I don't own either an Xbox or Playstation. No investment at all
I'm not speaking from a consumer perspective. I agree that having subscriptions as the only method of getting to this media is a bad thing. I'm speaking strictly from a monetary and business angle. As for the break even part...again...the math just doesn't add up on that.. Why do this at all if it's not going to turn a profit? People keep claiming that Netflix as shedding billions of dollars every year. I may be a laymen when it comes to business, but wouldn't this mean they'd have to make or get loans for this amount in order to lose it?
They'll send him out with a retro gaming shirt and those bullet points and the super fans will eat it all up
Alright, now I get it I think. You are just saying they changed metrics to make the last period look really good, even though it sets up negative reports in the future. If I am correct, it makes sense based on the new metrics being growth related.
www.abc.net.au
I am sure this trillion dollar value company is sympathetic to some of the concerned posters out there
If only the gaming division had these trillions then the investors wouldn't be periodically trying to get Microsoft to get out of gaming
The past and present after many years with time changing can be a funny thing
I don't think gamepass revenue will a primary arbiter of any impact on people who buy the next console. My guess is it will ultimately be user base. If enough consoles sell for 3rd parties to keep porting games in the event MS goes primary services model, my guess is Sony would allow cross play in exchange for a slice of gamepass revenue generated by its user base.
To put it simply, it's a whole lot of debt financing (in the case of Netflix, Uber, etc). In the case of Microsoft Amazon and Google they should (theoretically) be able to do this sort of thing without going into debt since cash reserves and profits from other areas of the business should be able to absorb the short-medium term losses.
A couple of articles you should read on the subject:
Uber and Netflix run at a loss. It's a 'winner-take-all' strategy that could end badly
Some of the world's most powerful and influential technology companies are either massively in debt or barely making a profit. But in 21st century Silicon Valley, that's the aim.
The method only works if they "win". Long term the market can't sustain this number of services all operating at a loss like this. Those who fail will fail spectacularly. The biggest players in the market are essentially gambling on the belief that if they keep doing what they are doing (raising more and more debt to fund growth) then there is no way that they won't win the majority of the market, both in terms of users and content.
With all due respect, have you seen how much revenue some F2P games make? Guaranteed that MS is hoping for revenue from x amount of players at 15 a month, vs. revenue from a smaller amount of players who actually buy a game per month. And adding potential in game purchases on top of that. From their perspective there's probably much more to be had from smaller monthly in flows than from a much larger pool of paying customers, especially when factoring in PC and perhaps another console or two down the road.
From MAU, to MASH (Monthly Active Steamed Hams).
That is not a direct comparison at all. Apples to oranges. Paid service(let alone the full game still being $60 if you do not do the $15/10 service) vs F2P. I get what you are saying and there is SOME truth to that(already considered) but this is still very different. MS is purposely hiding that stuff(I don't blame them either since they have shareholders to protect). People are blindly defending Microsoft(since they do not have any meta data to support their stance). Also people paying for a service AND buying the game is the ideal scenario for them, let's not kid ourselves and pretend that the service is the only thing they WANT.
I agree its not a direct comparison, but my point still stands despite your correct assertion that selling games and gamepass is their ideal situation.
What exactly is there a disagreement on?
fixed
Enemies killed is especially strange, if a game with hordes of zombies is released this year it will inflate the kills numbers, even if people only play a second... and do you count the lines that are cleared or the pieces that vanish in Tetris? How about a game like Overcooked? do you count every ingredient that gets cut (killed), or only the served plates?
In hindsight, nothing. For some reason I first thought you were suggesting they aren't potentially setting the stage for cross platform game pass.
Real question - does that still make the most sense after their successful work that induced Sony to adopt bc next gen? Not a hit piece masked as a question at all. I truly think MS did us all a solid and feel kinda bad that it gives 90-100 million potential customers reason to stay with their competitor.
Gamepass doesn't prove anything to SONY, and M$ inspires to surpass SONY. You don't get extra credit for maxing out Xbox Live. Gamepass doesn't mean anything.
I'm not following. Was referring to backwards compatibility being a net positive to gamers thanks to MS, while simultaneously giving MS main competitor an advantage (more incentive to stay within existing eco system).
And Xbox seems to be contributing very little to that trillion dollar value company.I am sure this trillion dollar value company is sympathetic to some of the concerned posters out there
I've definitely said that at $10 bucks a month (Game pass, not Gamepass Ultimate) was a great deal. $120 a year means as long as you get 2 first party games in that year that you would have been willing to buy at full price otherwise, Gamepass essentially has paid for itself from that alone. Add in the fact that you get to play a boatload of other games in between those 2 games and it just adds bonus to the value. Anybody who can't see this simply doesn't want to.
Compared to what their office suite brings in, yes Xbox brings in very little. Still don't know if Xbox is end the black from the billions of dollars Microsoft has invested in platform since start up.
Agreed.
I think Gears 5 stats have a lot to do with this. 23k sold in the UK week 1. However 3 million players on Gamepass. If you're measuring success...you need to use relevant metrics.
