes waste if they dont play more than few games year or even month, then it is just cheaper to buy games from sales.

Could be cultural thing, but here nobody I know is willing to pay for more than 1 video service or similar.

Like netflix only, prime only etc. Multiple are seen as being stupid consumer. And it includes other services too, so people dont want to have multiple subs of any kind, unless they really like it or need it

And people with ps+ pay for one sub, no room for more.

If costs vs what you get would not matter then people would not get the cheap 9.90€/month 100/10mbps internet connection as it is fast enough, they would get the 29-39€ 1000mbps connection.


Im really sceptical that it fucks ups games by lower quality, but we will see in 3-4 years I guess
The operating costs are negligible because MS is using existing infrastructure.