Support NeoGAF

[Three]

This is why those Xbox Series X/S bundles with Forza Horizon 5 make me chuckle. I know it's technically not free but surely anyone buying an Xbox at this point is getting Game Pass so you're just giving them a game that they're 99% going to get access to anyway.

Not to mention that you're paying $60 extra for a game that's over a year old now.

Is there an S bundle though? As far as I know it's officially only X, I believe it's a way of pushing up margins on it.

 

[just_jr]

What a duo, huh?

 

[yazenov]

The water is wet. Everyone knew this, even the Xbox fanboys deep down inside.

Like I said and many others have said if Gamepass increases game sales then every major and minor 3rd party game will launch on Gamepass on day one. Yet very few games do which were no doubt financially compensated to do so by MS.

Phil is full of shit and shame on the people who defend this liar.

 

[Three]

So you think that HIFI Rush success has nothing to do with Gamepass and being there and on the dev_direct had no effects at all.

Being in a showcase obviously has a marketing effect but that isn't necessarily a gamepass effect. You can still have showcases for games without that.

 

[Henry Panic]

Microsoft will not increase the price of game pass.

Game Pass Ultimate is already pricey, Microsoft has just been way too kind with the deals. There's nothing about it to raise. The deals will end, that's it, outside Black Friday.

Base Game Pass they'll just restrict what you get with it until you pay for Ultimate.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Microsoft will not increase the price of game pass.

Game Pass Ultimate is already pricey, Microsoft has just been way too kind with the deals. There's nothing about it to raise. The deals will end, that's it, outside Black Friday.

Base Game Pass they'll just restrict what you get with it until you pay for Ultimate.

It will increase, it has to increase for all sub services.

But GamePass is different than services like Hulu or Netflix in that all of that GamePass content is still available for ownership outside of the sub service, so MS isn’t as reliant on that subscription fee. When Netflix invests a lot of money into a movie or series, it’s very very rarely available on DVD or Blu-ray, so they HAVE to make that money back via subscriptions and in some cases merchandising. MS can invest money into a game and make the money back via subscription, retail sales, digital sales, and DLC/MTX. So they won’t need to raise prices to any extreme level, but it will eventually rise in price imho.

 

[John Wick]

So basically XBOX has known that Game Pass hurts game sales on both the front loaded sales and back end.

But did all that false flagging because they were trying to build a false narrative of success? I don't think Microsoft thought through what they were doing. I'm not sure these insights into their XBOX business being made public, was a great decision.

It makes them look very stupid indeed. On one hand they have claimed gamepass increases game sales and on the other it decreases them. Sony can easily refute this point with their own evidence.

 

[Henry Panic]

It will increase, it has to increase for all sub services.

But GamePass is different than services like Hulu or Netflix in that all of that GamePass content is still available for ownership outside of the sub service, so MS isn’t as reliant on that subscription fee. When Netflix invests a lot of money into a movie or series, it’s very very rarely available on DVD or Blu-ray, so they HAVE to make that money back via subscriptions and in some cases merchandising. MS can invest money into a game and make the money back via subscription, retail sales, digital sales, and DLC/MTX. So they won’t need to raise prices to any extreme level, but it will eventually rise in price imho.

You need to review how much a person not in GP has to pay for Ultimate without any deals. It's not cheap.

Literally zero reason to raise the price.

Your best bet may be base tier, but they could also restrict it so you have to get Ultimate for the most benefit.

 

[cireza]

Answer (a) : One internal email exchange stated that

Did I win something ?

 

[Havoc2049]

Price increase is absolutely coming this year. I predicted earlier that it will be around or at the release of Starfield. MS is going to make us PAY if we want to play their most anticipated title of the year.

It isn't just Game Pass or game sales only. There are all kinds of revenue streams for MS to make money that MS is taking advantage of. They already have the digital deluxe version to bring in revenue from Game Pass subscribers. They used it for Forza Horizon 5 and Hi-Fi Rush. Expect to see it with all future MS releases. The pre-order early access of the digital deluxe version of FH5 brought in tons of revenue for Microsoft before the game even launched. 1.2 million people bought the early access/digital deluxe version of FH5 before the game even launched, at either the $40 price point for Game Pass subscribers of $100 for non-subscribers. It brought in an estimated $54 - $118 million before the game even launched.

 

[JLB]

The game looks cool. Loads of people would have bought. I have no doubt about it

Less than current numbers if not on the showcase and Gamepass, and you know it.

 

[JLB]

So we are talking about exposure?

You know another name for that right? Marketing.

Marketing in the form of making an awesome game shadow drop and available on the same day?
Hell yeah, gimme that marketing all day.

 

[SLB1904]

Less than current numbers if not on the showcase and Gamepass, and you know it.

Do you really believe if this game was multiplat would sell less than it did?

And what you mean by showcase? Is that a new thing to announce new games?(sarcasm)

 

[JLB]

Where did you get this numbers? By that kind of "approximation" Elden Ring with 950k CCU sold 19 million copies in the first weeks on Steam alone.

Oh, yeah, comparing a shadow drop AA game vs a GOTY that is considered one of the best vg in history, that got hundreds on awards and is coming from one of the most prestigious studios in the world is the exact same thing.
You are a piece of genius, I can see that.

 

[JLB]

Do you really believe if this game was multiplat would sell less than it did?

And what you mean by showcase? Is that a new thing to announce new games?(sarcasm)

The game is multiplat, not even know what you are talking about.
And by showcase, I mean, showcase.A show were you show games.

 

[anothertech]

Interesting quote from Phil Spencer:

Holy shit this dude.

 

[SLB1904]

The game is multiplat, not even know what you are talking about.
And by showcase, I mean, showcase.A show were you show games.

 

[twilo99]

I can tell you from experience that I am buying less games since I signed up for gamepass, by less I mean.. I've bought one game in two years. I can't be the only one.. so if they were trying to tell you that gamepass helps with selling games, it really makes no sense.

But at the same time I've played more games in the past 12 months than I had in ~5years prior

 

[SmokedMeat]

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knew that. Didn’t matter if Microsoft said otherwise, because there’s no way Game Pass isn’t going to cannibalize single unit sales.

 

[twilo99]

The question becomes does the industry benefit from me playing 20 games per year without buying any of them or me purchasing one or two games in the same time period?

 

[IFireflyl]

You need to review how much a person not in GP has to pay for Ultimate without any deals. It's not cheap.

Literally zero reason to raise the price.

Your best bet may be base tier, but they could also restrict it so you have to get Ultimate for the most benefit.

Game Pass Ultimate is $14.99/month without any discounts. That means four months of Game Pass Ultimate costs less than one new AAA game (which would either be $60 or $70 depending on if everyone in the industry has gone up to this new price). Just an FYI, I am using USD.

For perspective, you could get three $60 games in a year for $180 total, or you can spend $180 and get Game Pass and play a lot more than three games. The question of value depends on the type of games a player likes, and if new titles (like Starfield and The Elder Scrolls IV) will also be available on Game Pass. But lets not pretend that Game Pass is expensive, even without discounts. It's not expensive when you compare it to the cost of games. The only way purchased games would be cheaper is if you only ever buy dirt-cheap indie games, or if you buy games used on eBay or something, or if you only buy older, heavily discounted games.

 

[IFireflyl]

The question becomes does the industry benefit from me playing 20 games per year without buying any of them or me purchasing one or two games in the same time period?

The industry would not benefit from you playing more games unless you're spending gobs on MTX that you weren't spending previously. If you're not spending more than you were previously then the industry is "harmed" by Game Pass. If you're making up the difference in MTX then the industry isn't really impacted. If you're spending more than you were previously due to MTX then the industry has been helped by Game Pass.

The problem is that this is extremely difficult to measure as people are going to use Game Pass differently.

 

[Henry Panic]

Game Pass Ultimate is $14.99/month without any discounts. That means four months of Game Pass Ultimate costs less than one new AAA game (which would either be $60 or $70 depending on if everyone in the industry has gone up to this new price). Just an FYI, I am using USD.

For perspective, you could get three $60 games in a year for $180 total, or you can spend $180 and get Game Pass and play a lot more than three games. The question of value depends on the type of games a player likes, and if new titles (like Starfield and The Elder Scrolls IV) will also be available on Game Pass. But lets not pretend that Game Pass is expensive, even without discounts. It's not expensive when you compare it to the cost of games. The only way purchased games would be cheaper is if you only ever buy dirt-cheap indie games, or if you buy games used on eBay or something, or if you only buy older, heavily discounted games.

Your ignoring the cost of the service, and comparing to games instead.

You can't ignore the many Ultimate users that got in through deals.

LOTS of deals.

 

[GHG]

They aren’t in a position where they can remove all physical games

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/xbox-to-stop-selling-physical-games-in-brazil.1651503/

make everything GaaS

https://gamingbolt.com/microsofts-h...yers-want-community-driven-ongoing-franchises

“There will always be single-player games with maybe 20 to 30 hours of gameplay, we love those kinds of games and there’s a place for those, but it’s also certainly the case with the focus on watching, streaming, broadcast and esports that it’s really important to think about the longevity of a game,” Booty said.
“It’s really difficult for anybody to think about making a large scale triple-A game these days without having in mind a content and service plan that goes one to two years into the future out of the gate.
“Games really have become much more social, much more mainstream, much more widespread. We know that the games industry is growing, and that’s taking nothing away from what you call the ‘single-player, narrative, cinematic game’ but we see a lot of interest from our players in more community-driven ongoing franchises. I think that is in alignment with a lot of the trends we see in gaming overall.”

chop games up and release them piece by piece

https://www.shacknews.com/article/99302/xbox-game-pass-could-evolve-to-have-episodic-content

Again, insanity.

 

[twilo99]

The industry would not benefit from you playing more games unless you're spending gobs on MTX that you weren't spending previously. If you're not spending more than you were previously then the industry is "harmed" by Game Pass. If you're making up the difference in MTX then the industry isn't really impacted. If you're spending more than you were previously due to MTX then the industry has been helped by Game Pass.

The problem is that this is extremely difficult to measure as people are going to use Game Pass differently.

Yes, the maths are impossible to figure out, so its not really clear cut on what game pass is actually doing to the industry.

I think of it more simple terms.

lets take hi-fi rush for example, I would never buy that game if it was not on GP, its just not my thing so I wouldn't even spend $10 on it, but since it is on GP I've clocked almost ~20hrs on it.

Now, is the developer of that game better off with me not buying the game at all or with 20hrs of my attention? I have no idea what they get from it, but its probable better than the zero dollars they would get otherwise.

 

[Venom Snake]

I'm late to the party so forgive me if i misunderstood something: so the narrative is that by arguing the legitimacy of acquisition, Microsoft is trying to prove its weaker position in the market by... telling how a potentially unprofitable and industry-damaging business model is potentially unprofitable and industry-damaging, despite all their marketing efforts to make it seem otherwise?

Because that would be fucking hilarious.

I don't even know if this is the best argumentation to create such a narrative, because it only shows what has been clear to everyone for a long time, corporations with such great potential are able to brute-force their way by absorbing huge losses to -at some point in the future- cutt off the competition and monopolize the industry (also at the cost of the industry), but this doesn't seem to help with the case, right?

 

[anothertech]

I Interpret this document a few ways...

No MS didn't lie, no spencer didn't lie, and no developers that praised it are not lying.

Phil-
"When you put a game like Forza Horizon 4 on Game Pass, you instantly have more players of the game, which is actually leading to more sales of the game," he said."

MS-
"Microsoft also submitted that it's internal analysis shows a decline in base game sales twelve months following their addition to gamepass"

So which is it? Someone is lying bro.

Including sycophants on this forum defending this shit as sustainable in any way.

 

[Dick Jones]

Phil-
"When you put a game like Forza Horizon 4 on Game Pass, you instantly have more players of the game, which is actually leading to more sales of the game," he said."

MS-
"Microsoft also submitted that it's internal analysis shows a decline in base game sales twelve months following their addition to gamepass"

So which is it? Someone is lying bro.

Including sycophants on this forum defending this shit as sustainable in any way.

It could be correct in the instance he is highlighting like a clinical paper that focuses on the results of 2% (Forza) than 98% (most other games on Gamepass)

Phil has always been economical with the truth. Every statement has a caveat

 

[anothertech]

It could be correct in the instance he is highlighting like a clinical paper that focuses on the results of 2% than 98%

Phil has always been economical with the truth. Every statement has a caveat

Ahh. The semantics of the word "Lie" lol

Completely agree with you tho

 

[Dick Jones]

Ahh. The semantics of the word "Lie" lol

Completely agree with you tho

 

[IFireflyl]

Yes, the maths are impossible to figure out, so its not really clear cut on what game pass is actually doing to the industry.

I think of it more simple terms.

lets take hi-fi rush for example, I would never buy that game if it was not on GP, its just not my thing so I wouldn't even spend $10 on it, but since it is on GP I've clocked almost ~20hrs on it.

Now, is the developer of that game better off with me not buying the game at all or with 20hrs of my attention? I have no idea what they get from it, but its probable better than the zero dollars they would get otherwise.

The developer got their money from Microsoft when the put the game on Game Pass. There is no value to the developer whether you don't ever play the game, or whether you play the game for 10,000 hours. The only way the developer sees any added value is if you then proceed to purchase the game (but why would you?), or if you spend money on micro-transactions, or (and this is something that really can't be measured) as a result of you enjoying this game you then proceed to buy something else from that developer. Those are the only three ways (that I can see) in which a developer is going to profit by you using Game Pass. I mean, maybe another potential benefit (which, again, is not measurable) is that the developer might get better compensation with a future game that they put on Game Pass if the first one does well. But that's also a stretch, especially for games that don't make money from micro-transactions (because Microsoft would literally be losing money by putting it on Game Pass).

This is why I don't trust Game Pass. I don't feel like this is a sustainable service when it comes to new games. I can see it for older games that have already run their course with initial sales, but for new games, especially games without micro-transactions, there is little benefit except for smaller developers that want to get a lump-sum payout that could be better than sales from the game. But even then, the developer doesn't benefit when people actually play that game because they already got their handout.

Maybe I'm wrong and Game Pass will become bigger than Netflix. I don't know the future.

EDIT: I initially said Game Pass and GeForce Now were the same type of cloud gaming service, but I removed that since GHG informed me that with GeForce Now you already have to own the game to utilize the cloud streaming feature.

Your ignoring the cost of the service, and comparing to games instead.

You can't ignore the many Ultimate users that got in through deals.

LOTS of deals.

The cost of the Game Pass Ultimate without any deals is $14.99/month. I already said this. Even with no deals, $14.99/month isn't expensive. If someone is struggling to afford that then gaming shouldn't be their hobby in the first place. They can play tic-tac-toe or something.

 

[legacy24]

What a duo, huh?

best lying duo of all time

 

[Dick Jones]

best lying duo of all time

 

[GHG]

This is why I don't trust GeForce Now or Game Pass.

Apples to oranges here.

GeForce Now requires you to purchase the games you want to play on PC (steam, epic games store, etc) in order to access them. As a cloud solution it's one of the few out there that wont have any negative impact on game sales.

 

[IFireflyl]

Apples to oranges here.

GeForce Now requires you to purchase the games you want to play on PC (steam, epic games store, etc) in order to access them. As a cloud solution it's one of the few out there that wont have any negative impact on game sales.

Good point. I thought it was a pure streaming service without game ownership. I am a bit out of the loop.

 

[GHG]

Good point. I thought it was a pure streaming service without game ownership. I am a bit out of the loop.

That was Stadia. GeForce Now is a streaming service that requires game ownership from its users.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce-now/faq

 

[hyperbertha]

people shouldn't compare games with show/video streaming. Shows didn't make most of their money from physical/digital sales.

 

[hyperbertha]

Sony wouldn't be fighting the Activision deal do hard and putting anti-gamepass clauses into agreements if it's current strategy is working. A less biased summary is that Microsoft is applying an unproven business model trying to compete in a different way and Sony is using it's position as a market leader to protect the status quo.

what dumb nonsense is this? Regardless of whether its current strategy is working, that's no reason to have your prime competitor freely mug up all valuable IP for free while you sit on your ass.

 

[jakinov]

Ok.

No amount of mental gymnastics can paint anything different than what MS said internally. They even knew damned well before even launching the service.

Games don’t sell more that appear on it. They even admitted they lose sales. Argue with them.

There no contention that the raw number of units sold would likely be higher if it was exclusively only available through traditional buying.

There’s no mental gymnastics, I’m simply saying the article you posted is not Microsoft saying you end up with more units sold than if you didn’t have it on gamepass. But that there is additional sales that arguably would not have happened if the game was less accessible. And that those additional sales help for an overall healthy business model for them.

If you look at the quote in context, He’s not championing it as the best most lucrative model or that it doesn’t canibalize sales. The fact that it canibalizes sales is implied in the question which Spencer just says he’ll just say the model has been healthy for their franchises then brings up this positive effect increased access has in that quote from the article. He’s not even saying it will work for all games either but that it’s been healthy (not great) for them and that 3rd party should make their own business decision but he thinks that it’s a good option.

The concept of the positive effect is this:

If A, B, C, D, E buy a game if store only

Then A buys game only if on gamepass but B, C, D, E + F, G, H, I use gamepass

Because game is popular/trending/hyped J or even K might possibly buy the game. It’s obvious that gamepass canibalizes the sales of B, C, D, E because they literally aren’t buying it but the concept is that there is potentially more additional people (J/K) that end up buying the game due to so many people talking about it.

 

[TGO]

And this why when people suggest Sony should put all games on Playstation Plus Extra day 1, Sony be like

 

[Klayzer]

Yes, the maths are impossible to figure out, so its not really clear cut on what game pass is actually doing to the industry.

I think of it more simple terms.

lets take hi-fi rush for example, I would never buy that game if it was not on GP, its just not my thing so I wouldn't even spend $10 on it, but since it is on GP I've clocked almost ~20hrs on it.

Now, is the developer of that game better off with me not buying the game at all or with 20hrs of my attention? I have no idea what they get from it, but its probable better than the zero dollars they would get otherwise.

Maybe developers will negotiate some type of financial agreement, with regards to how many users that try their games on GP. That could be in place right now actually.

 

[GHG]

There’s no mental gymnastics,


The concept of the positive effect is this:

If A, B, C, D, E buy a game if store only

Then A buys game only if on gamepass but B, C, D, E + F, G, H, I use gamepass

Because game is popular/trending/hyped J or even K might possibly buy the game. It’s obvious that gamepass canibalizes the sales of B, C, D, E because they literally aren’t buying it but the concept is that there is potentially more additional people (J/K) that end up buying the game due to so many people talking about it.

Not to be curt, but if you need to get over a third of the way through the English alphabet in order to explain something then that looks a lot like mental gymnastics to me.

 

[jakinov]

Pure horseshit from you here.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/phil-spencer-game-pass-leads-to-more-game-sales

"When you put a game like Forza Horizon 4 on Game Pass, you instantly have more players of the game, which is actually leading to more sales of the game," he said.

“more” as in “additional”. He’s not saying overall game sales will be higher if it’s on game pass but that people without game pass might end up buying it because of the elevated popularity of the game leading to additional sales that arguably other wise wouldn’t happen.

 

[ShadowkillXNA]

“more” as in “additional”. He’s not saying overall game sales will be higher if it’s on game pass but that people without game pass might end up buying it because of the elevated popularity of the game leading to additional sales that arguably other wise wouldn’t happen.

Nope. Read it again. He states unequivocally that being on gamepass elevates the popularity of the game thus increasing the number of sales. So he is in fact saying that being on gamepass increases sales.

 

[mckmas8808]

Any video game media people respond to this news yet?

 

[Ezekiel_]

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/xbox-to-stop-selling-physical-games-in-brazil.1651503/

https://gamingbolt.com/microsofts-h...yers-want-community-driven-ongoing-franchises

https://www.shacknews.com/article/99302/xbox-game-pass-could-evolve-to-have-episodic-content

GHG tag proposal : "The provider of receipts"

 

[GHG]

Any video game media people respond to this news yet?

No of course not, but the founder of the studio who made metal hellsinger has:

Interpret that how you will.

 

[DeepEnigma]

There no contention that the raw number of units sold would likely be higher if it was exclusively only available through traditional buying.

There’s no mental gymnastics, I’m simply saying the article you posted is not Microsoft saying you end up with more units sold than if you didn’t have it on gamepass. But that there is additional sales that arguably would not have happened if the game was less accessible. And that those additional sales help for an overall healthy business model for them.

If you look at the quote in context, He’s not championing it as the best most lucrative model or that it doesn’t canibalize sales. The fact that it canibalizes sales is implied in the question which Spencer just says he’ll just say the model has been healthy for their franchises then brings up this positive effect increased access has in that quote from the article. He’s not even saying it will work for all games either but that it’s been healthy (not great) for them and that 3rd party should make their own business decision but he thinks that it’s a good option.

The concept of the positive effect is this:

If A, B, C, D, E buy a game if store only

Then A buys game only if on gamepass but B, C, D, E + F, G, H, I use gamepass

Because game is popular/trending/hyped J or even K might possibly buy the game. It’s obvious that gamepass canibalizes the sales of B, C, D, E because they literally aren’t buying it but the concept is that there is potentially more additional people (J/K) that end up buying the game due to so many people talking about it.

Ok.

 

[BootsLoader]

Nah, not really. Anyone thinking otherwise is just lying to him/herself

You forgot they, them, themselves. It, itself, itselves, xxelves, and so on.

 

[GHG]

Ok.