• 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.

Microsoft Says Sony Will Benefit From Launching First-Party Games on PS Plus

Yoboman

Member
Forza Horizon 5 last November. Why?
It has car pass and a VIP membership though

I ask because all of MS games seem to have post purchase monetisation built in, whereas only a few of Sony's games do. If you are making up money after the person already has the game then offering it in a subscription makes more financial sense.
 

MacReady13

Member
There is so much defence for Sony’s current strategy to delay PS+ releases here. Where is that coming from? Am I the only one who jumped in at once on PS+ Premium and enjoy it a ton?
Ragnarök appearing day 1 on PS+ would be the biggest thing yet this generation as I see it.
Why? Why is it such a bad thing to keep these games off a sub service on day 1 and allow people to buy the game if they want? It maximises profits and allows the devs to get as much money back as they can. If you don't want to spend the full amount, wait for a sale or wait till it eventually appears on the sub service. Not all companies have the capability to lose money like Microsoft can.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I don't think a lot of people understand that these subscription services are loss leaders for years, even decades sometimes. I don't think Sony wants to lose money

There's also people that would sub just to play God of War then cancel the subscription

That's in their forte. Game pass probably has it's share of people who do the same, but as of the latest earnings it's evening approximately 200m a month in sub revenues.
 
It has car pass and a VIP membership though

I ask because all of MS games seem to have post purchase monetisation built in, whereas only a few of Sony's games do. If you are making up money after the person already has the game then offering it in a subscription makes more financial sense.
That's because the majority of Sony games are curated single-player experiences. The few games Sony does output with multiplayer components like GT7 are just as monetized as any other in the industry. Expect TLoU2 Factions to be no different.
 

DarkMage619

Report me if I continue to console war
The one with the car packs, treasure pass, VIP pass, car pass, DLC packs???
It has car pass and a VIP membership though

I ask because all of MS games seem to have post purchase monetisation built in, whereas only a few of Sony's games do. If you are making up money after the person already has the game then offering it in a subscription makes more financial sense.

"Contains no direct in-game microtransactions"

So the answer to your question is Forza 5 and that game as no microtransactions. DLC is not considered a microtransaction. Hot Wheels expansion is not a microtransaction.

Most of Sony's games also tend to be single player one and done titles as well and putting in monetization wouldn't make much sense. On that topic I'm pretty sure Grand Tourismo 7 HAS microtransactions but perhaps you didn't realize that. Maybe this is an example MS was talking about.
 

GhostOfTsu

Member
Most of Sony's games also tend to be single player one and done titles as well and putting in monetization wouldn't make much sense. On that topic I'm pretty sure Grand Tourismo 7 HAS microtransactions but perhaps you didn't realize that. Maybe this is an example MS was talking about.
Of course all those packs in Forza are not mtx but the specific one in GT7 is mtx. You always have to twist everything 🙄

You can't buy cars in GT7.
 

DarkMage619

Report me if I continue to console war
Of course all those packs in Forza are not mtx but the specific one in GT7 is mtx. You always have to twist everything 🙄

You can't buy cars in GT7.
I didn't make the website and I'm not the one trying to make a claim that MS is the only company using microtransactions. It isn't my fault Forza doesn't have any but GT7 does.

At the end of the day it's all optional and the entire thread ignores the context of MS' original response to Sony's claim. This just seems like more faux outrage.
 

Yoboman

Member
[/URL][/URL][/URL]

"Contains no direct in-game microtransactions"

So the answer to your question is Forza 5 and that game as no microtransactions. DLC is not considered a microtransaction. Hot Wheels expansion is not a microtransaction.

Most of Sony's games also tend to be single player one and done titles as well and putting in monetization wouldn't make much sense. On that topic I'm pretty sure Grand Tourismo 7 HAS microtransactions but perhaps you didn't realize that. Maybe this is an example MS was talking about.
Not really relevant what term is being used, the point Im getting to is how these games can make money. I'm not making any comment on whether microtransactions, DLC, season passes etc are good or bad

The point is MS can still make alot of money on these games even if pushed day one on Gamepass. It's just not an applicable model to single player only games that have no DLC content at all like GOW or TLOU2. The money needs to be made upfront there or not at all
That's because the majority of Sony games are curated single-player experiences. The few games Sony does output with multiplayer components like GT7 are just as monetized as any other in the industry. Expect TLoU2 Factions to be no different.
Agreed which is why it doesn't make much sense to say Sony should do day one PSPlus, when most of their games monetisation models don't fit it

And nobody will be happy if they pack the next GOW with DLC weaponsveven if it's on PSPlus
 
Last edited:

anothertech

Member
Maybe Microsoft will show us their sales numbers before and after gamepass to bring to light how into the black they are now that their entire user base doesn't need to buy their games.

Then Sony can do the same And try and prove their point. All we need is the hard numbers.

lol, Ms would never do that who am I kidding.
 
Dlc and mtx are the same thing, not sure why he's making out they're different,oh wait. 🤔
DLC = Paying for digital content that was not available as part of the base game.

MTX = Paying for digital content that is available as part of base game

In Forza Horizon, you cannot purchase any of the 450+ vehicles of the base game with real world currency. Car Packs are vehicles (digital content) made available after the game's launch and not in original files, therefore it's DLC.

In GT7, you can purchase any vehicle in the base game with real world currency, therefore its MTX.
 
Last edited:

GhostOfTsu

Member
I didn't make the website and I'm not the one trying to make a claim that MS is the only company using microtransactions. It isn't my fault Forza doesn't have any but GT7 does.

At the end of the day it's all optional and the entire thread ignores the context of MS' original response to Sony's claim. This just seems like more faux outrage.
Why do you insist on saying all the $3 car packs in Forza Horizon 5 are not MTX? There are dozens of them.
 
Last edited:
DLC = Paying for digital content that was not available as part of the base game.

MTX = Paying for digital content that is available as part of base game

In Forza Horizon, you cannot purchase any of the 450+ vehicles of the base game with real world currency. Car Packs are vehicles (digital content) made available after the game's launch and not in original files, therefore it's DLC.

In GT7, you can purchase any vehicle in the base game with real world currency, therefore its MTX.
What a load of crock of shit to say nothing. Warhammer total war has chaos race locked away even though it's in the base game but can be bought as dlc for example.

The point here is paying for anything for a game after buying the base game all falls into the same garbage milk you dry category.
 

DarkMage619

Report me if I continue to console war
Not really relevant what term is being used, the point Im getting to is how these games can make money. I'm not making any comment on whether microtransactions, DLC, season passes etc are good or bad

The point is MS can still make alot of money on these games even if pushed day one on Gamepass. It's just not an applicable model to single player only games that have no DLC content at all like GOW or TLOU2. The money needs to be made upfront there or not at all
Sony was claiming Game pass was too successful and they questioned their ability to compete. MS provided them with a suggestion in response. It would increase their subscription base if that is what they wanted. Whether or not Sony chooses to do that or not is up to them.

The facts are not all MS games have microtransactions and games that don't have them STILL hit Game pass day one. Unless titles like Psychonauts or Pentiment or Starfield have microtransactions I don't know about. Pretty sure those are single player games too. The real question is why would gamers be against something that would benefit them? Day one titles benefit gamers and that's what I care about.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?

anothertech

Member
Huh ?

I quoted the post with source, the only thing extra was rounding 183 to 200 ballpark.

Ampere is a reliable source if that's what you meant. It's not like vgchartz which purely does estimates.
It's just not official numbers regardless, especially with the rounding up down or sideways.

That's the point
 

sainraja

Member
just look at the movie/tv streaming industry for what will happen

you'll need at least a half dozen different subscriptions, if streaming really takes off we won't see Ubisoft & EA keep putting their games on other services since they'll really start to focus on their own instead
And not to mention the white label streaming services being pushed by companies such as Google now. Companies like Ubisoft/EA could simply favor their own platform and force people to stream their games (not saying this will happen but it is one of the things that could happen — the more likely scenario is that they could push their own streaming platform with promos and also sell their games on other platforms).
 

PerfectDark

Member
I have a series x, and 2x series s for my boys. I also have a ps5. I pay for 2 xbox game passes. No subscription to anything PlayStation. PS plus sub is a scam. Paying for any online pass is a scam since we already pay for internet but game pass is worth some of its value. I am not even using my PS5. No point even owning it besides the fact you want what you don't have and 3 months after I sell it I'll get bored and think a PS5 might solve those issues and buy another.
 

Leyasu

Banned
Maybe Microsoft will show us their sales numbers before and after gamepass to bring to light how into the black they are now that their entire user base doesn't need to buy their games.

Then Sony can do the same And try and prove their point. All we need is the hard numbers.

lol, Ms would never do that who am I kidding.
What everyone on Xbox and pc is gp subscriber?
 

Leyasu

Banned
?

Unsure what you mean. I'm just saying, if MS is trying to say their model is better for business, they need to show exactly what they mean with hard numbers.

Put up or shut up
Yea I understand that. You know what, reading again the last post I quoted, I think that I misunderstood what you wrote. My apologies
 
They all seem to know the numbers somehow when Microsoft hides them
Here's you (and many of your blue peers) cheerleading an Ampere forecast:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/ps5-...ere-analysis-forecasts.1628256/post-265419632

Which One Thinking GIF by Desus & Mero
 

phil_t98

Member
I don't think a lot of people understand that these subscription services are loss leaders for years, even decades sometimes. I don't think Sony wants to lose money

There's also people that would sub just to play God of War then cancel the subscription

WelL they are already loosing money then has they have there own sun service now?
 

phil_t98

Member
There is nothing behind the paywall in gt7. So no is not the same thing



also didn't they up the price of cars at one point to encourage buying of credits ie:microtransactions. id you look in the comments on that article about how hard they made it to get some cars that you virtually have to buy credits to get everything so the game does have micros transactions. now with both games you don't need to buy extra cars to enjoy the game
 

SLB1904

Member

also didn't they up the price of cars at one point to encourage buying of credits ie:microtransactions. id you look in the comments on that article about how hard they made it to get some cars that you virtually have to buy credits to get everything so the game does have micros transactions. now with both games you don't need to buy extra cars to enjoy the game
There is absolutely nothing behind the paywall in gt7. The cars prices in the "LEGENDARY DEALERSHIP" goes up and down according to the real life prices.
You clearly have no idea what are you talking about.
 

fallingdove

Member
I just assume the CEO of Microsoft gaming wouldn't publicly lie about something like this, since it would be a bit of a literal crime to do so.
Lol. I don’t know that the FTC is paying close attention to how Phil used the word sustainable. I would expect there to be far more people in prison if executives could be prosecuted for corporate spin.
 

phil_t98

Member
We're talking SP 1st party AAA games on the service day one

Yeah why not put them on the service to make it more appealing to get more subs. If Microsoft loosing money on there with more subs than Sony then they need to attract more subs to the service.


If everybody saying Microsoft loosing money on its sub service then you can bet Sony is to
 
I have a series x, and 2x series s for my boys. I also have a ps5. I pay for 2 xbox game passes. No subscription to anything PlayStation. PS plus sub is a scam. Paying for any online pass is a scam since we already pay for internet but game pass is worth some of its value. I am not even using my PS5. No point even owning it besides the fact you want what you don't have and 3 months after I sell it I'll get bored and think a PS5 might solve those issues and buy another.

 
I didn't make the website and I'm not the one trying to make a claim that MS is the only company using microtransactions. It isn't my fault Forza doesn't have any but GT7 does.

At the end of the day it's all optional and the entire thread ignores the context of MS' original response to Sony's claim. This just seems like more faux outrage.

Forza has MTX. Micro Transaction is a small transaction. There’s numerous one time purhcases for small amounts you can make to make the game less grindy/monotonous. It also has large scale expansions.

GT7 has more MTX, but that doesn’t change the fact that Forza also has them.

Both games are lessened by their inclusion and anyone who actively defends this shit needs to get their heads check, or their bums as they clearly have someone’s cock firmly planted there.
 
Top Bottom