• 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.

One Dev’s Xbox Struggles May Show How Game Pass Is Already Changing Games -Vice

Filben

Member
What does It means? Microsoft denied the game on game pass or the devs have said "no"?
As I understand it means that Microsofts wants new games on the Game Pass (and want to fund those) and don't want to warming up older games that have already been on the Game Pass. Given that Furi will get a significant upgrade after 6 years, it isn't a new game per se and per MS's definition but only an upgrade/remaster/whatever, so it doesn't fall under Microsoft's definition of a new game and they won't fund this new release. Devs then said, and I paraphrase, ok, then fuck it, no Xbox/MS then because we don't have the (financial) resources (without their help).
 

Hendrick's

Member
How dumb. He's basically saying Xbox didn't want to give them more money for their shitty game. It's clear that neither title sold anything by those charts and that they are looking for more sub money.
 
Last edited:

kingfey

Banned
I wish more developers shared this type of data. Thank you, The Game Bakers.

A few interesting things that popped up for me:
  1. PS paid 33% of the development cost to bring their game on PS+, while Xbox paid 25% of the development cost to bring their game on Gamepass.
  2. When Furi was on PS+, it still sold 7% on PlayStation. On the other hand, Furi sold only 5% on Xbox (despite not being on XBLG / GP).
  3. Comparatively, when Haven was on Gamepass, it didn't sell "at all" on Xbox (understandably so), but it sold 20% on PlayStation.
Very, very interesting.
The data would have been fine, if both system total were not 12% and less than steam, which was at 17%.
Fur seems to have sold badly on both of those consoles. And the difference between the consoles was 2% overall sales.

That is not an interesting break down. That just shows, India games sell badly on these 2 consoles.
 

kingfey

Banned
I see fair point but keep in mind that Haven got an earlier release on GP and a late release on PS4 too but ended up with a much higher percentage than xbox. So I'm not sure late release is the reason for it. It didn't apply to Haven at least.
Haven suits PS better, due to combat. So it makes sense for fellow PS users to buy it more, while xbox users buy it less.

Turn based games isn't that much popular on xbox these days.

X360 cemented what type of console xbox was.
 

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer
Abc Spencer GIF by The Bachelorette
 

Hendrick's

Member
The data would have been fine, if both system total were not 12% and less than steam, which was at 17%.
Fur seems to have sold badly on both of those consoles. And the difference between the consoles was 2% overall sales.

That is not an interesting break down. That just shows, India games sell badly on these 2 consoles.
Like I said, they are whining about not getting more free money for their games no one would have played if they weren't free. The two charts are nearly identical.
 

kingfey

Banned
Like I said, they are whining about not getting more free money for their games no one would have played if they weren't free. The two charts are nearly identical.
It would have been another obscure indie game, which nobody would have paid attention to. That is just the nature of indie games these days. Without publicity, you wont get the attention of normal gamers.
 

SirTerry-T

Member
That Haven looks like the sort of game enjoyed by people who actually LIKE the twee cover versions of old Punk and New Wave songs that get shat out for all those car and mobile phone commercials.
 

Metnut

Member
XBox gamers tend to be reluctant to purchase games that aren’t on Gamepass. I think this trend will continue as the generation goes on.

Nothing of value lost with this game though lol.
 
Last edited:

Hendrick's

Member
XBox gamers tend to be reluctant to purchase games that aren’t on Gamepass. I think this trend will continue as the generation goes on.

Nothing of value lost with this game though lol.
Except the data does not show that. It shows that gamers who can get the game as part of a subscription service they have will download it, but otherwise ignore it.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
So contrary to what was claimed gamepass doesn't boost sales, I'm glad it has been corrected.




“It surprised me. Being on Xbox Game Pass means that you basically have constant featuring on Xbox. Your game is on the dashboard all the time... People are seeing our game every day. And because of that, during launch month, our Xbox sales — we didn't do any discounts on it or anything — quadrupled, and have now settled to about three times as much as before. It's essentially an advert; a straight-up advert.”


What was claimed was also based on various developer feedback.


🤷‍♂️
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill




What was claimed was also based on various developer feedback.


🤷‍♂️
And we have a counter example here when your article specificaly mentions that by being on the dashboard made them gain visibility....No shit a game put on the dashboard is more advertise than an indie game....Sure some part could be attributed to gamepass but when the dev acknowledge that by being on the dashboard gave them visibility how to measure the real impact of gamepass on a game?
 

nikolino840

Member
As I understand it means that Microsofts wants new games on the Game Pass (and want to fund those) and don't want to warming up older games that have already been on the Game Pass. Given that Furi will get a significant upgrade after 6 years, it isn't a new game per se and per MS's definition but only an upgrade/remaster/whatever, so it doesn't fall under Microsoft's definition of a new game and they won't fund this new release. Devs then said, and I paraphrase, ok, then fuck it, no Xbox/MS then because we don't have the (financial) resources (without their help).
For what i know furi never been on game pass...and Need to know the timing...when they asked to be in the game pass system Microsoft already knew that they never wanted to do a DLC for Xbox? And i doubt that Microsoft denied a game......last week there was the new version at day one of this war of mine,a 2014 game
 
IF they get paid good enough. Just remember the story about the latest oddworld game.

The Oddworld story isn’t a story, it’s a developer assuming that millions of free downloads would have equaled millions of paid sales. It’s like a movie exec seeing millions of pirated downloads and assuming those are guaranteed ticket sales. It doesn’t work like that.

The Oddworld devs got money to finish their game. It was a win for them, otherwise they’d have had no game. Lanning said they needed the money to finish the game because of COVID. He was just upset about the delay and the gargantuan number of free Oddworld downloads.

As for Furi, it seems the number of sales were low on all consoles but especially low on Xbox. The developer said they tried to get special advertising placement from MS but they were denied.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
And we have a counter example here when your article specificaly mentions that by being on the dashboard made them gain visibility....No shit a game put on the dashboard is more advertise than an indie game....Sure some part could be attributed to gamepass but when the dev acknowledge that by being on the dashboard gave them visibility how to measure the real impact of gamepass on a game?

Yes, and ? Gaining visibility via game pass leads to increased sales and revenue for indie developers. We both agree on that. So do a lot of indie developers themselves. The developer here is attributing visibility directly to the game being on game pass in his quote.


Without GP or PS+ visibility the difference in Furi sales between PS and XB is 2% only.








So let's not try and turn this into an "But Xbox gamers didn't buy it" only issue.
 
Last edited:

Edgelord79

Gold Member
I can understand having to prioritize development.

As a player also I’m not disappointed as there is cacophony of these types of extremely difficult games already.
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Yes, and ? Gaining visibility via game pass leads to increased sales and revenue for indie developers. We both agree on that.

Without GP or PS+ visibility the difference in Furi sales between PS and XB is 2%.





So let's not try and turn this into an "But Xbox gamers didn't buy it" only issue.
So it is not gamepass but visibility that helped....Do you think that if the game was on gamepass but not on the dashboard for example the boost would've been as big ?
I'm not trying or turning anything into anything you are putting words in my mouth that you extrapolated.All I am saying right now is that we have a counter example of "gamepass helps sales", you have provided a link from a few years ago where they agreed that being on the dashboard gave them so much visibility that it helped their sales.Now I invite you to ponder what the result would have been if the game had been on the dashboard but not on gamepass...Then tell me how you came to the conclusion that gamepass helps sales.We have one flawed example for you and one counter example here.
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Just so I'm clear:

A 2016 game is no longer selling in 2022 because of a service that launched in 2017?

Alllllllright.
No that's not what they said, basically using the example of haven that has been(or still is) on gamepass, the game has barely sold outside of the gamepass download.And since MS refused the game for gamepass, the cost of porting/updating wouldn't be justified.
 
Summary : they were denied Game Pass money because their game wasn't new and they are now crying.
I don't even understand what they mean by that, because older games crop up on the service from time to time. Maybe MS just didn't want to pay them for an old game that never sold very well in the first place. I think I even claimed this game on PS+, but I've never touched it.
 

nikolino840

Member
No that's not what they said, basically using the example of haven that has been(or still is) on gamepass, the game has barely sold outside of the gamepass download.And since MS refused the game for gamepass, the cost of porting/updating wouldn't be justified.
But furi barely sold outside PS+ on PlayStation too
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
But furi barely sold outside PS+ on PlayStation too

Yeah, not getting why people are holding the examples from this developer as a gold standard. Their own data shows that there was only a 2% difference in sales outside of PS+ free users.

If anything, this shows that this developer should only stick to PC as that's where they get all their sales.



So it is not gamepass but visibility that helped....Do you think that if the game was on gamepass but not on the dashboard for example the boost would've been as big

That is an oxymoron. All Game Pass content gets constant rolling advertisement on the dash board. And on various other social media platforms with relevant announcements and/or exposure.

Hence indie developers love having their games go on GP as it gives them a far better venue to advertise, and because of that increased game revenue.


..Then tell me how you came to the conclusion that gamepass helps sales.

Based on multiple developer feedback like this or this or this or market analysis like this.

It's well within your prerogative to stick to one example that validates your belief and ignore the others that don't.

But come on now.
 
Last edited:

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Yeah, not getting why people are holding the examples from this developer as a gold standard. Their own data shows that there was only a 2% difference in sales outside of PS+ free users.

If anything, this shows that this developer should only stick to PC as that's where they get all their sales.





That is an oxymoron. All Game Pass content gets constant rolling advertisement on the dash board. And on various other social media platforms with relevant announcements and/or exposure.

Hence indie developers love having their games go on GP as it gives them a far better venue to advertise, and because of that increased game revenue.




Based on multiple developer feedback like this or this or this or market analysis like this.

It's well within your prerogative to stick to one example that validates your belief and ignore the others that don't.

But come on now.
So first link is someone saying gamepass is good and hearsay, second link is the same as the first you sent 3rd is sony is rude to indies 4th link is gamepass user spend more but is not about games on gamepass and 5th is same story as 3rd link.... Nothing here backs the idea that a game releasing on gamepass sell more. Now keep talking about ignoring opinions but at least post some relvant ones.
 

Clear

Gold Member
People missing the point as per usual.

Its about churn and competition. Its all well and good releasing a thing on a digital storefront, as it gives people a means to buy. But. if noone is made aware of its existence, or led towards it its just not going to sell. At all.

This is a problem if you don't have the resources to self-promote; how do you attract attention at a time when most major review outlets only cover a sliver of the total content released in any given week?

You end up stuck hoping to be in the good graces of the platform holder/storefront operator, and getting at least a little bit of prominence to let people know your product exists. Of course from the platform operator's end they have a certain finite number of priority slots to fill visibility-wise, and so will seek to allocate them in a way that's best for them and their business... Naturally meaning that indies on Gamepass will be favoured above those not on the service.

It should be obvious what this means in the long-term.
 

Fredrik

Gold Member
Why is there a controversy that people don’t buy games they get through a subscription?

The whole reason I subscribe on a library of games (or music and movies) is to not have to do individual purchases.

The reason a sub can increase sales is because there are still people who don’t subscribe and get caught up in the hype when they hear people talk about a new release. If the talk is positive that is, otherwise it’ll sell less.

If it turns out that devs can’t get enough money from subscriptions then the economics needs to be changed.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
So first link is someone saying gamepass is good and hearsay, second link is the same as the first you sent 3rd is sony is rude to indies 4th link is gamepass user spend more but is not about games on gamepass and 5th is same story as 3rd link.... Nothing here backs the idea that a game releasing on gamepass sell more. Now keep talking about ignoring opinions but at least post some relvant ones.

I mean, we can dismiss everything as hearsay at this rate and the conversation will keep going around in circles lol.

Being on GP helps developers from not just the exposure related sales, but also development assistance, the same applies to PS+ to some extent, but we have more reported comments from indie developers on game pass on the matter so it is what it is.

As Fredrik Fredrik pointed above, indie games don't generally sell a lot anyway, and the onus is not on gamers to need to buy every indie game, but subscription services like GP are a great way for players to play games they would otherwise not have considered, which can lead to additional revenue for the developers as gamers can then either buy the game, or additional content for it.. that's money that was not going to be spent in the first place.

On the topic of Furi, is anyone really expecting a game from 2016 to get a notable bump due to DLC in 2022/2023 anyway ? Very likely not.
 
Last edited:

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Why is there a controversy that people don’t buy games they get through a subscription?

The whole reason I subscribe on a library of games (or music and movies) is to not have to do individual purchases.

The reason a sub can increase sales is because there are still people who don’t subscribe and get caught up in the hype when they hear people talk about a new release. If the talk is positive that is, otherwise it’ll sell less.

If it turns out that devs can’t get enough money from subscriptions then the economics needs to be changed.
I agree but if the game in question is still on gamepass then why buy the game and not gamepass for around the same or often cheaper thant the game?
But to some it is difficult to understand and rather see this as a console war argument when it is true for gamepass and to a lesser extent games with gold, ps+ and psnow (to a lesser extent because +/gold are available for a month only and psnow because it is far less popular than gamepass).
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
I mean, we can dismiss everything as hearsay at this rate and the conversation will keep going around in circles lol.

Being on GP helps developers from not just the exposure related sales, but also development assistance, the same applies to PS+ to some extent, but we have more reported comments from indie developers on game pass on the matter so it is what it is.

As Fredrik Fredrik pointed above, indie games don't generally sell a lot anyway, and the onus is not on gamers to need to buy every indie game, but subscription services like GP are a great way for players to play games they would otherwise not have considered, which can lead to additional revenue for the developers as gamers can then either buy the game, or additional content for it.. that's money that was not going to be spent in the first place.

On the topic of Furi, is anyone really expecting a game from 2016 to get a notable bump due to DLC in 2022/2023 anyway ? Very likely not.
Great but you do realise that hearsay vs actual tangible data is far less convincing?And you are totally missing the point as to why they skip Xbox, it is not to get a notable bump they skip it because it is not rentable to port if they can't get on gamepass....Which means that it is detrimental to sales...Once again look at haven why did it sell less than 5% on Xbox financially it is totally understandable that the cost of proting a games for less than 5% of buyers is not interesting.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Great but you do realise that hearsay vs actual tangible data is far less convincing?And you are totally missing the point as to why they skip Xbox, it is not to get a notable bump they skip it because it is not rentable to port if they can't get on gamepass....Which means that it is detrimental to sales...Once again look at haven why did it sell less than 5% on Xbox financially it is totally understandable that the cost of proting a games for less than 5% of buyers is not interesting.

One example is not indicative of a trend. Besides, the game they're making the DLC for in the first place had give or take the exact same sales on Xbox and PS in the first place. So their rationale for skipping it makes even less sense, maybe a bit of vindictiveness because they wanted it to go on game pass but MS refused ?

Who can say.
 
Last edited:

K2D

Member
Bought it on PS4 way back when. Just for the sake of this thread, I'll give it a go this evening..!

Edit: never before played it.
 
Last edited:

Warnen

Can he swing from a thread? Take a look overhead / Hey, there, there goes the Spider-Man
Seems like all games should only be on PC, I can agree with this Dev.
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
One example is not indicative of a trend. Besides, the game they're making the DLC for in the first place had give or take the exact same sales on Xbox and PS in the first place. So their rationale for skipping it makes even less sense, maybe a bit of vindictiveness because they wanted it to go on game pass but MS refused ?

Who can say.
Same sales yes and no since on PS it sold about 30% more despite being on ps+....Sure those 30% doesn't mean much but the ps+ funding a third of the game does count.Sometime I feel like you are incapable of taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture, here we have the only tangible data available despite all you irrelevant links about ps being mean to indies (seriously did it just sparked the console warrior in you or did it had any sort of relevancy?).So to recap because like that you should be able to remain on topic, subscirption canibalize sales and even then the game sold better on ps even though marginally, but if gamepass doesn't contribute to the funding of the game then it is financially not viable to port it on Xbox.Look at haven and the abysmal number of sales on Xbox, if porting it cost more than (and I am very generous here considering the graph about haven sales) 5% of projected sales then you don't port it.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Seems like all games should only be on PC, I can agree with this Dev.

It checks out, wonder if the sales on consoles, separate from the grants from Sony and MS for the respective games, were even enough to justify development costs.




 

ANDS

Thought gaf was racist. Now knows better, honorary gaffer 2022
Seems reasonable to me, on all sides. MS has a focus for GP and FURI doesn't fit in, despite getting new content. PS+ works because if you had that game during the "free" period, you still have it. The charts in the article are not very clear (Tufte would not be pleased) but the point gets through eventually: without GP, you're focusing resources on to a platform that accounts for 5 percent of your playerbase. Not great.

How dumb. He's basically saying Xbox didn't want to give them more money for their shitty game. It's clear that neither title sold anything by those charts and that they are looking for more sub money.

The charts are percentage of total sales. How are you deriving how much the game sold from that (and why are you ignoring them saying that FURI is a constant year-over-year seller for them)?

. . .and the developers are a business just like MS is. MS is well within their right to fund a game with a spot on Gamepass, just like the developer is well within their right to say the game can't work without it.
 

KAOS

Member
From a business point the whole purpose of releasing dlc is to get more money. So not releasing it on a platform that has access to the game seems dumb to me!
 

watdaeff4

Member
Haven might have sold more if it was a good game that got good reviews and good word of mouth

It’s not a terrible game but it was pretty meh (and the reviews show that)

I would be interested in seeing what something like Nobody Saves the World did as it was a much more enjoyable game and reviewed better as well
 

Three

Member
Except the data does not show that. It shows that gamers who can get the game as part of a subscription service they have will download it, but otherwise ignore it.
What data?
FH5, Halo not showing on charts at all. Like they didn't exist. Xbox top sellers chart has like 4 COD etc. Data shows the opposite, denial says what you're saying.
 

Hendrick's

Member
What data?
FH5, Halo not showing on charts at all. Like they didn't exist. Xbox top sellers chart has like 4 COD etc. Data shows the opposite, denial says what you're saying.
I'm talking about the specific data in this article, not all of Game Pass.
 
Top Bottom