-
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.
Phil Spencer "Game Pass price increase is inevitable in the Future"
- Thread starter Bernoulli
- Start date
HerjansEagleFeeder
Member
My cancellation of the sub is inevitable. Geforce Now provides better value to me and my personal gaming habits as I don't care about 95% of the games on there and find Xcloud inferior to Nvidias solution.
twilo99
Member
It's horrible, but that problem seems to be upstream the supply chain ...
ShadyAcshuns
Member
Even if it does go up to $25 per month, that's still much better than paying $70 for a game if you just want to play it one and done.
elmos-acc
Member
Why would you ever buy a game for full price if you only want to play it through once? Sales exist and the game will be probably less than $30 soon enough.
ShadyAcshuns
Member
Perhaps, but it's just an alternative to paying full price but still getting to enjoy a game. Some games rarely go on sale. More options are always better than less.
Last edited:
What percentage are game sales? People keep posting that 15% to suggest gamepass is only a fraction of their business but the revenue they make for things like selling you premium upgrade dlc, battlepasses, mtx, etc are not counter to the gamepass model.
You are here suggesting that game sales are too important compared to gamepass subs so what's the game sales percentage in comparison? Not mtx or dlc, hardware or any other revenue that is still a part of gamepass as a business model but actual game sales. What percentage is that compared to it?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
1. People "keep posting" that 15% because that's publicly revealed info. We don't know the minutia of every percentage point.
2. Why are you counting MTX, DLC, hardware etc as part of the game pass model? that makes no sense.
3. I'm not 'suggesting anything'. I'm answering the concerned folks who see game pass as a clear and present threat that it will take a good long while before the game pass model eclipses the traditional sales model even for the one platform that promotes their sub service the most.
Last edited:
kiphalfton
Member
I'm saying before you can play the game, or mid-game it stops to play an ad. Like YouTube, Netflix, etc.
PropellerEar
Member
Killjoy-NL
Member
Isn't that exactly why GamePass is stagnating?
King Dazzar
Member
Not meaning to derail, but can you point me in the right direction with regards expanding on this? I love my physical movie media. Whilst Disney are still putting stuff out on 4k Blu Ray in my region. They've ceased all physical media in Australia from what I've read. I thought they were deliberately keeping some stuff from discs too and pushing their in app imax enhanced bit? Aren't all their shows app exclusive too? If this is changing it'd be great, but I was fearful that Disney would head towards stopping physical. Not reverse and support it.
Back on topic. I predict GP will ultimately lead to more mediocrity, whilst also with the drop in quality, a substantial price increase to the service over the next couple of years. But I'm a cynical miserable git. So I hope I'm wrong, unfortunately I doubt I am.
If the list of Bethesda games to release in the next years is true and XGS has also more games coming out i can understand they want to pull that lever.
If i have to choose i take more games over cheaper service (it's also true i still have more than 2 years locked).
If i have to choose i take more games over cheaper service (it's also true i still have more than 2 years locked).
Last edited:
1) so why are you using it to suggest it's small when you don't have details? Compared to what?
2) I'm saying just because money is made on mtx or battlepasses it doesn't mean gamepass isn't key to that model or a threat to B2P. So making money elsewhere or even through engagement of gamepass doesn't mean gamepass isn't key to the model.
It would be like saying Android isn't a threat to people buying OS like windows because Google doesn't make any revenue from android, it's 0% of their revenue, advertising revenue is separate so don't mix advertising with OS revenue. Gamepass is an integral part of the business model much like Android is even though they make most of their money from mtx or advertising respectively.
They sell hardware at a loss to get people in the ecosystem and gamepass, get engagement through gamepass, drive mtx, battlepasses and dlc. Just because revenue from the subscriptions itself is 15% it doesn't mean it's not part of a bigger picture when it comes to a business model.
3) if you're not suggesting that the subscription is not a threat to B2P because it's only 15% of revenue what exactly was your point of saying it's only 15% of revenue? What is the B2P revenue in comparison?
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
He just said that, should've been simple enough for you to understand?
Simply next gen, khaby is right.
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
www.tweaktown.com
This is the publicly available information, if you need them to dive into exact specifics, you're better off asking elsewhere. I'm only reiterating what we can say for sure, not what-if hypotheticals.
15% of their revenue coming from game pass is not a threat to B2P. Especially since every single piece of content on game pass is available in a B2P format. When they start making content exclusive to the game pass market and stopping the B2P market from accessing it, then it can be a valid argument.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Job Hop, my dude.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
Or just stop being poor
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
What's an invalid argument is your own use of the 15% in a mix of revenue streams that are irrelevant or even reliant and correlate with the subscription count but not counted to suggest that something else related which you don't have specifics on at all is not under threat.Simply next gen, khaby is right.
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
This is the publicly available information, if you need them to dive into exact specifics, you're better off asking elsewhere. I'm only reiterating what we can say for sure, not what-if hypotheticals.
15% of their revenue coming from game pass is not a threat to B2P. Especially since every single piece of content on game pass is available in a B2P format. When they start making content exclusive to the game pass market and stopping the B2P market from accessing it, then it can be a valid argument.
Ask yourself this, why did you bring it up? what does gamepass being 15% of revenue show? The answer is nothing. Much like Google's 0% direct revenue from Android means nothing.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Google makes revenue from Android from the split from developers. But all platform holders also make revenue from any sale on a platform even without it being on a subscription service. Weird correlation you're trying to make here.
-
Anyway, the original point of the topic was an answer to a question about price increases on a service being unavoidable in the future, which of course is not possible for any goods or service. Everything will increase in price overtime.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Literally everything in the entire world slowly increases in price over time. Did anyone think Game Pass was immune to inflation or competitive pricing? Like, c’mon, this is like Economics 101, folks.
Shadowstar39
Member
Seems some in here are more than happy for that, sadly. Even to the extent of making excuses and running defense for price increases.
Shadowstar39
Member
This is why we must not champion this shit. If they remove physical or the ability to buy for ownership we will all be screwed. If Sony, Nintendo and MS doing it, then what?
As far as Netflix and such, I have been buying up older movies and shows on dvd/Blu-ray as I see the days numbering where some get removed or remakes get put out and the originals get memory holed. We've seen this in the game space too. An old game is $9.99 then a team up reses it and charges 29.99 for thr same game, the old then gets removed from steam or whatnot.
But why are you counting the Google Play store mtx cut as Android revenue? Google makes 0% of their revenue from Android.
I hope you see the point now. This isn't a weird correlation, it's an analogy. Android being low revenue, 0%, for Google doesn't mean it's not a threat to paid OS. Doesn't mean store mtx sales and advertising which come off the back of the Android userbase shouldn't be counted as part of the overall business model. It doesn't mean it isn't integral to Google and it certainly doesn't mean it's not a threat to paid OS.
So when people try and parrot that "it's only 15% so gamepass isn't that important to their business model or a threat to paid games" they don't actually know what it means. They don't know how much of the other revenue (like mtx, battlepasses, upgrades) is driven by gamepass engagement to begin with. They don't know how much of the rest is actually B2P sales, how much is something irrelevant entirely. They know nothing and they can't deduce anything. They can't conclude anything from 15% from Gamepass any more than they can 0% from Android regarding how important it is to the business model. They just see a small number and parrot it to suggest B2P sales are higher or more important when they don't know anything. Nobody in their right mind would try to suggest that Google's 0% revenue from Android OS means it is not a threat to paid OS or not that important to them, but that's what I'm seeing.
Last edited:
Klayzer
Member
I totally agree with your assessment. Sorry, I'm not taking any number from Microsoft at face value. They've proven to absolutely lie when it's convient for them.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
Shocking. At the rate of these subscription price increases, it will probably end up being cheaper just to purchase the games.
Hawking Radiation
Member
I mean while its fun to poke fun at Xbox and Gamepass (based on recent events), this is 100% true and should be of shock to literally no one.
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Member
Disney is really hurting for revenue ironically, and they've realized they're missing out on a hardcore consumer base that will buy their movies regardless if they have disney+ or not, so they've been putting more content on disc again after stopping for a while.
That's not to say that they'll do it for all content or every movie. This mostly impacted their catalog releases.
They might think that pulling physical media may have more of an impact in certain regions.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
. Like honestly can you name a single subscription service that hasn’t had multiple price increases in the recent past? I don’t get the cherry-picking here. Game Pass hasn’t had a single increase in price in like 6 years until the nominal $1 increase in July.Like ffs cry me a river
FullMetalx117
Member
Simply next gen, khaby is right.
Game Pass and Xbox are profitable, Phil Spencer reiterates
Microsoft gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterates that the value-oriented Xbox Game Pass subscription service and the Xbox business as a whole are profitable.
This is the publicly available information, if you need them to dive into exact specifics, you're better off asking elsewhere. I'm only reiterating what we can say for sure, not what-if hypotheticals.
15% of their revenue coming from game pass is not a threat to B2P. Especially since every single piece of content on game pass is available in a B2P format. When they start making content exclusive to the game pass market and stopping the B2P market from accessing it, then it can be a valid argument.
I get why you're referencing this, it's the only baseline we have. But just generally speaking, investor presentations are designed to sell you on the company and the stock. It's like taking words from a car salesman as truth. Anyone doing an acquisition or divestiture using assumptions from an investor presentation will lose their jobs immediately and will be laughed out of the bank they work at
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Edgelord79
Gold Member
Gamepass killed my father.
Griffon
Member
It already is.
odhiex
Member
ShadyAcshuns
Member
Since you've stated you only like and play on Playstation before, I got to ask: why are you against GP? Is there a specific reason you have a negative view of it? If so, I'm trying to understand how some think an optional service is somehow a threat.
Killjoy-NL
Member
What makes you think I see GamePass as a threat? I don't.
I see MS a threat to the gaming industry and GamePass is their focus, so maybe that's where you get the idea from?
So if discussions relate to this, the yeah, I'm discussing the viability of GamePass.
GamePass itself and any other similar service, Idc about, because like you said, they're optional.
Last edited:
ShadyAcshuns
Member
So that's what I'm seeing then. Ok. With Amazon and Google moving gaming away from traditional consoles with cloud and mobile gaming, why do you see MS in particular as a "threat" to gaming?
Killjoy-NL
Member
Because Google and Amazon aren't going anywhere anytime soon.
Xbox has been detrimental to gaming since X360. They literally started Xbox merely to stop Sony.
Now that they're actively trying to buy whatever they can to stop Playstation from dominating and force everything onto GamePass, then I take even more issue with them.
If they would actually provide healthy competition, then I'd have no problem with them.
But Xbox under MS is a cancer, because of MS.
It's really simple.
ShadyAcshuns
Member
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but without MS to give PS competition in the traditional home console market, Sony would have a monopoly. If it weren't for GP, would Sony have given a more robust PS+ Extra and Premium subscription service?
Killjoy-NL
Member
And I'd argue that competition between PC - Nintendo - Playstation would be a lot healthier than what we have now.
And regarding Plus, I don't know. I don't care about it and think all those services are rip-offs.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
100% this! And Sony will increase PS+ Premium to $199 a year too. Probably by the end of 2025. It's the name of the game.
hinch7
Member
Short term gain, long term pain. Once traction has picked up and other big publishers go all in on subscriptions and pay walls, thats when the penny will drop. We've seen it with PS Plus like twice in such a short span of time.
Now imagine a company thats constantly looking for rapid growth. That spends 69B, two huge publishers later and CEO telling people they are going to charge you for it. Granted if people are happy with paying monthly for stuff they enjoy. But the 'best deal in gaming' mantra isn't going to last very long.
Last edited:
Sorcerer
Member
It's strange, not only will you be paying upwards of $600 for a console (if they exsist in that timeframe anymore) but you will also be paying $600 a year to sub. Crazy. I hope pc never gets this way or its over for gaming for me. Of course, I am hitting ancient/dinosaur status, so I might not see this!!! LOL!!!I am relieved. $70 game feels like a bargain now
Last edited:
Shadowstar39
Member
Thankfully backlogs exist. Between Steam/GOG, older games on pc dating back to the 1980s, PS1-2-3-4-5, GC, Wii, Switch, gb, gba, ds, 3ds, psp, vita, older retro consoles... yeah 1000+ games many not finished in my 44 years of living 40 years of video gaming. I think I will be fine, only problem is if hardware dies. Already can't access my ps3 library due to faulty blutooth/wifi chip that is stuck to the motherboard.
PC though always has ways and means to get work arounds going, and steam deck has been amazing for backlogs, especially ones that go back generations.
SenkiDala
Member
I like how a thread like this, makes posts more than the ones about Sony raising the PS+ price by 30% every year last years. Because Sony rising prices is "eehhh it's okkkkkk, 150 a year is alright, no problem honestly", but MS talking about the WILL, we dunno when rise the price, it's the end of the world.
These hyperbolic statements are too much for me, lol. Peacing out.
Last edited: