• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

News Rumor Jim Ryan on PS5's Response to Game Pass: "There Is News to Come, But Not Today"

FranXico

Member
Dec 7, 2010
14,089
27,869
1,420
Wow, Sony copied games rental subscription retroactively in time. Maybe they should sell time travel instead. Amazing. Can't wait until they go back in time and copy the wonderous invention that is xCloud games streaming too. Or Remote Play.

You know, in order for a meme to be funny, it must be at least somewhat grounded in reality.
 
Last edited:

Warnen

Can he swing from a thread? Take a look overhead / Hey, there, there goes the Spider-Man
Sep 24, 2005
5,762
5,885
1,885
Sea lab
Wow, Sony copied games rental subscription retroactively in time. Maybe they should sell time travel instead. Amazing. Can't wait until they go back in time and copy the wonderous invention that is xCloud games streaming too. Or Remote Play.

You know, in order for a meme to be funny, it must be at least somewhat grounded in reality.

Sony has 1st party games day and date with there release on there streaming service, sorry didn’t know that. My bad
 

vkbest

Member
Jan 23, 2017
1,666
1,642
500
You can...still buy the games, many games are there with discounts even, and first party games won't go out, and you can still buy those if you really want to own them.

Game Pass is a way to let people with little money play a ton of games, and think of them as really big demos that pratically give the games away if you beat them before they are rotated out, and if you buy them afterwards, you still keep your saves and progress.

No one is saying you can't buy the games on Game Pass, if anything, Microsoft still expects people to buy them after playing on Game Pass, apparently it has worked for some developers, with gamers trying games, liking them and then buying them, Inxile said they were pleasantly suprised with what happened to Wasteland 3.

Sure, many will just play the games and not buy anything...but they will still be able to talk about the games and generate word of mouth.

What is the sense to pay a subscription if you have to buy games yet?
 

Javthusiast

Member
Mar 20, 2017
4,445
10,882
820
Have a gamepass service, just with the difference of putting your first party exclusives couple months after you sold copies for full price first.

Best of both worlds for sony.

PS Now is still a half step. Have a service of many more ps4, later ps5 games added.

Be it 10$ a month or 15$ with PS Plus rolled in.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Demon2blades

Shivvy24

Member
May 7, 2020
85
94
205
How can Microsofts 23 studios all make AAA titles just for gamepass.

Financially not viable unless they are multi platform.
As amazing the gamepass deal is, that's what I thought too. Unless we get a few AAA and more smaller titles, it financially doesn't work unless ms has the money to burn through. And how many of us went with that $1 upgrade too.
 

Aguero9320

Member
Aug 20, 2014
966
1,289
570
Colorado Springs
I don’t see Sony ever having a real GamePass competitor... They’re just not a big enough company to take on Microsoft in that area. They would have had to do it (properly), first, like Netflix did.

I can see them upping the price of PS+ Or introducing a new tier though and including their first party. If it’s cheap enough and they can add some variety to their output I might get that.
 

Alphagear

Member
Mar 13, 2018
698
919
380
Because you silly goose, these games are still buyable outright and come with a 10% discount for being a GP subscriber.

That last line is a good laugh though, GP has many quality titles. Resident Evil 7, Titanfall 2, all of EA access, FF7, 8, 9, Forza Motorsport 7, Destiny 2 + all expansions, FH4, PUBG, Sea Of Thieves and so on so fourth.

It will soon have all playable Bethesda games too and I don’t care what anyone says about Netflix because the content it offers is way beyond what shitty television packages or any other streaming service can offer.

If you seriously believe all these studios would just give up their creativity and hard work to be turned into GP fillers then you’re wrong, most of them would simply walk away.

Most people will simply play the game on gamepass rather than buying it outright.

Let's be serious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Malcolm9

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
4,052
6,818
815
Australia
Most people will simply play the game on gamepass rather than buying it outright.

Let's be serious.
I see people still haven’t quite got their heads around it.

If someone plays a game on Gamepass, it means they never bought it. This means they were pretty unlikely to ever buy it at prices that offer meaningful profits to the creators - remember, the average game makes the vast majority of its profits within the first month of its release.
So, the cash that Microsoft offers a creator for having their game on Gamepass for a few months after it’s release window doesn’t impact sales, while offering up money that they otherwise wouldn’t have had. We’ve already had reports from developers that Gamepass was incredibly profitable for them - this is why. It’s profits that they wouldn’t have ever had without it, and it’s basically free money.

What Gamepass also does is offer Xbox fans a low risk option for trying out new games. I’ll use myself as this example - I took a chance on Sniper Elite 4, a series I’ve never played. I’m enjoying the game so damn much, that not only will I be buying the game so that when it leaves Gamepass I’ll still have it, the developer now has a new fan who’ll be keen on Sniper Elite 5. Hell, I’m already looking into the previous entries in the series, because I feel that I’ve been missing out.
So, in this specific case, Gamepass gave the developer free money, Microsoft gets my monthly subscription cost, Microsoft also get the platform royalties from my Sniper Elite 5 purchase, the developer gets an extra sale - more, if I end up buying the older entires - and the developer has a new fan.

That’s what Gamepass does, and that’s how it makes money for everyone. If I don’t end up purchasing the games I play, I never would’ve purchase them anyway, so the developer doesn’t lose a sale, but they still get the money Microsoft pays for having the game available.

The only sales that Gamepass cannibalises are Microsoft’s first parties. That’s because they’re the bait on the hook - come for Halo, stay for Sniper Elite, or whatever new games you end up trying and loving.
 

Gravemind

Member
Apr 16, 2020
416
1,135
375
Sony will bundle PS Now with PS+ to offer something similar to Game Pass Ultimate. They may even offer a small 5-10% discount on new releases. They're not, however, going to do a Game Pass clone and offer their new games day and date on the service. Not happening. Dont get your hopes up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonnyp

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,307
1,652
365
I hope it's a smaller set of higher quality games, basically an extension of the collection.

Just having a mish-mash of tons of games of variable quality holds no appeal to me, there's only so much free time I have a week, and it can take hours to get into a game.

Regardless there's no chance of big first-party games coming to Playstation Plus/Now on day one, it's just not financially viable.
 

12Dannu123

Member
Sep 23, 2016
709
463
395
Have a gamepass service, just with the difference of putting your first party exclusives couple months after you sold copies for full price first.

Best of both worlds for sony.

PS Now is still a half step. Have a service of many more ps4, later ps5 games added.

Be it 10$ a month or 15$ with PS Plus rolled in.

If people know that they can simply subscribe to a Sony Game Pass service and play the games after 2 months after release, then they will subscribe instead of paying full price. If you wait too long, then people will loose interest or buy the game when its super cheap, too close to release will be a result in uncontrollable massive losses to compete against MS (They will loose in a financial POV)
 

12Dannu123

Member
Sep 23, 2016
709
463
395
Exactly what I thought.

How can Microsofts 23 studios all make AAA titles just for gamepass.

Financially not viable unless they are multi platform.

My belief is most Microsoft studios will churn out shovelware for gamepass with the odd AAA title.

Gamepass will be no different to Netflix. Quantity and hardly any quality.

Game Pass is on PC, Mobile and Console and will expand to many more form factors via XCloud. It's definitely viable.

It's only sustainable for MS because they are large enough to absorb the losses to gain market share. PS is a core business to Sony so it needs to produce a profit. Xbox does not.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,307
1,652
365
Game Pass is on PC, Mobile and Console and will expand to many more form factors via XCloud. It's definitely viable.

It's only sustainable for MS because they are large enough to absorb the losses to gain market share. PS is a core business to Sony so it needs to produce a profit. Xbox does not.
Microsoft are not just going to accept neverending losses.

20+ studios making $100m+ games all going on to a subscription service which costs about $10 a month but always has massive discount offers. And then chuck in the money paid to third-parties to host their games and then for each download.

It's going to see some steep price rises, or some first and third-party games will be taken off.

There's no way Sony will take a bath and adopt the same approach.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: S0ULZB0URNE

Shelookdlvl18

Banned
Nov 8, 2020
558
1,063
360
Microsoft are not just going to accept neverending losses.

20+ studios making $100m+ games all going on to a subscription service which costs about $10 a month but always has massive discount offers. And then chuck in the money paid to third-parties to host their games and then for each download.

It's going to see some steep price rises, or some first and third-party games will be taken off.

There's no way Sony will take a bath and adopt the same approach.

I think the assumption that 20+ studios each making $100+ games is poorly misguided.

Of all those studios, how many have made a $100m game before? Who stated that they all are now.

The worst part of all, is the common misperception that games aren't "quality" unless the budget to produce it, meets or exceeds whatever the latest figure is that Sony boasted about spending.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VectorVictor
Oct 26, 2018
19,666
27,402
820
Have a gamepass service, just with the difference of putting your first party exclusives couple months after you sold copies for full price first.

Best of both worlds for sony.

PS Now is still a half step. Have a service of many more ps4, later ps5 games added.

Be it 10$ a month or 15$ with PS Plus rolled in.
Yup.

Or just do what EA does.

A basic EA Play on PC (like Xbox), and EA has that EA Origins pass that also includes day one games, but the price is much higher.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,307
1,652
365
I think the assumption that 20+ studios each making $100+ games is poorly misguided.

Of all those studios, how many have made a $100m game before? Who stated that they all are now.

The worst part of all, is the common misperception that games aren't "quality" unless the budget to produce it, meets or exceeds whatever the latest figure is that Sony boasted about spending.
Many will be - Avowed, Halo, Fable, Doom, Wolfenstein, Starfield, Gears, Fallout etc. Not sustainable as day ones as it stands. Last gen Shawn Layden said standard games cost $80m - $150m to produce.

Not sure what your second point is about, I've never heard Sony boasting about how much a game cost to produce. I do think that most gamers would prefer platform-holders to focus on bigger budget AAA games to make their consoles more attractive though.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,782
4,076
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Let's be honest with ourselves here. The only reason Sony has added game downloads to PS Now is because of game pass.
Downloads were included to PSNow in 2018. Game Pass exists because of PS Now, like many new things MS implemented to the late XBO and X|S gen, are their own version of stuff Sony did before.

And nobody is excited about streaming old games to consoles. There's literally no reason to stream if all of the games on the service can be installed and played locally. PS Now can't do that.
You can stream these games on another devices that aren't your console. And if there's no reason to stream/play old gen games then good luck with Game Pass on Series X until more than a year outside Halo and some indies. PS2 and PS4 games can be played locally, and when included PS5 games too. If you want to play games downloaded to your console, PS Now has way more downloadable games than Game Pass.

But Microsoft's promise of day 1 releases of first party games is going to keep that service out in the forefront of consumer value mindshare
"Value mindshare" is just an excuse when you have nothing else to back up. It gets tons of users now because it's almost free. Once the users need to pay a full subscription the users will highly decrease.

, especially once the first party titles start to drop.
Outside Halo all the AAA MS exclusives don't have release year and no XBO logo. If what MS said several times of having all their games crossgen during the first 2 years of Series X, they would start dropping around late 2022. Until then, Sony has at least 2021 with many AAA exclusives and MS will have Halo. In their IR meeting of last year they said they were going to improve PS Now for mid term, like expanding the service to more countries and devices, improve content quality, streaming resolution or servers, to include next gen, etc. They already started to do some of these things, and being mid term I assume they'll have it ready before 2022.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes Sony to catch up there.
Sony generates way more money than MS not only from game subscriptions, but also from selling their own and 3rd party games, and consoles, and from VR. Game Pass needs to grow a ton to cut the huge advantage that Sony has from game subscriptions in terms of both revenue generated and number of subscribers (specially from people paying full subscription).

MS is the one who has to catch up, not Sony. They catched up buying more studios, implementing their own Crossbuy, their own Cross-save, their own Remote Play and now soon? they will have their own PS Now once they release game streaming to consoles. After that I assume MS will buy someone to bring VR to Xbox to have their own PSVR. To give away day one their first party games is a desperate move to get attention. Sony doesn't do that because they already are very successful with their own strategy.

Many will be - Avowed, Halo, Fable, Doom, Wolfenstein, Starfield, Gears, Fallout etc. Not sustainable as day ones as it stands. Last gen Shawn Layden said standard games cost $80m - $150m to produce.

Not sure what your second point is about, I've never heard Sony boasting about how much a game cost to produce. I do think that most gamers would prefer platform-holders to focus on bigger budget AAA games to make their consoles more attractive though.
I think to adapt them to Game Pass many of these big IPs (and Forza) will move to GaaS: they will slice their campaign on a first part included in Game Pass and then the other ones into paid DLCs/'expansions' not included in Game Pass, and then the multiplayer will include a lot of microtransactions. So if they don't work they can can it faster, the starting product would be cheaper and the DLCs and microtransactions would help to fund the projects specially if successful.

Doom, Starfiled, Fallout and maybe Wolfenstein or Dishonored timed console exclusives on Xbox during half a year, or a year. All the other ones, full console exclusives.

All these things of having $1 Game Pass or getting it free with Discord and other places would end before the end of 2022, then their AAA next gen only exclusives start to drop.
 
Last edited:

Shelookdlvl18

Banned
Nov 8, 2020
558
1,063
360
Downloads were included to PSNow in 2018. Game Pass exists because of PS Now, like many new things MS implemented to the late XBO and X|S gen, are their own version of stuff Sony did before.


You can stream these games on another devices that aren't your console. And if there's no reason to stream/play old gen games then good luck with Game Pass on Series X until more than a year outside Halo and some indies. PS2 and PS4 games can be played locally, and when included PS5 games too. If you want to play games downloaded to your console, PS Now has way more downloadable games than Game Pass.


"Value mindshare" is just an excuse when you have nothing else to back up. It gets tons of users now because it's almost free. Once the users need to pay a full subscription the users will highly decrease.


Outside Halo all the AAA MS exclusives don't have release year and no XBO logo. If what MS said several times of having all their games crossgen during the first 2 years of Series X, they would start dropping around late 2022. Until then, Sony has at least 2021 with many AAA exclusives and MS will have Halo. In their IR meeting of last year they said they were going to improve PS Now for mid term, like expanding the service to more countries and devices, improve content quality, streaming resolution or servers, to include next gen, etc. They already started to do some of these things, and being mid term I assume they'll have it ready before 2022.


Sony generates way more money than MS not only from game subscriptions, but also from selling their own and 3rd party games, and consoles, and from VR. Game Pass needs to grow a ton to cut the huge advantage that Sony has from game subscriptions in terms of both revenue generated and number of subscribers (specially from people paying full subscription).

MS is the one who has to catch up, not Sony. They catched up buying more studios, implementing their own Crossbuy, their own Cross-save, their own Remote Play and now soon? they will have their own PS Now once they release game streaming to consoles. After that I assume MS will buy someone to bring VR to Xbox to have their own PSVR. To give away day one their first party games is a desperate move to get attention. Sony doesn't do that because they already are very successful with their own strategy.


I think to adapt them to Game Pass many of these big IPs (and Forza) will move to GaaS: they will slice their campaign on a first part included in Game Pass and then the other ones into paid DLCs/'expansions' not included in Game Pass, and then the multiplayer will include a lot of microtransactions. So if they don't work they can can it faster, the starting product would be cheaper and the DLCs and microtransactions would help to fund the projects specially if successful.

Doom, Starfiled, Fallout and maybe Wolfenstein or Dishonored timed console exclusives on Xbox during half a year, or a year. All the other ones, full console exclusives.

All these things of having $1 Game Pass or getting it free with Discord and other places would end before the end of 2022, then their AAA next gen only exclusives start to drop.

I'm curious if you cringe as much typing all that as I do reading it.

That's some high level fanboy text there. Gloss over whatever points you can't dispute, and effortlessly dismiss others with personal opinions presented as fact.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,782
4,076
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
I'm curious if you cringe as much typing all that as I do reading it.

That's some high level fanboy text there. Gloss over whatever points you can't dispute, and effortlessly dismiss others with personal opinions presented as fact.
I cringe reading insulting posts like yours where someone only throws personal attacks instead of providing facts to back up their opinion.
 
Last edited:

12Dannu123

Member
Sep 23, 2016
709
463
395
Microsoft are not just going to accept neverending losses.

20+ studios making $100m+ games all going on to a subscription service which costs about $10 a month but always has massive discount offers. And then chuck in the money paid to third-parties to host their games and then for each download.

It's going to see some steep price rises, or some first and third-party games will be taken off.

There's no way Sony will take a bath and adopt the same approach.

Netflix is a good example. After investing heavily in their service and making large losses per year they will become self-sufficient in 2022. That's the route that MS is going, invest heavily, acquire/produce IPs and hope that the base grows enough with profit to exceed their spending. This might take 10+ years to eventually break-even however and I don't see Sony having the ability to wait that long.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DigitalScrap

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,307
1,652
365
Netflix is a good example. After investing heavily in their service and making large losses per year they will become self-sufficient in 2022. That's the route that MS is going, invest heavily, acquire/produce IPs and hope that the base grows enough with profit to exceed their spending. This might 10+ years however and I don't see Sony having the ability to wait that long.
They wont do it and neither will Nintendo, because they're making billions as it is. They just need to continue keeping their platform attractive, and the IPs they own is the no.1 way to do that. Microsoft have felt the need to go a different route because they're a distant third.
 

kretos

Member
Oct 2, 2019
2,446
22,176
910
I'd love to play Playstation's blockbusters day 1 for 10$ but it will never happen when every new game they make sell millions and break records, people expecting 1st party games day 1 on a gamepass like service will be disappointed
 
Last edited:

Alphagear

Member
Mar 13, 2018
698
919
380
Netflix is a good example. After investing heavily in their service and making large losses per year they will become self-sufficient in 2022. That's the route that MS is going, invest heavily, acquire/produce IPs and hope that the base grows enough with profit to exceed their spending. This might take 10+ years to eventually break-even however and I don't see Sony having the ability to wait that long.

90% of the stuff on Netflix is low budget crap.

If Microsoft is going the Netflix route then expect the majority of games to be Shovelware filler with the odd AAA title chucked in.

Otherwise it's unsustainable with all 23 studios making high budget AAA titles.
 
Last edited:

Brofist

Member
Jun 15, 2004
10,937
1,104
1,765
Wow, Sony copied games rental subscription retroactively in time. Maybe they should sell time travel instead. Amazing. Can't wait until they go back in time and copy the wonderous invention that is xCloud games streaming too. Or Remote Play.

You know, in order for a meme to be funny, it must be at least somewhat grounded in reality.

Lots of big companies dip their toes into different types of services and products. It's the ones that follow through and do it right that are remembered.


90% of the stuff on Netflix is low budget crap.

If Microsoft is going the Netflix route then expect the majority of games to be Shovelware filler with the odd AAA title chucked in.

Otherwise it's unsustainable with all 23 studios making high budget AAA titles.

The general rule is the majority of everything is crap.

Go back and look at past consoles entire libraries. For every Last of Us there are 9 crap games. Go to the Blu-ray section at your local shop. It's mostly bargain bin filler.

Netflix spends more on content than the all the major Hollywood studios combined. Just because there is a lot of filler on the service doesn't mean there isn't a lot of high budget stuff too.

GP will be the same. Bethesda isn't going to start making low budget filler for GP, they'll still make their AAA games.
 
Last edited:

AJUMP23

Member
Sep 29, 2020
3,852
4,448
435
If Sony has a gamepass competitor they should call it “TRANSFARING”. Otherwise it is a missed cross Kojima marketing opportunity.
 

Agent X

Member
Jun 7, 2004
8,025
1,216
1,720
New Jersey
To give away day one their first party games is a desperate move to get attention. Sony doesn't do that because they already are very successful with their own strategy.

True.

Microsoft dangled the carrot of "first-party games on Day One!" and combined that hype with cheap "dollar deals" to pump up subscriber numbers. Just a year ago, some people were spinning tales with wistful dreams of unboxing their Project Scarlett systems in November 2020, and diving headfirst into Halo Infinite, Forza Motorsport 8, Hellblade II, and the next Fable game.

Also, as I mentioned in another thread earlier, the demand that Sony match Microsoft's policy of giving out their first-party games is based on a false equivalence. Sony produces many more games than Microsoft, they achieve far more popularity and critical acclaim, and the sales charts support all of this. The decline in sales of Microsoft's games isn't a consequence of Xbox Game Pass, either, because it's been like this for years.

If Microsoft's games sold as many copies as Sony's do, they wouldn't need to give them away.

If Microsoft produced as many multi-million selling games each year as Sony, they wouldn't want to give them away.

All these things of having $1 Game Pass or getting it free with Discord and other places would end before the end of 2022, then their AAA next gen only exclusives start to drop.

That is when the gravy train ends for subscribers. The "dollar deals" and other super bargains will fade away, and consumers will be asked to fork out full price (which could be increased from today's full price) if they want the real goods.

Xbox Game Pass is sustainable now because Microsoft isn't exerting anywhere near the amount of effort as Sony or Nintendo in game development.

That's the route that MS is going, invest heavily, acquire/produce IPs and hope that the base grows enough with profit to exceed their spending. This might take 10+ years to eventually break-even however and I don't see Sony having the ability to wait that long.

Will consumers wait that long? Microsoft can acquire/produce IPs until the cows come home, but if they fail to deliver the games that people are craving, then it's all for naught. It would be great to see Microsoft's games meet the level of quality and quantity that Sony and Nintendo have achieved, but they've got a long way before their competitors begin quaking.
 

Alphagear

Member
Mar 13, 2018
698
919
380
Lots of big companies dip their toes into different types of services and products. It's the ones that follow through and do it right that are remembered.




The general rule is the majority of everything is crap.

Go back and look at past consoles entire libraries. For every Last of Us there are 9 crap games. Go to the Blu-ray section at your local shop. It's mostly bargain bin filler.

Netflix spends more on content than the all the major Hollywood studios combined. Just because there is a lot of filler on the service doesn't mean there isn't a lot of high budget stuff too.

GP will be the same. Bethesda isn't going to start making low budget filler for GP, they'll still make their AAA games.

I was referring to first party output only on gamepass.

Microsoft is NOT gonna allow all its 23 studios to produce AAA titles just for gamepass.

The vast majority of games from Microsoft will be filler alongwith the odd AAA title.

Otherwise its not economically viable.

We keep hearing Microsoft is huge and can take the losses.

No company is in the industry to take losses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hezekiah

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
12,602
3,421
1,240
SC USA
I was referring to first party output only on gamepass.

Microsoft is NOT gonna allow all its 23 studios to produce AAA titles just for gamepass.

The vast majority of games from Microsoft will be filler alongwith the odd AAA title.

Otherwise its not economically viable.

We keep hearing Microsoft is huge and can take the losses.

No company is in the industry to take losses.
You do know that people will still be able to buy games that Microsoft studios make, right? Game Pass isn't going to be the only way they are available. The content won't only be for Game Pass. People will still be able to buy the games they want to keep just like they always have.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,782
4,076
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Xbox Game Pass is sustainable now because Microsoft isn't exerting anywhere near the amount of effort as Sony or Nintendo in game development.
Game Pass isn't sustainable now for MS, it's a long term investment for them. They are harvesting users to have a good metric to brag about and to hope the end convering into real subscribers paying their fee, that if lucky in the long term may end getting a huge market share of the game subscriptions. And they are betting hard here because they know that now they can't compete against Nintendo or Sony selling consoles or games.

And it's hard to think that with their Gold, Gamepass and xCloud will beat Sony's PS+ and PS Now, specially considering the huge lead Sony has over them, and specially after Sony revamps them for the next gen and that during at least the first year and a half of the generation Sony is going to have a lot of big AAA exclusives, several of them next gen only, while MS will only have Halo and mostly previous gen games in Game Pass. So during this start of the generation the distance between Sony and MS will increase instead of decreasing, so who knows if the distance will be too long to recover from it.

Microsoft can acquire/produce IPs until the cows come home, but if they fail to deliver the games that people are craving, then it's all for naught. It would be great to see Microsoft's games meet the level of quality and quantity that Sony and Nintendo have achieved, but they've got a long way before their competitors begin quaking.
Microsoft already acquired and is producing enough big games, but AAA games require time to be developed. They can't buy time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Agent X

Alphagear

Member
Mar 13, 2018
698
919
380
You do know that people will still be able to buy games that Microsoft studios make, right? Game Pass isn't going to be the only way they are available. The content won't only be for Game Pass. People will still be able to buy the games they want to keep just like they always have.

That's the point.

Will people buy these games outright when they can play them on Gamepass.

I won't.

Would you buy a movie on DVD or Blu ray if it's available on your Netflix subscription?

That's why it's not sustainable with Microsoft making AAA titles only with their 23 studios. Expect alot of filler.

This is the reason Sony won't jump on the bandwagon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hezekiah
Jun 28, 2013
2,745
2,827
895
Honestly Just have all multiplayer modes of their exclusives in PS +. Uncharted 4 Multiplayer, Ghost Of Tshusima Multiplayer, etc. When you buy the game you get all the microtransactions. Simple.
 

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
12,602
3,421
1,240
SC USA
That's the point.

Will people buy these games outright when they can play them on Gamepass.

I won't.

Would you buy a movie on DVD or Blu ray if it's available on your Netflix subscription?

That's why it's not sustainable with Microsoft making AAA titles only with their 23 studios. Expect alot of filler.

This is the reason Sony won't jump on the bandwagon.
Please explain why they will make filler? You haven't made that clear.

I have a collection of over 500 DVD's and Blu-Ray discs and I still subscribe to Netflix and a couple of other streaming services. I absolutely will buy a movie if it's on Netflix because I know it probably won't be on Netflix forever.

When I was subscribed to Game Pass I ended up buying every game I purchased DLC for and some just because they were on sale. I'm not subscribed right now as I'm focusing on my PS4 backlog. But I would absolutely subscribe again and probably will once the new first party games start hitting.

What Microsoft wants is for people to subscribe to Game Pass Ultimate. The revenue potential is unreal and with enough subscribers the service is absolutely sustainable. If Microsoft could convert the 15 million people currently subscribed to Game Pass over to Game Pass Ultimate monthly subscriptions that's $225 million in revenue per month, $2.7 billion per year. If it costs them $50 million to $100 million to make a AAA game and those come every 2 or 3 years per studio then the model is absolutely sustainable with enough subscribers. The only way it doesn't work is if Microsoft can't get people to subscribe, which is the likely scenario without the big budget titles and why it makes sense for them to be on Game Pass. But with the recurring revenue potential it's worth the gamble and Microsoft's pockets are deep enough to absorb it if this thing fails.

The "filler" are the indies and budget titles that swap in and out. People are still going to buy those If they are good because they're not going to be on the service forever. I'm sure Microsoft's studios will produce some duds. But there's enough indie shovelware available right now that Microsoft could moneyhat plenty for the service without having to make it themselves.

As much as we don't want to admit it packaged software has long been on the way out. It's going to be software as a service and subscriptions. Games are going to be that way in some form or fashion. Adobe makes a lot more money selling subscriptions to photoshop than they did selling a copy at a time and their revenue stream is a lot more stable and predictable. Microsoft is betting they can do the same thing for games.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,307
1,652
365
What Microsoft wants is for people to subscribe to Game Pass Ultimate. The revenue potential is unreal and with enough subscribers the service is absolutely sustainable. If Microsoft could convert the 15 million people currently subscribed to Game Pass over to Game Pass Ultimate monthly subscriptions that's $225 million in revenue per month, $2.7 billion per year. If it costs them $50 million to $100 million to make a AAA game and those come every 2 or 3 years per studio then the model is absolutely sustainable with enough subscribers. The only way it doesn't work is if Microsoft can't get people to subscribe, which is the likely scenario without the big budget titles and why it makes sense for them to be on Game Pass. But with the recurring revenue potential it's worth the gamble and Microsoft's pockets are deep enough to absorb it if this thing fails.
Unfortunately AAA games take a lot longer than 2 -3 years to make - as evidenced by Microsoft launching without any exclusives. I also think many games this gen (like Halo) will cost a lot more than $100m (Tim Sweeney said Gears of War 4 would have cost Epic $100m to develop), and you have to account for marketing aswell.

Also you have to take into account the money paid to third-parties for hosting their games and each time their game is downloaded.

It's sustainable if they massively increase their subscriber base, or significantly increase the price.
 

12Dannu123

Member
Sep 23, 2016
709
463
395
True.

Microsoft dangled the carrot of "first-party games on Day One!" and combined that hype with cheap "dollar deals" to pump up subscriber numbers. Just a year ago, some people were spinning tales with wistful dreams of unboxing their Project Scarlett systems in November 2020, and diving headfirst into Halo Infinite, Forza Motorsport 8, Hellblade II, and the next Fable game.

Also, as I mentioned in another thread earlier, the demand that Sony match Microsoft's policy of giving out their first-party games is based on a false equivalence. Sony produces many more games than Microsoft, they achieve far more popularity and critical acclaim, and the sales charts support all of this. The decline in sales of Microsoft's games isn't a consequence of Xbox Game Pass, either, because it's been like this for years.

If Microsoft's games sold as many copies as Sony's do, they wouldn't need to give them away.

If Microsoft produced as many multi-million selling games each year as Sony, they wouldn't want to give them away.



That is when the gravy train ends for subscribers. The "dollar deals" and other super bargains will fade away, and consumers will be asked to fork out full price (which could be increased from today's full price) if they want the real goods.

Xbox Game Pass is sustainable now because Microsoft isn't exerting anywhere near the amount of effort as Sony or Nintendo in game development.



Will consumers wait that long? Microsoft can acquire/produce IPs until the cows come home, but if they fail to deliver the games that people are craving, then it's all for naught. It would be great to see Microsoft's games meet the level of quality and quantity that Sony and Nintendo have achieved, but they've got a long way before their competitors begin quaking.

Definitely, they can simply acquire publishers.

I would say that spending 7.5 Billion shows commitment to Xbox and releasing Starfield, Elder Scrolls day 1 on Game Pass.

Nintendo and Sony should be very concerned if Google, Microsoft and Amazon start gobbling up publishers because they simply don't have influence or the business model to support an acquisition this size.
 
Last edited:

Agent X

Member
Jun 7, 2004
8,025
1,216
1,720
New Jersey
Definitely, they can simply acquire publishers.

I would say that spending 7.5 Billion shows commitment to Xbox and releasing Starfield, Elder Scrolls day 1 on Game Pass.

Nintendo and Sony should be very concerned if Google, Microsoft and Amazon start gobbling up publishers because they simply don't have influence or the business model to support an acquisition this size.

No, consumers should be concerned, because these huge companies have already started gobbling up developers and publishers, but none of them have reached the plateau as either Nintendo or Sony. That's a disappointment that so much money has been spent, and yet there's little to show that benefits video game players.

You're approaching this like a business analyst, who unfortunately does not truly understand the business.

It's not a matter of how much money you spend, but rather how wisely you spend your money.


Sony only acquired one development studio in the last few years. That studio had a long history (going back over two decades) of working with Sony on games exclusively for Sony platforms. Their last game was a Sony exclusive that came out about two years ago. In the period of two years, it amassed a staggering amount of sales, moving over 20 MILLION units.

Sony only spent about $229 million to acquire that studio.

You're tossing around the big numbers, but have those developers and publishers delivered on that level? It doesn't matter how much money that Microsoft/Google/Amazon spend, if their studios are failing to produce games that consumers want to play.

People keep bragging about how Microsoft owns 23 studios (more than Sony, more than Nintendo...maybe more than both of them combined)...yet all of them have failed to produce even one new, exclusive game for the launch of their new systems this year. That's a management failure.

It's worth repeating again: It's not a matter of how much money you spend, but rather how wisely you spend your money.
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Explosive Zombie

12Dannu123

Member
Sep 23, 2016
709
463
395
No, consumers should be concerned, because these huge companies have already started gobbling up developers and publishers, but none of them have reached the plateau as either Nintendo or Sony. That's a disappointment that so much money has been spent, and yet there's little to show that benefits video game players.

You're approaching this like a business analyst, who unfortunately does not truly understand the business.

It's not a matter of how much money you spend, but rather how wisely you spend your money.

Sony only acquired one development studio in the last few years. That studio had a long history (going back over two decades) of working with Sony on games exclusively for Sony platforms. Their last game was a Sony exclusive that came out about two years ago. In the period of two years, it amassed a staggering amount of sales, moving over 20 MILLION units.

Sony only spent about $229 million to acquire that studio.

You're tossing around the big numbers, but have those developers and publishers delivered on that level? It doesn't matter how much money that Microsoft/Google/Amazon spend, if their studios are failing to produce games that consumers want to play.

People keep bragging about how Microsoft owns 23 studios (more than Sony, more than Nintendo...maybe more than both of them combined)...yet all of them have failed to produce even one new, exclusive game for the launch of their new systems this year. That's a management failure.

It's worth repeating again: It's not a matter of how much money you spend, but rather how wisely you spend your money.

If MS for example gobbled up Ubisoft, which will have more impact? Buying Ubisoft or buying a small developer?

I will say that buying a good publisher is spending your money wisely as they have well known IP and will without a doubt draw people to your ecosystem.
 

Agent X

Member
Jun 7, 2004
8,025
1,216
1,720
New Jersey
If MS for example gobbled up Ubisoft, which will have more impact? Buying Ubisoft or buying a small developer?

I will say that buying a good publisher is spending your money wisely as they have well known IP and will without a doubt draw people to your ecosystem.

I've seen you and some others say this for a while, saying that Microsoft (or Google, or Amazon) could instantly assume a large and dominant presence in the industry by purchasing numerous publishers and developers. I believe that you're grossly oversimplifying the situation.

I'll play along, anyway.

If it is truly this simple, then why hasn't Microsoft purchased Ubisoft yet?
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
8,941
9,840
940
Can't deny being curious as to whatever they are planning. But I'm having a tough time believing I will subscribe to whatever it is. I completely understand not releasing their AAA exclusives day 1 to subscription passes, but without it I just don't see the value in a subscription package yet. I just have no interest in renting old games or renting indie games. If they say something definitive, like all of their games will be added at a specific interval (like 3 months post launch), then I might swing into the sign me up camp. Just my personal opinion based on my personal gaming habits, and not a dig at any subscription offering.
 

kiphalfton

Member
Dec 27, 2018
1,322
1,895
490
Just merge plus and now for one low low price.
You can already get a year of PS Plus and PS Now for like $50 on CD Keys, by buying year long subscriptions separately. Gamepass on the other hand is like $120/year or something ludicrous if you use a loophole (i.e. convert 4 x 12 month EA Play membership codes to one year).
 
  • Like
Reactions: N1tr0sOx1d3
Oct 26, 2018
19,666
27,402
820
Speaking with Russian media outlet TASS, PlayStation bigwig Jim Ryan was asked about Sony’s response to Xbox’s popular Game Pass subscription service. He replied, intriguingly: “There is actually news to come, but just not today.” The executive then went on to talk about PlayStation Now, which is the Japanese giant’s cloud streaming platform.

It’s a curious statement, because when asked a similar question earlier in the year, Ryan explained that a Game Pass-like subscription “doesn’t make sense for us”. He told Games Industry.biz: “We are not going to go down the road of putting new release titles into a subscription model. These games cost many millions of dollars, well over $100 million, to develop. We just don't see that as sustainable.”
Looks like he was right the whole time in a sneaky way.

There is news to come: MLB 21 on GP

And his statement at the end was more about their own sub plan, not competing sub plans. So he right about not killing their own disc/digital sales, but it never involved sales on competing devices.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

Mikey Jr.

Member
Dec 5, 2008
17,790
505
1,230
Toronto
The news to come was that ps5 collection and the free indie games at home.

That's the answer if anyone is curious.
 

Eric187

Banned
Jul 19, 2018
264
238
280
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Hendrick's