Support NeoGAF

[DenchDeckard]

I think Hogwart's is going to be a big litmus test and a show of these contrasting business strategies by PS and Xbox.

It is going to be one of the biggest and best-selling games in 2023 (just like Elden Ring was in 2022), and PlayStation has marketed the hell out of this game.

If the game sells 20-25 million copies (very likely) and 10-12 million of those copies sell on PlayStation, it is going to make a world of difference -- in terms of perception, brand value, PlayStation third-party software revenue, sequels of the game, and PlayStation console sales.

Early indications are that PlayStation's plan might be working.

vs.

Software sales charts splits will give us a better idea -- assuming we get some good info and data.

But this is literally the issue, when Microsoft ATTEMPTS or ATTEMPTED to do such marketing moves they got annihilated within 24 to 48 hours of announcing them.

Sony are in a lucky position what when these exclusive agreements get announced we all just go, oh yeah, expected...but when Microsoft does it, you have an entire mob of fanatical fanboys demanding the contracts, th3 dates that it was signed and for how long and the blood of the developers who signed the exclusivity deal.

Its madness, and don't try and tell me it is any other way on big third party games.

If Microsoft signed this deal you would have had fans literally shouting..."how dare they, don't they know philosephers stone was on the ps2 in 2002"

 

[Panajev2001a]

Im bemused at this guy . Not every gene launches in game pass, particularly the more high profile bigger budget releases and in particular from day one.

If sales of those games decline or decline further, what’s the incentive from publishers to put their games on the platform in future? It will get to a point more end more Xbox users will wait it out in the hope a game launches on the service and what if it doesn’t?

And yeah I’m talking from a consumer standpoint. Not every Xbox player is a subscriber but the way some talk you would think they were.

If people do not buy games more games, MS hopes, will go on GamePass which means people stay subbed and they can start raising prices and then since people do not buy games then games need to monetise more after the download has occurred (hello dopamine mining / intrusive micro transactions)…

Also, as people get accustomed to ADHD inducing content dropping on a certain cadence and with people having no skin in the games they play (they are not investing money in them anymore) they are encouraged to hop from game to game and this game publishers need to focus more on continuously drop feeding content and new games. more shit affecting how games are designed to thrive and be profitable/visible on such platform.

 

[Heisenberg007]

But this is literally the issue, when Microsoft ATTEMPTS or ATTEMPTED to do such marketing moves they got annihilated within 24 to 48 hours of announcing them.

Sony are in a lucky position what when these exclusive agreements get announced we all just go, oh yeah, expected...but when Microsoft does it, you have an entire mob of fanatical fanboys demanding the contracts, th3 dates that it was signed and for how long and the blood of the developers who signed the exclusivity deal.

Its madness, and don't try and tell me it is any other way on big third party games.

If Microsoft signed this deal you would have had fans literally shouting..."how dare they, don't they know philosephers stone was on the ps2 in 2002"

Not true. I think you're confusing it with something else.

These are simple marketing agreements. Microsoft did the same type of agreement for Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Dirt 5, Cyberpunk 2077, etc. Literally, nobody complained. This is not an exclusivity deal.

 

[odhiex]

Im bemused at this guy . Not every gene launches in game pass, particularly the more high profile bigger budget releases and in particular from day one.

If sales of those games decline or decline further, what’s the incentive from publishers to put their games on the platform in future? It will get to a point more end more Xbox users will wait it out in the hope a game launches on the service and what if it doesn’t?

And yeah I’m talking from a consumer standpoint. Not every Xbox player is a subscriber but the way some talk you would think they were.

Yeah, if the sales continue to plummet then we have another Wii U, which basically paid for ports from the other consoles as incentive.

 

[demigod]

But this is literally the issue, when Microsoft ATTEMPTS or ATTEMPTED to do such marketing moves they got annihilated within 24 to 48 hours of announcing them.

Sony are in a lucky position what when these exclusive agreements get announced we all just go, oh yeah, expected...but when Microsoft does it, you have an entire mob of fanatical fanboys demanding the contracts, th3 dates that it was signed and for how long and the blood of the developers who signed the exclusivity deal.

Its madness, and don't try and tell me it is any other way on big third party games.

If Microsoft signed this deal you would have had fans literally shouting..."how dare they, don't they know philosephers stone was on the ps2 in 2002"

The hell are you talking about. Don’t do drugs kids.

 

[Helghan]

Not by itself but if you think that games designed for a streaming services, knowing that people subbing on it would not pay for the game outside of the subscription, would not affect its game design and monetisation you are kidding yourself sorry. Convincing players that there is no value in buying games / destroying perceived value is not without its side effects but just watch the mobile gaming space…

Why would changes in game design and monetisation result in lower quality games?

 

[DenchDeckard]

Not true. I think you're confusing it with something else.

These are simple marketing agreements. Microsoft did the same type of agreement for Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Dirt 5, Cyberpunk 2077, etc. Literally, nobody complained. This is not an exclusivity deal.

So those games all had exclusive content on the Xbox versions? I wasnt aware of that....I dont think any one else in the world was either.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Why would changes in game design and monetisation result in lower quality games?

It would kill or help reduce certain type of games, it would disincentivise single player games without heavy micro transactions or drop feed content GaaS style.

Games would have a monetary incentive to keep you engaged longer more than having fun for a concentrated period of time and would be designed more and more to make sure you kept on spending more and more and more once you start playing the game as the game has no other revenue stream or little to replace it.

Then again, think about it without the shareholder hat on and it will be clear why this is not the grey long term play for gamers.

 

[Heisenberg007]

So those games all had exclusive content on the Xbox versions? I wasnt aware of that....I dont think any one else in the world was either.

You were talking about the exclusive quest on PS? Man, that's just one quest.

Xbox also does it when it can. Check out all these extra exclusive content Xbox has for Riot games.

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-game-pass/riot-games

You won't see anybody complain about it.

 

[DForce]

But this is literally the issue, when Microsoft ATTEMPTS or ATTEMPTED to do such marketing moves they got annihilated within 24 to 48 hours of announcing them.

Sony are in a lucky position what when these exclusive agreements get announced we all just go, oh yeah, expected...but when Microsoft does it, you have an entire mob of fanatical fanboys demanding the contracts, th3 dates that it was signed and for how long and the blood of the developers who signed the exclusivity deal.

Its madness, and don't try and tell me it is any other way on big third party games.

If Microsoft signed this deal you would have had fans literally shouting..."how dare they, don't they know philosephers stone was on the ps2 in 2002"

Microsoft has a lot of exclusive deals lined up in the future.

How many people are complaining about them?

 

[DenchDeckard]

Microsoft has a lot of exclusive deals lined up in the future.

How many people are complaining about them?

What deals are those? and what content is exclusive to Xbox? on third party games?

 

[DenchDeckard]

You were talking about the exclusive quest on PS? Man, that's just one quest.

Xbox also does it when it can. Check out all these extra exclusive content Xbox has for Riot games.

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-game-pass/riot-games

You won't see anybody complain about it.

Lmao, this is what you had to dig up to try and catch a "gotcha"?

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-game-pass/riot-games

Wow.

 

[Snake29]

What deals are those? and what content is exclusive to Xbox? on third party games?

You really don't know about any upcoming Xbox timed exclusive deals they have?

 

[DenchDeckard]

You really don't know about any upcoming Xbox timed exclusive deals they have?

No I don't know any games that have timed exclusive content that is something like a Harry potter, Tomb Raider, or should I say big third party exclusive.

What is there?

Is this going to be someone shows a High On Life, or an indie game?

We going with Darktide and Stalker?

 

[Helghan]

It would kill or help reduce certain type of games, it would disincentivise single player games without heavy micro transactions or drop feed content GaaS style.

Games would have a monetary incentive to keep you engaged longer more than having fun for a concentrated period of time and would be designed more and more to make sure you kept on spending more and more and more once you start playing the game as the game has no other revenue stream or little to replace it.

Then again, think about it without the shareholder hat on and it will be clear why this is not the grey long term play for gamers.

You are making the assumption that GP on itself doesn't make enough revenue to support all of this...

 

[Ar¢tos]

No I don't know any games that have timed exclusive content that is something like a Harry potter, Tomb Raider, or should I say big third party exclusive.

What is there?

Is this going to be someone shows a High On Life, or an indie game?

We going with Darktide and Stalker?

Exclusive content / marketing deals offers are made to the market leader, so it's normal that publishers are approaching Sony instead of MS for them.

What you should really be asking is how does MS has 70bn to buy Activision but no money to buy exclusive content / timed exclusivity / full exclusivity from all 3rd party publishers?
Because with a really good offer they would all forget about Sony to get MS $$$.

 

[Heisenberg007]

No I don't know any games that have timed exclusive content that is something like a Harry potter, Tomb Raider, or should I say big third party exclusive.

What is there?

Is this going to be someone shows a High On Life, or an indie game?

We going with Darktide and Stalker?

Both are AAA games with multiple established games (some of which were even released on PlayStation). Why shouldn't they count?

 

[Heisenberg007]

Lmao, this is what you had to dig up to try and catch a "gotcha"?

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-game-pass/riot-games

Wow.

Is this not an example of exclusive content?

 

[qwertz12345]

Ed Fries said all this months / years ago...

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/form...-of-game-pass’s-potential-impact-vgc.1636971/

 

[Panajev2001a]

You are making the assumption that GP on itself doesn't make enough revenue to support all of this...

At the current prices? Nah. Not enough to replace the current revenue the diverse group of publishers and devs get now, not without them optimising for the new distribution channel.

 

[Snake29]

No I don't know any games that have timed exclusive content that is something like a Harry potter, Tomb Raider, or should I say big third party exclusive.

What is there?

Is this going to be someone shows a High On Life, or an indie game?

We going with Darktide and Stalker?

What about ARK2 and a lot more games. Timed exclusives are timed exclusives...it doesn't matter. If Sony had timed exclusive for STALKER 2, Xbox fans would crying again that "Sony is taking away games from Xbox" and that sort of nonsense.

 

[Helghan]

At the current prices? Nah. Not to replace the current revenue the diverse group of publishers and devs get now, not without them optimising for the new distribution channel.

We don't really know, now do we? Spencer said it was profitable, but we don't have a clue what he means by that. We only know 25-30M subscribers, but no idea about the ARPA. So who knows? Neither one of us.

 

[MarkMe2525]

Pay close attention to Kotick. After all that shit talking, once he realized that deal wont go through, he's crying publicly on tv that Sony wont return his phone calls. Like some jilted ex leaving 46 calls per hour.

I mean, that's one way to spin Koticks statement, but that doesn't make it true. The context of the statement involved Sony's claim of how important Activision is to Sony's viability in the market. He was sharing an anecdote that could be perceived as evidence that Sony is overblowing Activision's role in the long term success of Sony and PlayStation.

Despite what's going on at reset era and the copium thread, does anyone legitimately think Kotick is trying to market the next COD on a console that sells well in two territories. Or a platform with a global presence?

This is a false dilemma.. Kotick is sailing off into the sunset if the sale goes through, I'm sure he isn't going to care if COD is being marketed on a console that only "sells well in two territories" when he isn't working at the company.

 

[Ar¢tos]

If the deal fails, I can see people being fired at both MS and Activision.
If it goes through a lot of people will be fire from Activision.
It's a lose-lose situation from this point of view.

 

[Pelta88]

I mean, that's one way to spin Koticks statement, but that doesn't make it true. The context of the statement involved Sony's claim of how important Activision is to Sony's viability in the market. He was sharing an anecdote that could be perceived as evidence that Sony is overblowing Activision's role in the long term success of Sony and PlayStation.

This is a false dilemma.. Kotick is sailing off into the sunset if the sale goes through, I'm sure he isn't going to care if COD is being marketed on a console that only "sells well in two territories" when he isn't working at the company.

I was going to counter your point and then I saw your avatar and decided against engaging with you.

 

[3liteDragon]

This has been you for the past few days.

 

[SlimySnake]

Im bemused at this guy . Not every gene launches in game pass, particularly the more high profile bigger budget releases and in particular from day one.

If sales of those games decline or decline further, what’s the incentive from publishers to put their games on the platform in future? It will get to a point more end more Xbox users will wait it out in the hope a game launches on the service and what if it doesn’t?

And yeah I’m talking from a consumer standpoint. Not every Xbox player is a subscriber but the way some talk you would think they were.

He's talking about first party sales but he's completely missing the real world implications of this. If the game cant make its money back then MS wont make a sequel or simply shut down that studio. We've seen this happen time and time again in this industry with MS, Sony and other third party studios.

MS has already laid off people at 343 likely because Halo underperformed. It's definitely frustrating that Ryan isnt able to see this.

 

[quest]

He's talking about first party sales but he's completely missing the real world implications of this. If the game cant make its money back then MS wont make a sequel or simply shut down that studio. We've seen this happen time and time again in this industry with MS, Sony and other third party studios.

MS has already laid off people at 343 likely because Halo underperformed. It's definitely frustrating that Ryan isnt able to see this.

Halo infinite is not great. Neogaf people need to go. Microsoft gets rid of people and now its gamepass causing all Microsoft studios to cut staff and be AA studios. Make up your minds and stick with it. The constant goal post shifting with Microsoft is getting old.

 

[SlimySnake]

Halo infinite is not great. Neogaf people need to go. Microsoft gets rid of people and now its gamepass causing all Microsoft studios to cut staff and be AA studios. Make up your minds and stick with it. The constant goal post shifting with Microsoft is getting old.

Halo had 20 million users.

If GOW sold 20 million copies and Sony still laid off SSM employees, what would you say?

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Halo had 20 million users.

If GOW sold 20 million copies and Sony still laid off SSM employees, what would you say?

free to play

 

[MarkMe2525]

I was going to counter your point and then I saw your avatar and decided against engaging with you.

Oh my, what a burn. I'm sure your "counter" would have been filled with logical fallacies much like your original statement.

 

[SomeGit]

Is this not an example of exclusive content?

None of that content is exclusive. You can get all champions, agents, skins, whatever without game pass.

 

[Foilz]

I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge to just about everyone in the industry or any industry when you are faced with selling your product for $70 or taking a lump sum to allow people to use it freely that maybe sales will get hurt.

But this doesn't change the fact that more than half those games on gamepass would have been overlooked by most if they weren't on game pass. Also this doesn't hurt games that have been established in the market for 6 months plus. After 6 months sales for most games drop off steadily.

Twitter is full of tards saying how this proves GP is actually bad for devs and games. These people are morons

 

[El Pistolero]

If people do not buy games more games, MS hopes, will go on GamePass which means people stay subbed and they can start raising prices and then since people do not buy games then games need to monetise more after the download has occurred (hello dopamine mining / intrusive micro transactions)…

Also, as people get accustomed to ADHD inducing content dropping on a certain cadence and with people having no skin in the games they play (they are not investing money in them anymore) they are encouraged to hop from game to game and this game publishers need to focus more on continuously drop feeding content and new games. more shit affecting how games are designed to thrive and be profitable/visible on such platform.

Perfectly put. People fail to realize that moving to a GP like ecosystem will fundamentally change the way videogames are consumed and, by extension, the way they are conceived in the future...The best deal in the universe is not all heaven scent and roses.

 

[Pelta88]

The slow realization that Phil Spencer has been lying his ass off, that's taking place in resetera version of this thread, is glorious. The infighting that's taking place since kotaku got Microsoft to re-confirm GP is cannibalizing game sales will make you laugh to your stomach hurts. Previously, on era, saying "Phil is bad at his job" could get you banned. Which makes the documented submission to regulators that the GP numbers have been false, has 80% of era like...

They're sipping, swimming, and bathing in copium. The new narrative(s) on era are that

A: Phil has been lying, but only for a short period. So he still a good guy we should trust and believe in.

B: Microsoft accountants did not get the math right when they submitted to regulators and GP is still profitable... If you think about it.

 

[NickFire]

I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge to just about everyone in the industry or any industry when you are faced with selling your product for $70 or taking a lump sum to allow people to use it freely that maybe sales will get hurt.

But this doesn't change the fact that more than half those games on gamepass would have been overlooked by most if they weren't on game pass. Also this doesn't hurt games that have been established in the market for 6 months plus. After 6 months sales for most games drop off steadily.

Twitter is full of tards saying how this proves GP is actually bad for devs and games. These people are morons

The people who say bad for games and devs might be talking primarily about larger scope, aka big, aka aaa, etc. games. I'm not saying this to degrade indie type games. Just pointing out that outside of enthusiast circles, not many people are buying high end consoles for indie type games. At least none that I know of (again, outside enthusiast circles).

And if they are talking about big games, they are right at least for 3rd party games in the first year. Obviously, MS is not paying them the same amount they would get if the GP audience had purchased the game, and if its single player the chances that someone buys it after beating it on subscription is pretty low. But after the game has been out a while it definitely starts making more sense.

Another note - it seems like pretty much everything people debate on this topic is caused by misleading statements in my humble opinion. If the statements were specifically limited to smaller games do better, I bet everyone would just say duh without arguing at all.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

You are making the assumption that GP on itself doesn't make enough revenue to support all of this...

You don’t understand, MS is going to radically change the way they design games, make them a lot worse, make them smaller so they can churn them out faster, lower the quality, and then people will still sub when they raise the price, even though all of these games will also be available at retail and/or digitally, and they’re going to do all of this from the third place position, and it’s all going to be done in the name of GamePass, a service they expect to account for 10-15% of their revenue max.

In other words it’s nonsense. You need a tin foil hat to engage a lot of the people in this thread

 

[DeepEnigma]

The narratives are… insane. Hell, Spencer literally said it’s profitable and you have people stumbling all over themselves trying to twist his words into something else.

"Spencer says." He did in the OP as well.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Microsoft responds to this revelation that Game Pass cannibalizes game sales.

Microsoft seeks to explain its own admission Xbox Game Pass lowers base game sales

Microsoft has issued a statement in response to its own admission that titles entering Xbox Game Pass sell fewer copies…

www.eurogamer.net

"Xbox Game Pass offers gamers and game creators more choice and opportunity in how they discover, experience, and deliver games," an Xbox spokesperson told Eurogamer in response today. "For gamers, that means providing another option for them to discover games and play with friends at a great value. For developers, that means creating another option for how they monetise their games.

"We're focused on helping game creators of all sizes maximise the total financial value they receive through Game Pass. Each game is unique, so we work closely with creators to build a custom program to reflect what they need, ensure they are compensated financially for their participation in the service, and allow room for creativity and innovation. As a result, the number of developers interested in working with Game Pass continues to grow."

I'm still trying to find an actual answer in this response.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Microsoft responds to this revelation that Game Pass cannibalizes game sales.

Microsoft seeks to explain its own admission Xbox Game Pass lowers base game sales

Microsoft has issued a statement in response to its own admission that titles entering Xbox Game Pass sell fewer copies…

www.eurogamer.net

I'm still trying to find an actual answer in this response.

There is none. Just more marketing.

 

[Topher]

Microsoft responds to this revelation that Game Pass cannibalizes game sales.

Microsoft seeks to explain its own admission Xbox Game Pass lowers base game sales

Microsoft has issued a statement in response to its own admission that titles entering Xbox Game Pass sell fewer copies…

www.eurogamer.net

I'm still trying to find an actual answer in this response.

The whole article is bullshit. Microsoft wasn't "seeking to explain" anything. Eurogamer sought a quote from Microsoft and they received a non-answer.

 

[Thirty7ven]

A non answer is pretty much confirmation.

 

[Heisenberg007]

There is none. Just more marketing.

Right? And I think I was going mad or if 11 PM was too much for me today!

Question: "So does Game Pass still increase game sales or does it cannibalize sales? Has the situation changed now since 2018 when Phil gave that statement?"

Answer: "Xbox Game Pass offers gamers and game creators more choice and opportunity in how they discover, experience, and deliver games."

 

[proandrad]

Good guy Microsoft willing to lose money because they love the gamer so much.

 

[GHG]

Microsoft responds to this revelation that Game Pass cannibalizes game sales.

http://[URL]https://www.eurogamer.n...mission-xbox-game-pass-lowers-base-game-sales

[/URL]



I'm still trying to find an actual answer in this response.

The usual deflection and spin then.

How about one of these "journalists" ask the following guy to elaborate:

 

[knocksky]

You don’t understand, MS is going to radically change the way they design games, make them a lot worse, make them smaller so they can churn them out faster, lower the quality, and then people will still sub when they raise the price, even though all of these games will also be available at retail and/or digitally, and they’re going to do all of this from the third place position, and it’s all going to be done in the name of GamePass, a service they expect to account for 10-15% of their revenue max.

In other words it’s nonsense. You need a tin foil hat to engage a lot of the people in this thread

Holy shit this thread is something for sure.

As they are probably using the gamepass money to fund it's content, they are probably not as concerned as the people who flock to these threads are.

Gotta love the determination though.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

I'm still trying to find an actual answer in this response.

That PR statement is me in middle school trying to reach the minimum 300 words for that one last written exercise on my english tests when all i wanted to say was a single small sentence. In this case "yes, Gamepass decreases sales".

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/microsoft-releases-statement-xbox-game-172752493.html

After a report stated yesterday that Xbox Game Pass actually does cannibalize video game sales, Microsoft has revealed a full statement on the matter to try and explain previous seemingly contradictory statements by Phil Spencer himself.
Microsoft has in the past claimed that Xbox Game Pass is all-around a good thing for developers, this doesn’t seem to be the case as shown in a UK Competition and Markets Authority report, which revealed a lack of video game sales as a result of Game Pass. However, Microsoft is looking to quash the talk around the service and definitively state that Game Pass is overall a benefit for the company.


Microsoft commented to Kotaku on the news story from yesterday, stating the following:

“…we’re focused on helping game creators of all sizes maximize the total financial value they receive through Game Pass. Each game is unique, so we work closely with creators to build a custom program to reflect what they need, ensure they are compensated financially for their participation in the service, and allow room for creativity and innovation.”

While this statement is in direct response to the news from the CPA’s report on the Activision-Blizzard acquisition, it fails to actually deny any of the details in that report. The report confirmed that game sales declined after a game was added to Xbox Game Pass, which is in contrast to previous statements by Phil Spencer that insist a game being placed on the service actually increases sales overall, rather than causing a reduction in overall sales. Nothing in the state

Microsoft has responded to the news report that Gamepass is cannibalizing traditional game sales by... Avoiding it all together to talk about value. Not addressing the contradictions by Phil Spcencer.

In fact, this evasive response is so smooth, I wouldn't be surprised if this PR was written by Phil himself.

What this does somewhat confirm though is partners who jump on gamepass are likely working with Microsoft to maximize their bottom-line, which by participating in the service. Something we already got a hint of when they spend $600,000 for that cooking game to come to gamepass. Likely covering the sales revenue by partnering with Xbox to be featured on GP.

 

[ByWatterson]

 

[HeisenbergFX4]