Support NeoGAF

[feynoob]

As good as those games may be for some, they did not create any positive impact. A controversial opinion, and at the risk of sounding harsh, but Hi-Fi Rush was pretty much a failure in every sense.

The game hit 2 million players despite being day one on Game Pass. Even if we do the 75:25 split, an 89 MC game that took ~4-5 years to make, sold only 500,000 copies across Steam and Xbox, and only got 1.5 million players from a Game Pass subscription base of ~25 million players (6% attach rate).

I like Hi-Fi Rush, and I think it is one of the better Xbox games out there. But at the end of the day, in the context of this thread, it didn't create any positive effect: revenue, subscription growth, or console sales.

It's an indie game.

 

[feynoob]

Best games of the past 18 months:

Elden Ring, Hogwarts Legacy, TotK.

You aren’t getting quality like that on subscription services day one, anywhere.

As I’ve said in the past, both services (Extra and Game Pass) are ideal supplementary services for people that are in their teens or early 20s.

You are getting those in this upcoming showcase.

 

[DenchDeckard]

see what happens when starfield and more launches....but glad that physical still remains strong.

Subscriptions need great content to grow and it's been a little dry for 18 months or so.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

The problems with subscription services are two-fold, as has been made clear by video streaming platforms:

First, there's a finite amount of people who want them. Once everyone who wants a subscription has one, the revenue changes from driving new subs to trying to retain existing ones or minimizing user 'churn' (user's subscribing for a while, while others drop off for a while). That's why you see companies like Netflix taking aggressive stances on things like password sharing now. They used to be fine with it, but now they're cracking down in the hopes that it drives new subs from the people currently 'sharing' accounts. Bear in mind that video streaming services are platform agnostic whereas game streaming services are platform dependent, so Game Pass and PS+ will hit the ceiling much faster than video services.

Second, subscription services end up in an arms race to provide content to keep subscribers "engaged". Like subscribers, there's a finite well of material that can be put on the subscription service. This ultimately ends up leading to a system of quantity over quality. Again, with video streaming we see this with the sheer number of projects being greenlit only to be canceled part way through, or only after one, season. It's already happening on game streaming services as well -- most notably Game Pass, since it's the older of the two. This push for constant content is how we end up with stinkers like Redfall. Had Redfall needed to survive solely on sales, I doubt it would have launched in the state we got it. But sales were a secondary thought -- using a big, hyped, first party title to drive engagement for Game Pass subscribers was more important than the quality of the title itself.



How did I know this was going to be your response?

Continuing to prove the point as to why software sales on Xbox is abysmal compared to PlayStation.
Because Xbox fans expect everything to show up on Game Pass or they simply won't bother.
Game Pass has fundamentally warped Xbox fans' brains into not buying games.
And then they wonder why output is dismal.

Couple buddies of mine swapped to Xbox and when I asked why they said “everything is free”.

 

[THE DUCK]

There's no point in subscribing to a game service if there aren't any good games for it...

This might be Microsoft's problem, but nobody ever seems to want to admit it.

They come and go, some periods are better than others, just like any console.

Unfortunately the way this stuff works is that for a service like this, if you arent adding subscribers its basically like losing money to regular folks like us. If you are losing subscribers, even a bit, its the pre death knell. These people dont care about increasing and making a service better to a set amount of users, they only care about increasing revenue.

But it seems like a bit of an overreaction that MS might stall during a period where they have basically no content. Check the same figures come November.......

 

[THE DUCK]

Best games of the past 18 months:

Elden Ring, Hogwarts Legacy, TotK.

You aren’t getting quality like that on subscription services day one, anywhere.

As I’ve said in the past, both services (Extra and Game Pass) are ideal supplementary services for people that are in their teens or early 20s.

That may be for now, but I suspect you will see 2 games like that this fall on gamepass in Starfield and Forza. Also if you go back 6 more days, you would have Forza Horizon 5, which is also truly an AAA game.

 

[rofif]

fuck gaas

 

[alienator]

i rather buy 1 good game for 60-70 than having 2-300 games on a sub service i dont play anyways because im invested in just 1 game at that moment. also i care about ownership. i truly dont care about this 'everything is free on gamepass (but i dont own anything)' mantra.

 

[Roufianos]

I've subbed to Game Pass for about 8 cumulative months since Series X launched.

Really not compelled by it. I liked Halo and Forza, and will sign up again for Starfield, but the rest of my time was a lot of booting games up and uninstalling 30 mins later.

There's some stellar games on there but I've already played the likes of Fallout 3 and Gears.

Time is more valuable than money and I'm not gonna waste it playing shit like Atomic Heart because it's 'free'.

 

[Banjo64]

Huh? Teens or early 20s?

People with 10s of hours of spare time a week.

Gamepass brought Hi Fi Rush and Atomic Heart day 1 this year and will bring Starfield and probably something else good later this year.

Hi-Fi Rush and Atomic Heart are not close to the level of the 3 games I mentioned.

That may be for now, but I suspect you will see 2 games like that this fall on gamepass in Starfield and Forza. Also if you go back 6 more days, you would have Forza Horizon 5, which is also truly an AAA game.

Forza/Forza Horizon are incomparable to Zelda or Elden Ring (and even Hogwarts which had ambition in spades). If Starfield is closer to the level of Fallout 4 over BGS’s older works, then it will be nothing other than a very good game.

 

[feynoob]

If Starfield is closer to the level of Fallout 4 over BGS’s older works, then it will be nothing other than a very good game.

Starfield being space game makes it a higher level.

I mean this is what you will do in space.

 

[feynoob]

I've subbed to Game Pass for about 8 cumulative months since Series X launched.

Really not compelled by it. I liked Halo and Forza, and will sign up again for Starfield, but the rest of my time was a lot of booting games up and uninstalling 30 mins later.

There's some stellar games on there but I've already played the likes of Fallout 3 and Gears.

Time is more valuable than money and I'm not gonna waste it playing shit like Atomic Heart because it's 'free'.

It mainly depends on your taste and what type of games you like.
I am not going to sugar coat you here. Been feeling the same, but that is mainly due to me not wanting to play those games.
There are alot of good games there, but they are not the type of games that I want to spend my money even if they are on sale. I have a certain taste.

 

[Banjo64]

Starfield being space game makes it a higher level.

I mean this is what you will do in space.

Looks good

If it’s GOAT tier, I’ll be delighted. Point stands though that that would be the only game on that level to ever release day one on Game Pass, so you’d still be better of buying it outright instead of subbing (unless you’ve got unlimited free time).

 

[THE DUCK]

People with 10s of hours of spare time a week.


Hi-Fi Rush and Atomic Heart are not close to the level of the 3 games I mentioned.


Forza/Forza Horizon are incomparable to Zelda or Elden Ring (and even Hogwarts which had ambition in spades). If Starfield is closer to the level of Fallout 4 over BGS’s older works, then it will be nothing other than a very good game.

Umm, no. You can hold Zelda up for gameplay (not graphics, since it runs on a dinosaur), but the others are in the same overall class.

 

[Vlodril]

This isn't really about Sony. It is clearly about the decline/stagnation in Game Pass.

How? Because Sony recently shared its subscription growth numbers, and it is growing alright. So if the overall industry is stagnated, it is only because the other subscription service has declined.

PS Plus has been increasing both in terms of ARPU as well as total # of subscribers.

It is insane how premium has more subs although it offers almost nothing better than extra. And i have premium myself. I guess the "it's only 20 more might as well" people are the majority.

 

[feynoob]

Looks good

If it’s GOAT tier, I’ll be delighted. Point stands though that that would be the only game on that level to ever release day one on Game Pass, so you’d still be better of buying it outright instead of subbing (unless you’ve got unlimited free time).

Points doesnt stand out. Games like that are small numbers and doesnt represent majority of games out there. They are huge for a reason.
If Xbox showcases fable, avowed, hell blade 2 and other AAA games for gamepass, then that is huge get for gamepass.

 

[feynoob]

It is insane how premium has more subs although it offers almost nothing better than extra. And i have premium myself. I guess the "it's only 20 more might as well" people are the majority.

Its the naming.
People will go for the cool name, even if it has 10 more games.

So far the current tier is this.

• PS Plus Essential: $9.99 monthly / $24.99 quarterly / $59.99 yearly.
• PS Plus Extra: $14.99 monthly / $39.99 quarterly / $99.99 yearly.
• PS Plus Premium: $17.99 monthly / $49.99 quarterly / $119.99 yearly.

Pay attention to the naming.

 

[Banjo64]

Umm, no. You can hold Zelda up for gameplay (not graphics, since it runs on a dinosaur), but the others are in the same overall class.

Points doesnt stand out. Games like that are small numbers and doesnt represent majority of games out there. They are huge for a reason.
If Xbox showcases fable, avowed, hell blade 2 and other AAA games for gamepass, then that is huge get for gamepass.

Hellblade 1 was cheeks and I’m yet to see anything apart from pretty graphics to suggest the 2nd game will be much better.

When are Fable and Avowed coming?

If you’re interested in playing these once a year/once every 2 year tentpole games I don’t understand why you need a constant subscription to Game Pass?

 

[systemr123]

Ya, ok, lol. 2%, such a massive decrease, and could early be Sony for doing silly things like pulling first parry games from the service.

MS pulled almost all of the big AAA games from their service over the years now, it’s an indie palooza now which you could actually buy and own forever for the same money as the subscription if you’d only buy games you’d really want to play.

Gamepass library is in a very bad state right now and I can totally imagine no new people register anymore. They removed anything good from it and replaced it with Apple Arcade level indies mostly.

 

[feynoob]

Hellblade 1 was cheeks and I’m yet to see anything apart from pretty graphics to suggest the 2nd game will be much better.

When are Fable and Avowed coming?

Considering the trailer for hell blade 2, its a massive step up in term of graphics. If ninja theory can make the first game with limited budget, imagine what they can do with MS budget.

as for fable and avowed, it depends on the showcase. I can see fable for 2024.

If you’re interested in playing these once a year/once every 2 year tentpole games I don’t understand why you need a constant subscription to Game Pass?

Its about making gamepass value stronger. Those games dont leave the service, which increases its value. The more you add them, the stronger the line up gets. in 5 years from now, the service will have a huge catalogue of big games for newcomers.

 

[feynoob]

MS pulled almost all of the big AAA games from their service over the years now, it’s an indie palooza now which you could actually buy and own forever for the same money as the subscription if you’d only buy games you’d really want to play.

Gamepass library is in a very bad state right now and I can totally imagine no new people register anymore. They removed anything good from it and replaced it with Apple Arcade level indies mostly.

Its a shit state honestly. 2021 line up was great, compared to 2022 line up.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Looks good

If it’s GOAT tier, I’ll be delighted. Point stands though that that would be the only game on that level to ever release day one on Game Pass, so you’d still be better of buying it outright instead of subbing (unless you’ve got unlimited free time).

Yes, but nuance is important here.

You are right that GOAT level games do not join Game Pass on PS+ day one. Even if Starfield is GOAT, it's important to remember that it started production before Bethesda joined Microsoft.

The game's scope and creative vision was already set. Now Microsoft HAS TO put it on Game Pass day one, even if they don't want to, because of their publicly announced policy and their arguments to regulators who look into Xbox acquisitions.

The truth is that even Starfield would not be Game Pass day one if Zenimax was independent.

 

[Banjo64]

Considering the trailer for hell blade 2, its a massive step up in term of graphics. If ninja theory can make the first game with limited budget, imagine what they can do with MS budget.

How will an increased budget result in better game play?

It’s about making gamepass value stronger. Those games dont leave the service, which increases its value. The more you add them, the stronger the line up gets. in 5 years from now, the service will have a huge catalogue of big games for newcomers.

A nice idea in theory, but considering games depreciate in value over time that’s not much of an argument.

E.g if you want to play Starfield in 5 years time, it’s safe to say it’ll cost the same as Fallout 4 right now (which by the way, is £5 on sale right now on PS and Xbox).

 

[THE DUCK]

MS pulled almost all of the big AAA games from their service over the years now, it’s an indie palooza now which you could actually buy and own forever for the same money as the subscription if you’d only buy games you’d really want to play.

Gamepass library is in a very bad state right now and I can totally imagine no new people register anymore. They removed anything good from it and replaced it with Apple Arcade level indies mostly.

What are you talking about? Every single MS studio AAA game is still on gamepass, they remove nothing over time that they own outright. I take it you don't subscribe, or you would know this.
All the Halo games, all the Forza games, all the gears games, etc, all have been up and are still up. The only ones that cycle out are 3rd party and there is still a good selection on there.

 

[Three]

It is insane how premium has more subs although it offers almost nothing better than extra. And i have premium myself. I guess the "it's only 20 more might as well" people are the majority.

It offers a lot of quality 'classic' games in the classic catalogue plus the ability to stream. Some of those are actually PS4 games or remasters.

Gravity Rush remastered, Last of Us remastered, all Bioshocks , Doom, SFIV, all Uncharted, Yukuza, syphon filter, etc. I wouldn't say it's nothing but I guess that depends on what you've played and are interested in.

 

[feynoob]

How will an increased budget result in better game play?

more workers, more content, higher graphic videlity.
Look at psychonauts 2. With MS money, they added more content to the game. That is what a higher budget allows you to do that.
Even obsidian is making more games now (avowed and outer worlds 2 in production).

A nice idea in theory, but considering games depreciate in value over time that’s not much of an argument.

E.g if you want to play Starfield in 5 years time, it’s safe to say it’ll cost the same as Fallout 4 right now (which by the way, is £5 on sale right now on PS and Xbox).

Its an argument as you are getting more games every year. Unless you have a higher budget, its harder to get all of them. Which is why those subscription services are good solution for that.
You can afford both new and old games that way.

 

[feynoob]

Yes, but nuance is important here.

You are right that GOAT level games do not join Game Pass on PS+ day one. Even if Starfield is GOAT, it's important to remember that it started production before Bethesda joined Microsoft.

The game's scope and creative vision was already set. Now Microsoft HAS TO put it on Game Pass day one, even if they don't want to, because of their publicly announced policy and their arguments to regulators who look into Xbox acquisitions.

The truth is that even Starfield would not be Game Pass day one if Zenimax was independent.

If MS wants to, they can pretty much write a check for all big games out there.
The only reason as to why that is not happening is due to ROI. Otherwise, MS will go pew pew with their money.

 

[Heisenberg007]

If MS wants to, they can pretty much write a check for all big games out there.
The only reason as to why that is not happening is due to ROI. Otherwise, MS will go pew pew with their money.

They aren't doing it because it doesn't make sense to do so.

 

[Banjo64]

more workers, more content, higher graphic videlity.

Higher graphical fidelity and more content won’t address the core issue of the gameplay itself being bland and boring.

Look at psychonauts 2. With MS money, they added more content to the game. That is what a higher budget allows you to do that.

Tim Schaffer said they could include cut bosses because they had more time post takeover. I don’t see how that translates to Hellblade to be honest.

Even obsidian is making more games now (avowed and outer worlds 2 in production).

Obsidian have always been capable of running multiple projects simultaneously.

Alpha Protocol/New Vegas 2010
Dungeon Siege 2011
Stick of Truth 2014
Pillars/Skyforge/Armoured Warfare 2015
Pathfinder/Tyranny 2016
Pillars 2 2018
Outer Worlds 2019
Grounded 2020

Nothing to do with Microsoft.

 

[feynoob]

They aren't doing it because it doesn't make sense to do so.

And that is good thing for us.
Imagine MS money without any limitation.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Yeah, less AAA games compare to previous generations or even last year. Same reason why Elden ring sells exploded last year and outdid previous soul games by a lot. It was the only good AAA third party game for almost half the year in 2022.

The price hike from 60 to 70 still slow down sells as common sense will tell you. Lower price = more sells, it is basic economics after all. Which is a contributing factor on why FF16 pre orders are low currently. Hopefully the game scores well on metacritic to gain more sells. If not, RIP square enix as FF is their biggest franchise and pretty much the only franchise keeping square relevant (maybe DQ).

Somehow you edited this and you still said sells instead of sales four times...

 

[feynoob]

Higher graphical fidelity and more content won’t address the core issue of the gameplay itself being bland and boring.

The first game was a tight budget game, which is why it turned out that way. When your budget is low, there are things you can/cant do.
With a higher budget, you can essentially experiment on all kind of different way to tackle those problems.

Tim Schaffer said they could include cut bosses because they had more time post takeover. I don’t see how that translates to Hellblade to be honest.

They had small budget from crowd funding (around $3.8m).

https://www.axios.com/2021/07/19/psychonauts-2-microsoft-double-fine

Obsidian have always been capable of running multiple projects simultaneously.

Alpha Protocol/New Vegas 2010
Dungeon Siege 2011
Stick of Truth 2014
Pillars/Skyforge/Armoured Warfare 2015
Pathfinder/Tyranny 2016
Pillars 2 2018
Outer Worlds 2019
Grounded 2020

Nothing to do with Microsoft.

It kinda does, as MS budget allows them to hire more people and not have to worry about budget issues.
The budget of the game has huge impact on how the game turns out to be.
Look at totk. Nintendo delayed the game for 1 more year. That is an extra budget to the game, which you cant do that if you have a limited budget.

 

[SmokedMeat]

There’s a few subscription services out there, but I don’t think they’re that appealing.

I’d rather just own my games.

 

[Banjo64]

The first game was a tight budget game, which is why it turned out that way. When your budget is low, there are things you can/cant do.

Core gameplay isn’t one of those things. Teams like Moon Studios have made captivating exciting gameplay on tiny budgets.

With a higher budget, you can essentially experiment on all kind of different way to tackle those problems.

I’m failing to see how Microsoft’s supposed infinity budget has helped most of their studios. Playground’s games are identical to pre-buyout. 343 couldn’t make a great game if they had £5b and 10 years. We’re literally citing one game, Psychonauts 2, which would have been highly polished even without Microsoft, who only benefited from more time.

They had small budget from crowd funding (around $3.8m).

https://www.axios.com/2021/07/19/psychonauts-2-microsoft-double-fine

It kinda does, as MS budget allows them to hire more people and not have to worry about budget issues.
The budget of the game has huge impact on how the game turns out to be.
Look at totk. Nintendo delayed the game for 1 more year. That is an extra budget to the game, which you cant do that if you have a limited budget.

Again, Halo was delayed for 1 year and was still a Beta product. It’s not just a case of more money and more time guarantees a good game.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

There's no point in subscribing to a game service if there aren't any good games for it...

This might be Microsoft's problem, but nobody ever seems to want to admit it.

Subscription services will never increase the quality of the content.

If you pay a monthly subscription at a 5 star restaurant and you can come in and eat whenever you want however many times a day you want, do you think that the quality of the food will increase, stay the same, or decrease?

This is why Jim Ryan said he wasn't going to put games day and date on PS+ and said it would diminish their games and he got roasted for it when it was a simple thing to understand.

The only model where this works is for something like music because the userbase is so large they were fairly easily able to convert the number of people who listen to music to the number of people who buy music. The reality is MORE people are willing to pay to have access to "all" music because they can consume whatever they want.

Games and even TV/Movies are different. People listen to music while doing other things, driving into work, cooking in the kitchen, at a party, before they go to bed, in the shower e.t.c.

Games and TV/Movies generally require more engagement and more time dedicated to just that. You'll never reach more people that are willing to pay a subscription for gaming that rivals how much they're currently paying in B2P.

Music also has other streams of income that Gaming does not. Even Movies have theaters first.

 

[THE DUCK]

There’s a few subscription services out there, but I don’t think they’re that appealing.

I’d rather just own my games.

What would be wrong with playing said games on a sub and then buying the ones you love the most when they are $10? Kind of end up in the same place but have extra games to play too for around the same cost.

 

[reksveks]

We’re literally citing one game, Psychonauts 2, which would have been highly polished even without Microsoft, who only benefited from more time.

Time and budget are generally related when you are paying employees though.

Obviously you could replace the employees with cheaper ones or cut their salary but same employees with more time generally equals more money.

 

[feynoob]

Core gameplay isn’t one of those things. Teams like Moon Studios have made captivating exciting gameplay on tiny budgets.

Budgets always affects the core gameplay. You can only makes games around the budget that you have. Higher budget means more freedom creativity.

I’m failing to see how Microsoft’s supposed infinity budget has helped most of their studios. Playground’s games are identical to pre-buyout. 343 couldn’t make a great game if they had £5b and 10 years. We’re literally citing one game, Psychonauts 2, which would have been highly polished even without Microsoft, who only benefited from more time.

Forza is a racing game. Halo suffered from poor management with a 10 year plan and a new engine for the game.
We are talking about a dev who made a game with a limited budget that was unique. Imagine what they can do with a higher budget.

Again, Halo was delayed for 1 year and was still a Beta product. It’s not just a case of more money and more time guarantees a good game.

because halo had tons of issues. 10 year plan, slipspace engine and bad management. Had they worked on a different engine and not have that grandious 10 year plan it would have been different.

They are currently trying to abandon that engine.

Halo Reportedly Dropping Slipspace Engine in Favor of Unreal

A new rumor suggests the Halo team at 343 Industries decided to drop the in-house Slipspace Engine in favor of Epic's Unreal Engine.

wccftech.com

Report: Halo Infinite Won't Get Story DLC, Series Switching To Unreal

Things are changing at Halo developer 343 Industries following massive layoffs across Microsoft—including reportedly 95 people at the Halo developer. The studio is switching to Unreal Engine, has no plans to make more story content for 2021’s Halo Infinite, and continues trying to figure out...

www.yahoo.com

the 10 year plan.
https://gamerant.com/halo-infinite-9-months-since-release-10-year-plan-doubtful-slow-progress/

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Seems like the market for subscriptions has reached saturation which was already pointed out in the last SIE business segment. Guess it's time for MS to raise up the prices for Game Pass, but I guess they can't do that just yet as their still battling to get the ABK acquisition through.

Why do you think they're fighting so hard to make this go through?

Most companies would have called it by now with the deal being blocked by the CMA. You can tell they're paying for tremendous PR with the number of pro news articles about this. And the full court press on UK ministers.

They don't have anything to turn this ship around if this deal fails and they know it. They're desperate to save GamePass and they're desperate to shore up Xbox numbers.

Nvidia pulled out of the ARM deal much quicker.

Phil Spencer will be fired quickly after this deal falls through as GamePass numbers start to dry up. And yes, they will increase the price, hoping that they can at least generate more revenue from existing users, which will drive some users away but gamepass costs 10 dollars, let's say they had 40 million subscribers (ignoring game pass ultimate for a second). that's 400 million in revenue monthly. Increase to 15 dollars and lose 25 percent of your base and you still get 450 million dollar a month. The extra 50 million in revenue monthly equates to 600 million dollars a year annually.

But this also slows future adoption, which is why they haven't done it yet, but it is coming.

 

[THE DUCK]

Subscription services will never increase the quality of the content.

If you pay a monthly subscription at a 5 star restaurant and you can come in and eat whenever you want however many times a day you want, do you think that the quality of the food will increase, stay the same, or decrease?

This is why Jim Ryan said he wasn't going to put games day and date on PS+ and said it would diminish their games and he got roasted for it when it was a simple thing to understand.

The only model where this works is for something like music because the userbase is so large they were fairly easily able to convert the number of people who listen to music to the number of people who buy music. The reality is MORE people are willing to pay to have access to "all" music because they can consume whatever they want.

Games and even TV/Movies are different. People listen to music while doing other things, driving into work, cooking in the kitchen, at a party, before they go to bed, in the shower e.t.c.

Games and TV/Movies generally require more engagement and more time dedicated to just that. You'll never reach more people that are willing to pay a subscription for gaming that rivals how much they're currently paying in B2P.

Music also has other streams of income that Gaming does not. Even Movies have theaters first.

This is not true.

For movies: Certainly much better than the crap movies we used to see made for networks. Leagues ahead, really. Can't compare to theatrical as this has always been a separate release.
For TV shows: Before subscription services, we basically had HBO for great shows. The emergence of Netflix, then Disney plus, paramount, Apple +, and amazon have all deliver a whole slew of really excellent shows. Most much better than the garbage we saw on major networks.
For Music: Subscription hasn't affect quality any way at all.
For Games: Nobody really knows if they are affecting it positively or negatively. Of course you can argue the companies releasing games won't care about quality, but just like Netflix/apple/paramount/disney, it's actually a race to produce the best content. The group with the best content can
attract the most customers. Potentially knowing you have fixed revenue could also allow developers more time and resources to properly finish games. (this depends on who's in charge)

Your 5 star restaurant sub basically does exist, it's called Club 33, and it's still 5 star. They do still have to pay for food but that's not really the primary cost. 25K up front and 10K a year before you take a bite. Again it's all about who is running it.
The notion of coming in and eating 5 times a day is nonsense, since the other methods cost nothing per use and food and space would obviously be at a premium at a restaurant.

Sign people up for a once a month 5 star restaurant for $500 a month, you can eat there once a month, what makes you think a proper staff and chef can't keep this a great place to eat? Quality of the food could be as good or better than other restaurants.
The fixed revenue stream would definitely help with staffing and cost planning.

 

[feynoob]

Why do you think they're fighting so hard to make this go through?

Most companies would have called it by now with the deal being blocked by the CMA. You can tell they're paying for tremendous PR with the number of pro news articles about this. And the full court press on UK ministers.

They don't have anything to turn this ship around if this deal fails and they know it. They're desperate to save GamePass and they're desperate to shore up Xbox numbers.

Nvidia pulled out of the ARM deal much quicker.

Phil Spencer will be fired quickly after this deal falls through as GamePass numbers start to dry up. And yes, they will increase the price, hoping that they can at least generate more revenue from existing users, which will drive some users away but gamepass costs 10 dollars, let's say they had 40 million subscribers (ignoring game pass ultimate for a second). that's 400 million in revenue monthly. Increase to 15 dollars and lose 25 percent of your base and you still get 450 million dollar a month. The extra 50 million in revenue monthly equates to 600 million dollars a year annually.

But this also slows future adoption, which is why they haven't done it yet, but it is coming.

 

[Roufianos]

It mainly depends on your taste and what type of games you like.
I am not going to sugar coat you here. Been feeling the same, but that is mainly due to me not wanting to play those games.
There are alot of good games there, but they are not the type of games that I want to spend my money even if they are on sale. I have a certain taste.

Same, I'm just far too picky to get the most out of the service. It's definitely a bargain if you just want to sign up for Microsoft games (should they ever arrive) but no way am I staying persistently subbed.

 

[Heisenberg007]

2022 was empty land for gamepass in terms of Xbox AAA games.

All the more reason to worry. They released Hi-Fi Rush and Redfall in 2023. It's still not up, even when compared with the 2022 numbers that were understandably lower because of lack of content.

 

[GHG]

What would be wrong with playing said games on a sub and then buying the ones you love the most when they are $10? Kind of end up in the same place but have extra games to play too for around the same cost.

Looking at the new games I've played and enjoyed this year so far:

• Zelda TOTK
• Diablo 4
• Hogwarts Legacy
• Street fighter 6
• System shock remake
• Shadows of doubt
• Hi Fi Rush

(and I still need to get to jedi survivor and Dead island 2)

Only 2 of those games fit your strategy, hi Fi Rush which released on gamepass and shadows of doubt which released into early access (and strictly speaking, it's still not been as low as $10 yet). There's also the both the Forza Horizon rally DLC and burning shores, neither of which have hit $10 or less. That's shit.

So do you care more about enjoying your hobby or saving money? Because most people, especially here, just want to enjoy their hobby.

 

[feynoob]

All the more reason to worry. They released Hi-Fi Rush and Redfall in 2023. It's still not up, even when compared with the 2022 numbers that were understandably lower because of lack of content.

This showcase might give us what they have in store.
They had issues releasing their games out of the gate on time.
Hopefuly we get a release date for avowed, fable and hell blade 2.
Also what are other bethesda studios working on? Other than leakers, they are pretty much silent.

 

[genesisblock]

I was quite skeptical on the Game Pass formula. And for awhile, I did max out my experience by playing the PS exclusives.

However, the feeling of being constantly reminded that I'm paying monthly for games I have stopped due to life issues put me off the experience. Then there's the fact that not all DLC is included in the free game which means I'll end up having buyers remorse should I buy DLC on temporary licenced games.

In the end, buying a game for sale reminds me that permanence can't be replaced as an experience. I booted up Steam after upgrading my PC, and playing all those games in my back log at full settings with mods gave me a clear and enjoyable experience that I can ever have on a subscription model. Knowing that it's always there ready for me to play can never be replaced by any other model.

 

[reksveks]

You would think xbox total revenue was down massively

 

[feynoob]

Same, I'm just far too picky to get the most out of the service. It's definitely a bargain if you just want to sign up for Microsoft games (should they ever arrive) but no way am I staying persistently subbed.

You can try my method. Sub to the service for 4 months. Unsub it for 4 months, then sub back to it.
3rd party games stay there for 12 months. That is enough time to play all cool games.

 

[feynoob]

You would think xbox total revenue was down massively

Not to mention the company still has massive big games coming to the service.
Bethesda buyout was for that reason.

I think people here need to realise that time is everything.

 

[THE DUCK]

Looking at the new games I've played and enjoyed this year so far:

• Zelda TOTK
• Diablo 4
• Hogwarts Legacy
• Street fighter 6
• System shock remake
• Shadows of doubt
• Hi Fi Rush

(and I still need to get to jedi survivor and Dead island 2)

Only 2 of those games fit your strategy, hi Fi Rush which released on gamepass and shadows of doubt which released into early access (and strictly speaking, it's still not been as low as $10 yet). There's also the both the Forza Horizon rally DLC and burning shores, neither of which have hit $10 or less. That's shit.

So do you care more about enjoying your hobby or saving money? Because most people, especially here, just want to enjoy their hobby.

I guess it depends on how up to date you are, a lot of us are busy to the point where we can wait a few months.
Fast forward to later this year though and it becomes more interesting if you plan on buying Starfield and Forza and Hellblade.
I mean for someone who game a lot you would think $120 a year would be worth it long term........even if we are in a lull.
What about all the game you sort of want to buy/try? I have tried a whole bunch of amazing games on gamepass would never have even played and that offers me value.
That said, buying isn't all bad, if it works out for you. I think the two models can co-exist peacefully.