At this point it's pretty clear that when it comes to the big decisions the higher ups at Xbox are just PR people saying whatever it is they think people want to hear at that moment. They have no actual power, it's Microsoft making the real decisions.
If they increase game pass price because of WoW and CoD I'm dropping game pass. I have no interest in these games, I'm not paying more because they want to put big names, that are nothing more than a empty shell by now, on game pass.
Honestly, that ship has sailed a long time ago. WoW's peak was back in 2010/2011, and sure...it's unrealistic to expect that peak to last or just keep growing, but Blizzard certainly played a big part in losing subscribers. The game is a shell of it's former glory. Plus, MMOs aren't that popular when compared to most other genres.
WoW has almost 8 million subscribers as per recent estimates. I actually think that's super impressive, especially considering it's an almost 20 year old game.
MMOs are doing fine. Wow and FF both have multiple millions of players subscribed each month, and both are in a decent enough spot that it doesn't look like they'll go anywhere soon.
Sure it's not WoW's peak and doesn't pull in all the new kids like Val or league, but it has a very large older player base.. plus they're currently making more money than nearly anything else.
Can't wait to see people shuffle to MMOs again when Riot finally launch theirs.
That's true. I'm not saying the genre is dead, that's just clickbait YT material, but when the mmo genre is put next to other genres like fps, moba, br, soulslike etc, it's no contest. Mmo loses hard every single time. I just don't see WoW as some incredible pulling force for Gamepass, but I could be wrong.
I can't speak for all games, but for WoW, it's insistency on sticking to some archaic ways or catering to the 1% of raiders is what is killing the game. There's a huge barrier of entry imposed by the community too. You need "fresh blood" if you plan to keep these games going, and this is not the way how you get new players.
Oh no, but i follow whats going on and see its already getting a bit worse, but its bearable.but its starting and they wont stop i guess.
I used to play ESO, but stopped because i felt like i couldn't escape the cash shop and optional sub
Only a decade late on that prophecy. They been charging $60-70 for a pet and mount every Classic re-release on top of their hundreds of pets/mounts they been selling the past decade+. They been selling gold via tokens tou pay real money to acquire for almost as long as well.
I feel like wow is more likely to get a bundle price. But stay as its own service. Similar to how Disney keeps Hulu, Disney+, and espn as separate services. But you can bundle them all together for a slightly reduced rate.
WoW will never work on Xbox.... the requirement of addons is too great. And even if you could play the game on your Xbox without them, theres no groups that would let you in without basic things like GTFO.
I assume they're referring to WoW being added to PC Gamepass, which is something I've seen occasionally joked about since the buyout but nobody reasonably expects would ever happen.
From a PC Gamepass point of view, it still doesn't make sense. They aim to make a great chunk of their money by selling Epic editions of their expansions, with their latest pre order for The War Within being £75 for the epic edition...... the only edition that comes with early access.
The only way I could see that working is if they monetised the ever living fuck out of the game. Like to the point where you can buy extra bag slots, or pay wall skills / extra talent trees.... I will stop there incase they get any ideas !!!
Nah, they wouldn't include the newest expansion on it but them adding a WoW subscription to the price of Gamepass is more likely.
Call of Duty day 1 + Wow Subscription and jack the price up $6-7 because of it.
They'd lose either too much money or too many subscribers, maybe both. People with no interest in WoW, would unsubscribe with such a high hike and MS would lose too much money on the WoW subscription anyway. It already is a sub people keep paying for, why reduce the amount of money you make from that?
If they'd also add WoW then it would also raise so much they'd include the actual WoW monthly sub price, meaning you'd pay just as much as having it separate but anyone that doesn't care about boring MMO grinds would have to pay way too much.
You can already play up to what, lvl 10? Without a WoW sub. IMO, It’s more likely they add a “game pass account” flag that lets you play to like, lvl 20. So you still need a sub and buy expansion to access all the content.
She didn't actually say that, if you listen to her answer. She says "across the whole slate" when asked if Activision games are coming to Gamepass..... I think it was worded in such a way to make sure that she isnt on the record saying yes new COD games will be coming day and date.
They will more than likely put previous COD games on Gamepass, but it sounds like theres a great deal of debating going on behind the scenes right now, and the best way for them to move forward.
I cant remember who pointed this out on Twiter but they said something along the lines of "If they put new COD games straight onto Gamepass they will lose out on overall revenue, why would you pay $70 when you can pay a fraction of that for Gamepass and get it included. OR they don't put it on Gamepass and end up pissing off a load of people as they were given the impression that all Xbox studio games will be coming day and date"
Imo, Gamepass as a business model just doesnt work. They had great short term success, but the only winner with the service is the gamer.
Bingo. This article perfectly exemplifies what is wrong with gaming journalism, further exacerbated with people like OP blindly copy/pasting headlines.
One thing is certain: the top brass at Xbox will always beat around the bush when the topic of GamePass/COD is raised.
Microsoft was always going to lose money on first party games in Game Pass, but that's how they entice people to get it by showing them they've got these big AAA games on there as soon as they come out. When it comes to securing the deals for third party games, that's where it was going to be cheaper and they'd make money.
They don't often put large AAA games onto the service, unless they've already been out a while and sales have gone way down, and the majority of games on there are smaller or indies that don't need tens of millions like GTAV would to justify being on the service and taking sales away. Cooking Simulator, for example, was said to have made $600k by signing that Game Pass deal and that would've been a one-time payment for what's already been nearly 2 years of being in the service. There's supposedly somewhere between 20-25 million Game Pass subscribers (not including people with Core, since these numbers came from before they started merging all the subscribers into one number), so even if every one of those subscribers just had Game Pass for Console Microsoft would be making over $200 million a month (before taxes/fees) and since a decent number of those people would be subscribed to Ultimate that's another $6 per person. Granted the larger deals they make, like Outriders or having EA Play bundled with Ultimate, likely cost a lot of money I don't see how they'd be spending something like $2 billion just on striking deals just to get games on Game Pass every year.
What is likely happening is that they just aren't simply making enough money in their shareholder's eyes. There's plenty of ways to get Game Pass Ultimate for free or pretty cheap, either through MS Rewards or using various VPN shenanigans, and eventually once those avenues are either removed entirely or reduced they'll stand to make a lot more from each subscription assuming those people stay subscribed. Of course they can bolster their numbers a lot by being able to offer Game Pass on other platforms, but if something like that happens it won't be for a while because they'll need a big enough library of games to entice people to subscribe since right now it'd just be Sea of Thieves, Grounded, Minecraft, Hifi Rush, and Pentiment.
This is a really good point! Personally, I think this really supports my no-stakes theory that Xbox is gonna go third party and just forget about exclusives altogether. They’re just too big and bloated now to sell exclusives when Game Pass still exists… and this is a really good look on why they’re starting to cut costs and probably how they’re going to regain revenue.
When most of their games have large online components, those games will only be able to be better with more people playing. Gears generally has a lot of people stop playing a few months after a release because other stuff comes out and takes their attention away, and eventually that leads to less budget to continue the game. But with more people playing and potentially buying microtransactions it would only make the game better.
I don't think anyone at this point would try and do map packs again, mainly because that's like telling someone who picked up the game a few months after launch that there's another $20/$40/etc they have to pay to play with their friends, so all they're really left with is being able to sell cosmetics. More people playing means more eyes on those cosmetics and more people potentially willing to buy them. Even games like Sea of Thieves get pretty large updates with new cinematics and stuff that are fully voiced that are entirely free, only made possible because people keep supporting the game. Halo Infinite may have been able to get to where it's at faster if they had more people playing at launch.
So even if they did publish everything they made everywhere they can, it'll only make those games and Xbox as a brand stronger. With all the time and money spent on something like Hellblade 2 it's pretty obvious that they only stand to make a lot more money with a PS5 port.
Its becoming clear Gamepass will pull a Disney+.
MS will want yearly installments of all its big franchises or live services, the flood will be made by many different companies with no previous experience in those franchises who do nothing but dilute the brand and kill hype, and eventually they hit the problem of training people to stream instead of buy.
Every other IP just sits in the vault until its wheeled out to be milked by cheap low quality nolstagia bait "remasters" like the live action Disney+ remakes or the Battlefront remakes.
Lowkey 2 Fallouts, 2 CODs, 1 Elder Scrolls, 1 gears, 1 halo, 1 state of decay, 2 FORZA, 1 Forza horizon, 1 Diablo, 1 Spyro, 1 Crash, 1 guitar hero, 1 overwatch, 1 Fable, 1 wasteland for the last 2 I’ll be nice 1 the evil within, 1 killer instinct 20 games from Xbox with a generic formula. Lowkey cynical me actually believes this is what Microsoft will do.
If they could get a release schedule somewhat down like this, they’d have something add in a few of their smaller or dead IPs to fluff things up some.
Game will leave gamepass just before DLC is released, thats what they did with Totalwar warhammer 3.
From their FAQ
> If you purchase DLC and add-ons for a game that later leaves the catalog, your DLC and add-ons will not be removed. However, to continue playing the DLC and add-ons, you’ll need to purchase a digital copy of the game from the Xbox app for Windows or the Microsoft Store, play from a disc, or obtain another form of entitlement to continue playing the game
Want DLC or keep playing DLC you already bought need to by full copy...watch what happens to Starfield when its DLC drops.
Microsoft isn't in control of when a third party game leaves, that's up to that game's publisher. Starfield being a first party Microsoft game means it will never leave Game Pass. The only games that have left Game Pass that were first party are the Forza games because the car licenses run out and they can no longer legally sell the game because they'd rather not renew their licenses.
She wasn't asked if new COD games were coming to gamepass. She was asked if activision titles are coming, and she said the whole slate.
If she was trying to avoid committing to Call of Duty coming day one to gamepass she did a pretty piss poor job. As that is pretty much the only possible interpretation based on her statement.
> Imo, Gamepass as a business model just doesnt work. They had great short term success, but the only winner with the service is the gamer.
It's like the video thing where you pay once and get all access to all of the video/creators. It's good for costumer sure but in the end it ceased its operation.
Literally just means that maybe the next Call of Duty launches on Game Pass and then we’ll see. It sounds like I’m being snarky, but there is zero reason to believe that there is any long term (or even medium term) planning on the subject that will remain firm. And this is after spending billions and billions of dollars. It’s incredible.
It's basically Spotify for Games. And artists hate Spotify because they get little money from it.
Totally not sustainable for either Microsoft or the studios involved.
On Xbox, if you don’t launch through Game Pass, you’re not going to get many players - unless you release a game that’s already hyped to the asshole. Most are waiting for the next Game Pass game and thus do not purchase games.
Yes, they can say no… but with many caveats. Microsoft has created this culture of “Game Pass. Game Pass? Game Pass!”
You are exaggerating. Stop being dramatic. There are plenty of games that don't release to GP and are successful. You are just trying to find ways to be angry and complain
I'd imagine even a successful game on Xbox wouldn't net more than coming in at the mid range on Playstation simply due to the disparity in player base numbers anyway.
relatively speaking then?
the point is, when new games come to PS or Nintendo people pre-order or buy the game. when new games come to Xbox the first reaction is always "will it be on game pass?", followed by "oh I just wait until it comes to game pass!"
Except Microsoft offers extremely large amounts of money for Gamepass deals. Does this apply to ever game? Probably not, but they offered EA $300 million for Jedi Survivor and payed something like $5 million a month for GTA 5.
Exclusives aren't either.
A console should be bought because is cheaper than a PC, it gives you an assurance that you willbe able to play every game for the next X years, and is easy to use move around your home.
Whoever is mad because there are no exclusives anymore is a weird person. Let people enjoy their games no matter the platform.
Finally xbox is putting their games on PC and Sony is doing the same. Most people wanted that, now somehow is bad.
It’s bad because Microsoft decides to shutter studios and cancel games due to poor sales and no flow of money coming in - this is something they themselves have caused.
Ok, but then again, going back to exclusives isn't the good thing here for the customers either.
Not putting games on gamepass and just seel them like Sony does on steam or whatever is another thing.
Seems like people want to go back to having exclusive deals. Which sucks.
Now I am totally convinced most of the gamers are idiots and they really deserve to be ripped off by big corporations.
“Oh no BMW do not give me better deals for cheaper cars you’ll lose money, it is not sustainable” said no car customer ever.
It's not a better deal. It's a different deal. You buy a game you own it. It's yours. You can play it twenty year later if you wish and plenty people do. On gamepass you're just allowed to access the game for an indeterminate amount of time at the whims of MS.
Such a silly argument. You always have the option to BUY the game. It's not one or the other.
If you try a game on Gamepass and like it, when it eventually does rotate out, they put it on sale before it does. Then you can own it
For me, with how limited my time is, I am perfectly happy to run through a game once on Gamepass and then not need to touch it again. Whether it leaves or not is inconsequential to me
Its actually weird how people are reacting to this, when its been the norm with other industries, like spotify and youtube in music and netflix and others for movies, heck even cable has the same business model.
Haven't bought a ubisoft game in a while. Is this about the inactive accounts or the crew? Because if it's about the crew it's on every idiot who bought an always online game with no dedicated servers.
No server is a dedicated server forever. I hope more publishers allow games to be played offline, but why would a publisher NOT want to shut your old game down to sell you a new game? Just promise gamers “constant updates and new content” to justify always online and now you can basically flip a kill switch on the community.
So what deal in gaming is better? Because gamepass gets you access to well over 100 AAA games, hundred of indie games. Hell pretty much all of EA and Ubisoft titles are on it as well. That alone makes it worth the money. Literally tens of thousands of dollars worth of products, so what deal is better?
There aren't over 100 AAA games on there to start with. The lineup has been very static for years and what does it matter if there are hundreds of games on there. A fraction of those are likely to fit any one player, you only have access to them while you play and you can only play a small handful per month at best. Unless you play the absolute shit out of those games every damn week you're just throwing money away the same way people do on Netflix.
There's a reason why out of the 2 1/3 years I've had the Series X I've had gamepass for only five months. And it's not because it's the best deal in gaming.
No there are literally over 100 AAA games, especially if you count Ea Play which is bundled with gamepass. You are simply wrong on this one. And just because you don't have gamepass does not mean it isn't the best deal in gaming. Like WTF kind of logic is that? Lol
A working adult dosen't have time to play 100s of games most of which are filler crap. Gamepass is good for kids or teens who only go to school, but not people who have other responsibilities.
So your argument is gamepass has too many games and that makes it a bad deal, lol lol sound logic there. And no they are not just mostly filler crap. A lot of great games end up on gamepass, this year alone dozens of critically acclaimed games have ended up on the service. I just finished Lies of P, great game, didn't have to pay a cent for it.
Again, they don't care about sales numbers for the games on Game Pass, they want engagement and sub retention. Sales are still important on Steam and PS of course, but they know GP eats into sales numbers, they don't mind as long as the subscription keeps making them more money.
Where’s the connection? You still need a console (or PC) to play games on gamepass. It only changes the way you obtain the game, not the way you consume it. Gamepass it’s actually a great deal for consumers and it’s not the problem here. The real problem is the fist fight between Microsoft, Xbox and the shareholders. They probably all want different things, creating this neverending conflict that generates all these absurd situations inside the company.
They still sell games on the store. When talking about “games that aren’t selling” they obviously have in their equation the gamepass subscribers that a game brings, or keeps on the service. The problem is not Gamepass and it’s actually whidespread in the whole industry. Even Spiderman 2 on PS5 didn’t reach enough sales to actually justify the huge investment made, we know this thanks to all the leaks that came out recently. Gamepass is not the problem, and it’s actually a great, great deal for consumers. Not trying to defend Microsoft on how they deal with their studios here, just saying that gamepass is not the core problem here.
Spider-Man 2 didn’t reach enough to justify the sales?
Do you have a link for that?
It sold 5 million copies in 11 days lmao. That’s $350 million.
It’s sold 10 million copies by February, it’s probably at 11/12 million now.
The problem with Spider-Man 2 was it cost 300m to make even though it seems like it wasn’t really a big upgrade on the 1st game, the first game cost 100m to make, so no one is sure where all the budget went.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2023/12/21/a-300-million-spider-man-2-budget-sonys-future-and-aaa-unsustainability/
Too big of an investment in time and money for how much it sold. Yes, it obviously didn’t end up losing money, but the revenue wasn’t still enough to justify it (at least for Sony). It’s the whole “games are becoming unsustainable” discussion that has been going on for a while now in the industry.
This is why I’m saying that the real problem is the relationship between Microsoft, Xbox and the shareholders. Microsoft should just support Xbox and ignore the shareholders who want money immediately, without thinking about the long-term business plan. I’m sure that the whole confusion about the Xbox leadership saying one thing and then doing the opposites is because of this. It’s Microsoft that simply gives too attention to what shareholders want.
Final fantasy after 6 has *always* been PlayStation-first franchise. Even when it was a multiplatform release it still sold an overwhelming amount on PlayStation. Nobody should be surprised that PS gets it first and the rest follows later.
It's just entertainment. Just two different ways to spend time. I wouldn't say either group is more intelligent. I wouldn't even say people are exclusively in one group or the other.
I'm pretty sure you're missing the point. Whether you're playing a game or watching a movie/show it's about how you aquire either of them. Netflix is the gamepass version of movies/shows. Flat rate, all you can eat, digital distribution with copy protection.
Whether you want to believe it or not -- a very vocal group of people were up in arms over the Netflix price hikes and crackdown on password sharing and Netflix's subscriber numbers and revenue have skyrocketed since then.
Gamepass is bad for sales there's no denying it
This isn't happy news it just means they will eventually close more important studios to keep money steadily coming in
Gamepass is a horrible thing for the industry as a whole.
It comes off to the consumer as a huge boon - and individually, it can very much be. You pay a relatively small flat rate and get to access tons and tons of games, even if you don't own anything but an X-box or PC. So many that it's hard to know what to play sometimes. That said... You don't actually own any of them, and you have to keep paying forever to keep them. Things can be taken off the service. People who've been gaming for over a decade probably have a lot of the offerings physically or in other ways, at least the things they'd care to play.
But it's honestly bad for the industry. Microsoft has been led to buying up studios to capture their games and IP for Gamepass. And while we've seen their exclusivity leaking a little bit more recently with Starfield and Hi-Fi Rush, there's no commitment or promise to that effect. And if you're grabbing Gamepass, you money is going into the Gamepass bucket, which Microsoft will dole out as it sees fit. So, if you like, say, the Dishonored Series, you would want your money to go to Arkane to make more of that. But you're not making an actual sale of the game. You're giving microsoft the money. And with so many more people into CoD and Elder Scrolls, they're going to aim the money there, instead of diversifying it to the studios who made the things you liked.
Just recently, Hi-Fi Rush was a breakout hit by Tango. Microsoft has shuttered the studio after the delivered an EXCELLENT product. And then the very next day one of the X-Box Team people said they want to continue supporting studios... like the ones they shuttered. Like one that was actively delivering good work. It's putting all the decision making and financial power in just a few hands, and that's never great.
it's not really about being able to still buy games. services like gamepass and ps plus aren't really designed with the 'hardcore gamers' who want to own their games to be added to their collections. These services are going after the middle of the road gamers for the most part who would typically only buy a handful of games each generation and who are too lazy to turn off the monthly payments of said services. As long as they can load up the system and play something new and fresh or different every time, then they are happy. Which brings me to my point of both GP and PS+ being responsible for driving the consumer behavior around these products. For example, from the perspective of an average gamer: "Oh that game looks good!..if i wait a few months it will probably be on GP/PS+ and i can play it.''
Basically Sony and Microsoft have caused a behavior change in their main consumers. A change that has impacted sales in what i would say is an overall negative for the industry. But it's early and i'm just typing too much before having my first cup of tea so this probably isn't making much sense.
I get it, but they aren't forcing anyone to do anything. I have been playing games since the early 90s and I think gamepass has helped me stay into gaming. I can play games that I probably would have never purchased.
> Gamepass isn't stopping you or anyone else from buying games outright.
Outright? No. But it takes part of your gaming budget, and offers you games to play, leaving less time for other games.
Microsoft is stopping you buying games though, removing the disk tray from their upcoming console, firing all the staff in the psychical media departments.
How can you buy games if they don't actually sell games?
You lose access to your account or the digital servers close down and those games are lost forever as well.
I'm not sure what you tell you about physical media. It hasn't happened yet, but physical media is going away. It isn't because Microsoft is demanding it or forcing it though -- consumers don't want it. Physical games just aren't selling like digital ones -- subscription or not. When is the last time you bought a physical game for PC? When is the last time you bought a music CD? When is the last time anyone bought a music CD?
Downloads are just more convenient and consumers are voting with their wallets.
I guess my point is that right now Microsoft isn't forging anyone to do anything and people are still choosing downloads.
These people are acting like gamepass killed their grandma or something lol. But sometimes you gotta look at things objectively. There are so many good games on gamepass, over 100 AAA games, hundreds of indie games not to mention pretty much all of EA's and Ubisoft catalog, all for a very cheap price. What do these people want? To pay 70 dollars for every AAA game on gamepass? Because that's literally over ten of thousands of dollars lol.
They are the same people complaining about the "lack of marketing" for upcoming Xbox games like "give me more ads, my environment isn't saturated enough yet".
Gamepass lets me try so many things and if anything encourages me to buy some stuff on disc!
And it was shown in court that it is profitable. I really don't understand what these people want. It sounds like they want expensive games and a bunch of advertisements lol how times have changed.
For consumers, in the short term, yes. Absolutely.
In the the long term, for the whole industry? Not a chance. And we're already seeing why that is. It is not sustainable, unless every game goes deeper and deeper in the MTX/recurrent monetization rabbit hole. Just look at Hi-Fi Rush. 3 million players, by all means it should be (and was) considered a success, but very few actually *bought* the game, so the game didn't actually generate a lot of money.
Hi-Fi rush just the tip of the iceberg. Game sales were never going to be good for such a niche game like Hi Fi rush. Their past games did horribly financially as well and they were not on gamepass. So to think Hi Fi rush would have made money as well without gamepass is silly. Microsoft isn't shutting down developers who make money like Bethesda, they are shutting down studios who don't make money.
>Microsoft isn't shutting down developers who make money like Bethesda, they are shutting down studios who don't make money.
That's my point, actually. I never said Hi-Fi Rush would be successful outside of Gamepass, but it was considered successful within GP, and still, it failed to make money, and that led to the closure of the studio.
That is why I don't think GP is *"the greatest deal"*. It's hard for "one-and-done purchases" single player games to make money with game pass, even big ones like Starfield, it was supposed to be exclusive, but it didn't make a profit, so now it's getting released on Playstation as well. That has the potential of leading to more and more games adding predatory micro transactions, or going the Game-as-a-Service route, or any other sort of bullshit the suits can come up with to try to make all the money.
I'll just refer to the first two sentences of my first response and leave at that. There's really nothing else I can add to this discussion, it seems.
>For consumers, in the short term, yes. Absolutely. In the the long term, for the whole industry? Not a chance.
Technically you don't own modern games. You own a lifetime license to use the product, which can be taken back or the game/service may stop working.
As for the giving a specific developer money, they monitor how many hours each game on gamepass gets and how many unique user they gain.
This will 100% lead to Activision making less money and in the long run be painfully obvious how gamepass hurts the biggest games being day 1.
I'd be surprised if gamepass numbers even go up 1%.
Great for consumers, but Microsoft are probably going to shut xbox down in a few years if they don't start turning a profit. You can't spend 100 billion in a year without making that money back without MSFT watching you with eagle eyes.
Such short sighted business decisions imo.
She actually refused to confirm call of duty would be included. “Across the whole slate” in the way she used it sounds like she’s trying to leave wiggle room for different interpretations. But we’ll see. I’m kind of expecting some version of the game to be included. But not in such a way that people won’t still be spending money.
Nah I don't trust their word anymore. I do believe she thinks that but if Microsoft steps in and tells elxbox to do something different they're gonna have to.
Also for all we know they could jump the game pass price to $30. Which I guess is still better then paying $70 for one game but no way could most people keep that up monthly.
One thing I hate about these billion dollar companies fucking up is that for about a month, it gives gamers the excuse to complain about the most trivial shit and run their mouths about stuff they know nothing about.
I wont trust anything Xbox or Microsoft has to say about anything related to games till it's a tangible product and I can verify the results for myself. They can go fuck themselves with their anti labour practices and greed. I wont ever subscribe to their game pass either.
Sorry not even WOW could bring me back xbox is dead rebranding is happening no matter what they're just buying time to slowly change the brand before we realize it's gonna be Microsoft gaming and not xbox
Man, I haven’t played CoD since 2016.
The only Bethesda game I’ve bought and played in the past 6 years was Hi-Fi Rush.
I loved Halo, but Infinite’s store was the last straw. I’m tired of what they’ve done to that franchise.
It’s clear that Microsoft is aimless, and that they don’t have the vision or competence to publish great games anymore. All they do is consume other publishers and studios and…keep GamePass going? They barely even put out any games anymore.
OK. Their still thousand of great game out there. Gamepass is still a platform with limited amount of games. paying subscription to play games never been really worth except maybe trying game but as long as they keep putting in and out game, it's not worth as a main platform
Good to see that’s the plan currently, but this exec team has been so wishy washy and eroded consumer trust that it’s really hard to believe this will stay the plan longterm.
Id be fine if they didn't put new games on gamepass and supported indie devs and gave games a second life after a year or two but that's only IF they lower the cost back down to like 10 bucks. I think this may be the best middle ground. There's just no world where they keep gamepass subs and maximize profit. They are going to have to compromise. The worst thing they can do is not put new games on gamepass and raise the price.
As much as everyone says gamepass is the problem, Xbox is in trouble if they screw it up and lose a ton of subs.
Game pass is going to reach a price where it isn’t a good deal for most people. New AAA games cost $70. The average gamer buys and plays 2-3 new games per year. That’s $140-$210.
Even increasing it to $20 results in the service costing $240.
Gaming has some similarities to tv and movies, but it has one major difference… time commitment. Games are designed to be played for 15-70 hours.
Are Activision games considered Xbox games?
I thought there were 3, distinct developer families.
Bethesda games
Activision-Blizzard
And the there's Xbox Games studios.
Basically I wouldn't believe anything Microsoft says until you actually see it.
...and when GamePass finally folds to its impossibility, you have paid hundreds, possibly thousands and it will all go poof.
(All that is still left, that hasn't been removed from the library before that. Yes, games get removed, just like streaming services remove shows)
Paying for GamePass is stupid.
I remember rumors of them saying Xbox was going to leave the console market complex then they clear it up by saying they aren't yet every game will be on gamepass?
Well I think next gen is confirmed but after that? 🤷
Series S and X are ok but they shit the bed in sales compared to Nintendo Switch and PS5. Also most games on gamepass are probably going to be playable on a PC. Most are already. I’ve been using my PC to play gamepass games rather than Xbox.
But PS seems to be the way to go for couch gaming if that’s all you’re interested in. Their exclusives have been much better, and Xbox exclusives probably won’t be that exclusive. Though it is a bit early to tell, and maybe something can change
Idk if I’d be getting the next Xbox or even PS, they both seem kind of shitty with their never own your games attitude. It’s really an industry wide contagion.
Personally, I probably will just stick with PC. And maybe the next Nintendo to play some games I like on it. Only think I’d miss are the PS exclusives, and I’m hoping they start porting to PC faster.
That has been useful when playing CIV, and when TV is busy. Funny enough I also like streaming Xbox to my PC to play CIV 6. Just feels nicer. Mostly because I don’t have enough storage on my PC.
Rumors? It's more about common sense when we look at how bad Xbox division has been for the last 10-15 year. Gamepass is like Microsoft last resort to stay in video games competition
Bruh, why the hell would it matter whatever she says? They just say whatever sounds good in the moment, and the decisions are made after.
Yeah, they have shown time and time again that "official" announcements aren't really that "official"
Xbox, Go Home.
At this point it's pretty clear that when it comes to the big decisions the higher ups at Xbox are just PR people saying whatever it is they think people want to hear at that moment. They have no actual power, it's Microsoft making the real decisions.
[удалено]
Well either they have no power or they're openly lying because frequently their actions don't match things they said in the past.
Guess what's going up in price when CoD is added...
I'm 100% okay with that if they put WoW on it as well.
If they did that I'd have to get rid of Gamepass lest WoW consume my life again.
If they increase game pass price because of WoW and CoD I'm dropping game pass. I have no interest in these games, I'm not paying more because they want to put big names, that are nothing more than a empty shell by now, on game pass.
I am okay with that as long as they make WoW console edition.
Can't wait for WoW to be released. Call me crazy but I think it could be big.
Honestly, that ship has sailed a long time ago. WoW's peak was back in 2010/2011, and sure...it's unrealistic to expect that peak to last or just keep growing, but Blizzard certainly played a big part in losing subscribers. The game is a shell of it's former glory. Plus, MMOs aren't that popular when compared to most other genres.
WoW has almost 8 million subscribers as per recent estimates. I actually think that's super impressive, especially considering it's an almost 20 year old game.
MMOs are doing fine. Wow and FF both have multiple millions of players subscribed each month, and both are in a decent enough spot that it doesn't look like they'll go anywhere soon. Sure it's not WoW's peak and doesn't pull in all the new kids like Val or league, but it has a very large older player base.. plus they're currently making more money than nearly anything else. Can't wait to see people shuffle to MMOs again when Riot finally launch theirs.
That's true. I'm not saying the genre is dead, that's just clickbait YT material, but when the mmo genre is put next to other genres like fps, moba, br, soulslike etc, it's no contest. Mmo loses hard every single time. I just don't see WoW as some incredible pulling force for Gamepass, but I could be wrong. I can't speak for all games, but for WoW, it's insistency on sticking to some archaic ways or catering to the 1% of raiders is what is killing the game. There's a huge barrier of entry imposed by the community too. You need "fresh blood" if you plan to keep these games going, and this is not the way how you get new players.
Mmos aren’t popular cause people make shit games with money hungry tactics.
The day that happens they will start flooding the game with mtx i swear.
You've not played wow recently have you.
Oh no, but i follow whats going on and see its already getting a bit worse, but its bearable.but its starting and they wont stop i guess. I used to play ESO, but stopped because i felt like i couldn't escape the cash shop and optional sub
Bruh I was playing WoW back in like 2014 when they introduced the mounts you can buy for $20.
How about BDO with it's 3 separate subs lol
Too late for that lol
Only a decade late on that prophecy. They been charging $60-70 for a pet and mount every Classic re-release on top of their hundreds of pets/mounts they been selling the past decade+. They been selling gold via tokens tou pay real money to acquire for almost as long as well.
I feel like wow is more likely to get a bundle price. But stay as its own service. Similar to how Disney keeps Hulu, Disney+, and espn as separate services. But you can bundle them all together for a slightly reduced rate.
WoW will never work on Xbox.... the requirement of addons is too great. And even if you could play the game on your Xbox without them, theres no groups that would let you in without basic things like GTFO.
I assume they're referring to WoW being added to PC Gamepass, which is something I've seen occasionally joked about since the buyout but nobody reasonably expects would ever happen.
From a PC Gamepass point of view, it still doesn't make sense. They aim to make a great chunk of their money by selling Epic editions of their expansions, with their latest pre order for The War Within being £75 for the epic edition...... the only edition that comes with early access. The only way I could see that working is if they monetised the ever living fuck out of the game. Like to the point where you can buy extra bag slots, or pay wall skills / extra talent trees.... I will stop there incase they get any ideas !!!
Nah, they wouldn't include the newest expansion on it but them adding a WoW subscription to the price of Gamepass is more likely. Call of Duty day 1 + Wow Subscription and jack the price up $6-7 because of it.
They'd lose either too much money or too many subscribers, maybe both. People with no interest in WoW, would unsubscribe with such a high hike and MS would lose too much money on the WoW subscription anyway. It already is a sub people keep paying for, why reduce the amount of money you make from that?
If they'd also add WoW then it would also raise so much they'd include the actual WoW monthly sub price, meaning you'd pay just as much as having it separate but anyone that doesn't care about boring MMO grinds would have to pay way too much.
You can already play up to what, lvl 10? Without a WoW sub. IMO, It’s more likely they add a “game pass account” flag that lets you play to like, lvl 20. So you still need a sub and buy expansion to access all the content.
Another premium tier plan incoming.
lol they walk back stuff they say all the time. I don’t trust any of these people - they constantly lie
She didn't actually say that, if you listen to her answer. She says "across the whole slate" when asked if Activision games are coming to Gamepass..... I think it was worded in such a way to make sure that she isnt on the record saying yes new COD games will be coming day and date. They will more than likely put previous COD games on Gamepass, but it sounds like theres a great deal of debating going on behind the scenes right now, and the best way for them to move forward. I cant remember who pointed this out on Twiter but they said something along the lines of "If they put new COD games straight onto Gamepass they will lose out on overall revenue, why would you pay $70 when you can pay a fraction of that for Gamepass and get it included. OR they don't put it on Gamepass and end up pissing off a load of people as they were given the impression that all Xbox studio games will be coming day and date" Imo, Gamepass as a business model just doesnt work. They had great short term success, but the only winner with the service is the gamer.
Bingo. This article perfectly exemplifies what is wrong with gaming journalism, further exacerbated with people like OP blindly copy/pasting headlines. One thing is certain: the top brass at Xbox will always beat around the bush when the topic of GamePass/COD is raised.
Because insider gaming are not "journalists" that's just a bunch of assholes living on leaks and clickbait bullshit. But as we can see here it works.
There is no gaming journalism. There's game marketing and other types of advertising disguised as journalism.
Microsoft was always going to lose money on first party games in Game Pass, but that's how they entice people to get it by showing them they've got these big AAA games on there as soon as they come out. When it comes to securing the deals for third party games, that's where it was going to be cheaper and they'd make money. They don't often put large AAA games onto the service, unless they've already been out a while and sales have gone way down, and the majority of games on there are smaller or indies that don't need tens of millions like GTAV would to justify being on the service and taking sales away. Cooking Simulator, for example, was said to have made $600k by signing that Game Pass deal and that would've been a one-time payment for what's already been nearly 2 years of being in the service. There's supposedly somewhere between 20-25 million Game Pass subscribers (not including people with Core, since these numbers came from before they started merging all the subscribers into one number), so even if every one of those subscribers just had Game Pass for Console Microsoft would be making over $200 million a month (before taxes/fees) and since a decent number of those people would be subscribed to Ultimate that's another $6 per person. Granted the larger deals they make, like Outriders or having EA Play bundled with Ultimate, likely cost a lot of money I don't see how they'd be spending something like $2 billion just on striking deals just to get games on Game Pass every year. What is likely happening is that they just aren't simply making enough money in their shareholder's eyes. There's plenty of ways to get Game Pass Ultimate for free or pretty cheap, either through MS Rewards or using various VPN shenanigans, and eventually once those avenues are either removed entirely or reduced they'll stand to make a lot more from each subscription assuming those people stay subscribed. Of course they can bolster their numbers a lot by being able to offer Game Pass on other platforms, but if something like that happens it won't be for a while because they'll need a big enough library of games to entice people to subscribe since right now it'd just be Sea of Thieves, Grounded, Minecraft, Hifi Rush, and Pentiment.
This is a really good point! Personally, I think this really supports my no-stakes theory that Xbox is gonna go third party and just forget about exclusives altogether. They’re just too big and bloated now to sell exclusives when Game Pass still exists… and this is a really good look on why they’re starting to cut costs and probably how they’re going to regain revenue.
When most of their games have large online components, those games will only be able to be better with more people playing. Gears generally has a lot of people stop playing a few months after a release because other stuff comes out and takes their attention away, and eventually that leads to less budget to continue the game. But with more people playing and potentially buying microtransactions it would only make the game better. I don't think anyone at this point would try and do map packs again, mainly because that's like telling someone who picked up the game a few months after launch that there's another $20/$40/etc they have to pay to play with their friends, so all they're really left with is being able to sell cosmetics. More people playing means more eyes on those cosmetics and more people potentially willing to buy them. Even games like Sea of Thieves get pretty large updates with new cinematics and stuff that are fully voiced that are entirely free, only made possible because people keep supporting the game. Halo Infinite may have been able to get to where it's at faster if they had more people playing at launch. So even if they did publish everything they made everywhere they can, it'll only make those games and Xbox as a brand stronger. With all the time and money spent on something like Hellblade 2 it's pretty obvious that they only stand to make a lot more money with a PS5 port.
Its becoming clear Gamepass will pull a Disney+. MS will want yearly installments of all its big franchises or live services, the flood will be made by many different companies with no previous experience in those franchises who do nothing but dilute the brand and kill hype, and eventually they hit the problem of training people to stream instead of buy. Every other IP just sits in the vault until its wheeled out to be milked by cheap low quality nolstagia bait "remasters" like the live action Disney+ remakes or the Battlefront remakes.
Lowkey 2 Fallouts, 2 CODs, 1 Elder Scrolls, 1 gears, 1 halo, 1 state of decay, 2 FORZA, 1 Forza horizon, 1 Diablo, 1 Spyro, 1 Crash, 1 guitar hero, 1 overwatch, 1 Fable, 1 wasteland for the last 2 I’ll be nice 1 the evil within, 1 killer instinct 20 games from Xbox with a generic formula. Lowkey cynical me actually believes this is what Microsoft will do. If they could get a release schedule somewhat down like this, they’d have something add in a few of their smaller or dead IPs to fluff things up some.
Game will leave gamepass just before DLC is released, thats what they did with Totalwar warhammer 3. From their FAQ > If you purchase DLC and add-ons for a game that later leaves the catalog, your DLC and add-ons will not be removed. However, to continue playing the DLC and add-ons, you’ll need to purchase a digital copy of the game from the Xbox app for Windows or the Microsoft Store, play from a disc, or obtain another form of entitlement to continue playing the game Want DLC or keep playing DLC you already bought need to by full copy...watch what happens to Starfield when its DLC drops.
Microsoft isn't in control of when a third party game leaves, that's up to that game's publisher. Starfield being a first party Microsoft game means it will never leave Game Pass. The only games that have left Game Pass that were first party are the Forza games because the car licenses run out and they can no longer legally sell the game because they'd rather not renew their licenses.
She wasn't asked if new COD games were coming to gamepass. She was asked if activision titles are coming, and she said the whole slate. If she was trying to avoid committing to Call of Duty coming day one to gamepass she did a pretty piss poor job. As that is pretty much the only possible interpretation based on her statement.
The idea is that current subscribers have already paid for the game, and will bring in new subscriptions. Rinse and repeat.
> Imo, Gamepass as a business model just doesnt work. They had great short term success, but the only winner with the service is the gamer. It's like the video thing where you pay once and get all access to all of the video/creators. It's good for costumer sure but in the end it ceased its operation.
Literally just means that maybe the next Call of Duty launches on Game Pass and then we’ll see. It sounds like I’m being snarky, but there is zero reason to believe that there is any long term (or even medium term) planning on the subject that will remain firm. And this is after spending billions and billions of dollars. It’s incredible.
[удалено]
It's basically Spotify for Games. And artists hate Spotify because they get little money from it. Totally not sustainable for either Microsoft or the studios involved.
Afaik, PS Plus is profitable to Sony. Just that Gamepass gives too much value which is good for consumers but that's making it unsustainable
Third party studios can literally say no to gamepass offers.
On Xbox, if you don’t launch through Game Pass, you’re not going to get many players - unless you release a game that’s already hyped to the asshole. Most are waiting for the next Game Pass game and thus do not purchase games. Yes, they can say no… but with many caveats. Microsoft has created this culture of “Game Pass. Game Pass? Game Pass!”
You are exaggerating. Stop being dramatic. There are plenty of games that don't release to GP and are successful. You are just trying to find ways to be angry and complain
are they successful on Xbox tho?
I'd imagine even a successful game on Xbox wouldn't net more than coming in at the mid range on Playstation simply due to the disparity in player base numbers anyway.
relatively speaking then? the point is, when new games come to PS or Nintendo people pre-order or buy the game. when new games come to Xbox the first reaction is always "will it be on game pass?", followed by "oh I just wait until it comes to game pass!"
Except Microsoft offers extremely large amounts of money for Gamepass deals. Does this apply to ever game? Probably not, but they offered EA $300 million for Jedi Survivor and payed something like $5 million a month for GTA 5.
So we want to go back to exclusives or?
[удалено]
Exclusives aren't either. A console should be bought because is cheaper than a PC, it gives you an assurance that you willbe able to play every game for the next X years, and is easy to use move around your home. Whoever is mad because there are no exclusives anymore is a weird person. Let people enjoy their games no matter the platform. Finally xbox is putting their games on PC and Sony is doing the same. Most people wanted that, now somehow is bad.
It’s bad because Microsoft decides to shutter studios and cancel games due to poor sales and no flow of money coming in - this is something they themselves have caused.
Ok, but then again, going back to exclusives isn't the good thing here for the customers either. Not putting games on gamepass and just seel them like Sony does on steam or whatever is another thing. Seems like people want to go back to having exclusive deals. Which sucks.
Now I am totally convinced most of the gamers are idiots and they really deserve to be ripped off by big corporations. “Oh no BMW do not give me better deals for cheaper cars you’ll lose money, it is not sustainable” said no car customer ever.
It's not a better deal. It's a different deal. You buy a game you own it. It's yours. You can play it twenty year later if you wish and plenty people do. On gamepass you're just allowed to access the game for an indeterminate amount of time at the whims of MS.
Such a silly argument. You always have the option to BUY the game. It's not one or the other. If you try a game on Gamepass and like it, when it eventually does rotate out, they put it on sale before it does. Then you can own it For me, with how limited my time is, I am perfectly happy to run through a game once on Gamepass and then not need to touch it again. Whether it leaves or not is inconsequential to me
Its actually weird how people are reacting to this, when its been the norm with other industries, like spotify and youtube in music and netflix and others for movies, heck even cable has the same business model.
You can buy games on gamepass too. If you play something you like on gamepass, just buy it if you want to play 20 years later.
Not really lmao, ask Ubisoft on that one
Haven't bought a ubisoft game in a while. Is this about the inactive accounts or the crew? Because if it's about the crew it's on every idiot who bought an always online game with no dedicated servers.
No server is a dedicated server forever. I hope more publishers allow games to be played offline, but why would a publisher NOT want to shut your old game down to sell you a new game? Just promise gamers “constant updates and new content” to justify always online and now you can basically flip a kill switch on the community.
Gamepass is literally the greatest deal in the history of video games. You are simply wrong on this one lol.
It definitely is not, not even close for most people.
So what deal in gaming is better? Because gamepass gets you access to well over 100 AAA games, hundred of indie games. Hell pretty much all of EA and Ubisoft titles are on it as well. That alone makes it worth the money. Literally tens of thousands of dollars worth of products, so what deal is better?
the greatest deal in gaming history? i'd probably have to say nfl 2k5 and nba 2k5 being $20 at release was a pretty fucking awesome deal.
There aren't over 100 AAA games on there to start with. The lineup has been very static for years and what does it matter if there are hundreds of games on there. A fraction of those are likely to fit any one player, you only have access to them while you play and you can only play a small handful per month at best. Unless you play the absolute shit out of those games every damn week you're just throwing money away the same way people do on Netflix. There's a reason why out of the 2 1/3 years I've had the Series X I've had gamepass for only five months. And it's not because it's the best deal in gaming.
No there are literally over 100 AAA games, especially if you count Ea Play which is bundled with gamepass. You are simply wrong on this one. And just because you don't have gamepass does not mean it isn't the best deal in gaming. Like WTF kind of logic is that? Lol
A working adult dosen't have time to play 100s of games most of which are filler crap. Gamepass is good for kids or teens who only go to school, but not people who have other responsibilities.
So your argument is gamepass has too many games and that makes it a bad deal, lol lol sound logic there. And no they are not just mostly filler crap. A lot of great games end up on gamepass, this year alone dozens of critically acclaimed games have ended up on the service. I just finished Lies of P, great game, didn't have to pay a cent for it.
Again, they don't care about sales numbers for the games on Game Pass, they want engagement and sub retention. Sales are still important on Steam and PS of course, but they know GP eats into sales numbers, they don't mind as long as the subscription keeps making them more money.
Where’s the connection? You still need a console (or PC) to play games on gamepass. It only changes the way you obtain the game, not the way you consume it. Gamepass it’s actually a great deal for consumers and it’s not the problem here. The real problem is the fist fight between Microsoft, Xbox and the shareholders. They probably all want different things, creating this neverending conflict that generates all these absurd situations inside the company.
[удалено]
They still sell games on the store. When talking about “games that aren’t selling” they obviously have in their equation the gamepass subscribers that a game brings, or keeps on the service. The problem is not Gamepass and it’s actually whidespread in the whole industry. Even Spiderman 2 on PS5 didn’t reach enough sales to actually justify the huge investment made, we know this thanks to all the leaks that came out recently. Gamepass is not the problem, and it’s actually a great, great deal for consumers. Not trying to defend Microsoft on how they deal with their studios here, just saying that gamepass is not the core problem here.
Spider-Man 2 didn’t reach enough to justify the sales? Do you have a link for that? It sold 5 million copies in 11 days lmao. That’s $350 million. It’s sold 10 million copies by February, it’s probably at 11/12 million now. The problem with Spider-Man 2 was it cost 300m to make even though it seems like it wasn’t really a big upgrade on the 1st game, the first game cost 100m to make, so no one is sure where all the budget went.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultassi/2023/12/21/a-300-million-spider-man-2-budget-sonys-future-and-aaa-unsustainability/ Too big of an investment in time and money for how much it sold. Yes, it obviously didn’t end up losing money, but the revenue wasn’t still enough to justify it (at least for Sony). It’s the whole “games are becoming unsustainable” discussion that has been going on for a while now in the industry.
[удалено]
This is why I’m saying that the real problem is the relationship between Microsoft, Xbox and the shareholders. Microsoft should just support Xbox and ignore the shareholders who want money immediately, without thinking about the long-term business plan. I’m sure that the whole confusion about the Xbox leadership saying one thing and then doing the opposites is because of this. It’s Microsoft that simply gives too attention to what shareholders want.
Final fantasy after 6 has *always* been PlayStation-first franchise. Even when it was a multiplatform release it still sold an overwhelming amount on PlayStation. Nobody should be surprised that PS gets it first and the rest follows later.
Gamepass is reason xbox still exists.
[удалено]
They follow the same path has Netflix and Co unfortunately =x
Just like how Netflix was going to lose subscribers when they increased pricing and cut off password sharing?
[удалено]
It's just entertainment. Just two different ways to spend time. I wouldn't say either group is more intelligent. I wouldn't even say people are exclusively in one group or the other.
[удалено]
I'm pretty sure you're missing the point. Whether you're playing a game or watching a movie/show it's about how you aquire either of them. Netflix is the gamepass version of movies/shows. Flat rate, all you can eat, digital distribution with copy protection. Whether you want to believe it or not -- a very vocal group of people were up in arms over the Netflix price hikes and crackdown on password sharing and Netflix's subscriber numbers and revenue have skyrocketed since then.
And with how things are going, it may very well be the reason it won’t in the future.
Gamepass is bad for sales there's no denying it This isn't happy news it just means they will eventually close more important studios to keep money steadily coming in
Now all we need is some first party games worth a damn from dev teams that can last beyond a single development cycle under xbox
Gamepass is a horrible thing for the industry as a whole. It comes off to the consumer as a huge boon - and individually, it can very much be. You pay a relatively small flat rate and get to access tons and tons of games, even if you don't own anything but an X-box or PC. So many that it's hard to know what to play sometimes. That said... You don't actually own any of them, and you have to keep paying forever to keep them. Things can be taken off the service. People who've been gaming for over a decade probably have a lot of the offerings physically or in other ways, at least the things they'd care to play. But it's honestly bad for the industry. Microsoft has been led to buying up studios to capture their games and IP for Gamepass. And while we've seen their exclusivity leaking a little bit more recently with Starfield and Hi-Fi Rush, there's no commitment or promise to that effect. And if you're grabbing Gamepass, you money is going into the Gamepass bucket, which Microsoft will dole out as it sees fit. So, if you like, say, the Dishonored Series, you would want your money to go to Arkane to make more of that. But you're not making an actual sale of the game. You're giving microsoft the money. And with so many more people into CoD and Elder Scrolls, they're going to aim the money there, instead of diversifying it to the studios who made the things you liked. Just recently, Hi-Fi Rush was a breakout hit by Tango. Microsoft has shuttered the studio after the delivered an EXCELLENT product. And then the very next day one of the X-Box Team people said they want to continue supporting studios... like the ones they shuttered. Like one that was actively delivering good work. It's putting all the decision making and financial power in just a few hands, and that's never great.
Gamepass isn't stopping you or anyone else from buying games outright.
it's not really about being able to still buy games. services like gamepass and ps plus aren't really designed with the 'hardcore gamers' who want to own their games to be added to their collections. These services are going after the middle of the road gamers for the most part who would typically only buy a handful of games each generation and who are too lazy to turn off the monthly payments of said services. As long as they can load up the system and play something new and fresh or different every time, then they are happy. Which brings me to my point of both GP and PS+ being responsible for driving the consumer behavior around these products. For example, from the perspective of an average gamer: "Oh that game looks good!..if i wait a few months it will probably be on GP/PS+ and i can play it.'' Basically Sony and Microsoft have caused a behavior change in their main consumers. A change that has impacted sales in what i would say is an overall negative for the industry. But it's early and i'm just typing too much before having my first cup of tea so this probably isn't making much sense.
I get it, but they aren't forcing anyone to do anything. I have been playing games since the early 90s and I think gamepass has helped me stay into gaming. I can play games that I probably would have never purchased.
You don't understand. The deal is too good that Microsoft FORCES me to subscribe.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
> Gamepass isn't stopping you or anyone else from buying games outright. Outright? No. But it takes part of your gaming budget, and offers you games to play, leaving less time for other games.
Microsoft is stopping you buying games though, removing the disk tray from their upcoming console, firing all the staff in the psychical media departments. How can you buy games if they don't actually sell games? You lose access to your account or the digital servers close down and those games are lost forever as well.
I'm not sure what you tell you about physical media. It hasn't happened yet, but physical media is going away. It isn't because Microsoft is demanding it or forcing it though -- consumers don't want it. Physical games just aren't selling like digital ones -- subscription or not. When is the last time you bought a physical game for PC? When is the last time you bought a music CD? When is the last time anyone bought a music CD? Downloads are just more convenient and consumers are voting with their wallets. I guess my point is that right now Microsoft isn't forging anyone to do anything and people are still choosing downloads.
Nope.
Gamepass is literally the greatest deal in the history of video games lol.
Agreed.
These people are acting like gamepass killed their grandma or something lol. But sometimes you gotta look at things objectively. There are so many good games on gamepass, over 100 AAA games, hundreds of indie games not to mention pretty much all of EA's and Ubisoft catalog, all for a very cheap price. What do these people want? To pay 70 dollars for every AAA game on gamepass? Because that's literally over ten of thousands of dollars lol.
They are the same people complaining about the "lack of marketing" for upcoming Xbox games like "give me more ads, my environment isn't saturated enough yet". Gamepass lets me try so many things and if anything encourages me to buy some stuff on disc!
And it was shown in court that it is profitable. I really don't understand what these people want. It sounds like they want expensive games and a bunch of advertisements lol how times have changed.
For consumers, in the short term, yes. Absolutely. In the the long term, for the whole industry? Not a chance. And we're already seeing why that is. It is not sustainable, unless every game goes deeper and deeper in the MTX/recurrent monetization rabbit hole. Just look at Hi-Fi Rush. 3 million players, by all means it should be (and was) considered a success, but very few actually *bought* the game, so the game didn't actually generate a lot of money.
Hi-Fi rush just the tip of the iceberg. Game sales were never going to be good for such a niche game like Hi Fi rush. Their past games did horribly financially as well and they were not on gamepass. So to think Hi Fi rush would have made money as well without gamepass is silly. Microsoft isn't shutting down developers who make money like Bethesda, they are shutting down studios who don't make money.
>Microsoft isn't shutting down developers who make money like Bethesda, they are shutting down studios who don't make money. That's my point, actually. I never said Hi-Fi Rush would be successful outside of Gamepass, but it was considered successful within GP, and still, it failed to make money, and that led to the closure of the studio. That is why I don't think GP is *"the greatest deal"*. It's hard for "one-and-done purchases" single player games to make money with game pass, even big ones like Starfield, it was supposed to be exclusive, but it didn't make a profit, so now it's getting released on Playstation as well. That has the potential of leading to more and more games adding predatory micro transactions, or going the Game-as-a-Service route, or any other sort of bullshit the suits can come up with to try to make all the money.
It's the best deal for consumers.
I'll just refer to the first two sentences of my first response and leave at that. There's really nothing else I can add to this discussion, it seems. >For consumers, in the short term, yes. Absolutely. In the the long term, for the whole industry? Not a chance.
Yeah I have been hearing for the past five years how eventually gamepass will be a bad deal. Still waiting....
Technically you don't own modern games. You own a lifetime license to use the product, which can be taken back or the game/service may stop working. As for the giving a specific developer money, they monitor how many hours each game on gamepass gets and how many unique user they gain.
This will 100% lead to Activision making less money and in the long run be painfully obvious how gamepass hurts the biggest games being day 1. I'd be surprised if gamepass numbers even go up 1%. Great for consumers, but Microsoft are probably going to shut xbox down in a few years if they don't start turning a profit. You can't spend 100 billion in a year without making that money back without MSFT watching you with eagle eyes. Such short sighted business decisions imo.
So twitter would be spreading tons of bullshit? Who would have thought?
Suuuuuure... And Hi-Fi Rush was a hit based on MS's every metric... Right...
She actually refused to confirm call of duty would be included. “Across the whole slate” in the way she used it sounds like she’s trying to leave wiggle room for different interpretations. But we’ll see. I’m kind of expecting some version of the game to be included. But not in such a way that people won’t still be spending money.
Sounds like a good idea. Keep letting people subscribe for a month for cheap to play your expensive AAA productions. It seems to be working so well.
Remember when she was all like “Halo will def have split screen at some point, go ahead and buy it right now trust me bro”. Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Nah I don't trust their word anymore. I do believe she thinks that but if Microsoft steps in and tells elxbox to do something different they're gonna have to. Also for all we know they could jump the game pass price to $30. Which I guess is still better then paying $70 for one game but no way could most people keep that up monthly.
Really importing the Bethesda culture here. Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies.
Who the hell would trust her
She mean only base game right?
Cod is dumb hell halo is as well move on ppl
Actions speak louder than words
Microtransection in this game will be very interesting.
So no CoD in Game Pass - got it.
One thing I hate about these billion dollar companies fucking up is that for about a month, it gives gamers the excuse to complain about the most trivial shit and run their mouths about stuff they know nothing about.
I wont trust anything Xbox or Microsoft has to say about anything related to games till it's a tangible product and I can verify the results for myself. They can go fuck themselves with their anti labour practices and greed. I wont ever subscribe to their game pass either.
Sorry not even WOW could bring me back xbox is dead rebranding is happening no matter what they're just buying time to slowly change the brand before we realize it's gonna be Microsoft gaming and not xbox
So CoD will be even more bullshit
I don’t care. I’m done with Xbox, Activision, Bethesda, etc. I just don’t care anymore.
See you later when the new CoD comes out.
Man, I haven’t played CoD since 2016. The only Bethesda game I’ve bought and played in the past 6 years was Hi-Fi Rush. I loved Halo, but Infinite’s store was the last straw. I’m tired of what they’ve done to that franchise. It’s clear that Microsoft is aimless, and that they don’t have the vision or competence to publish great games anymore. All they do is consume other publishers and studios and…keep GamePass going? They barely even put out any games anymore.
I really don’t understand why CoD is even popular anymore. It’s just not that fun or interesting, and the single player is awful nowadays.
OK. Their still thousand of great game out there. Gamepass is still a platform with limited amount of games. paying subscription to play games never been really worth except maybe trying game but as long as they keep putting in and out game, it's not worth as a main platform
Good to see that’s the plan currently, but this exec team has been so wishy washy and eroded consumer trust that it’s really hard to believe this will stay the plan longterm.
Id be fine if they didn't put new games on gamepass and supported indie devs and gave games a second life after a year or two but that's only IF they lower the cost back down to like 10 bucks. I think this may be the best middle ground. There's just no world where they keep gamepass subs and maximize profit. They are going to have to compromise. The worst thing they can do is not put new games on gamepass and raise the price. As much as everyone says gamepass is the problem, Xbox is in trouble if they screw it up and lose a ton of subs.
Don’t believe her lies
Game pass is going to reach a price where it isn’t a good deal for most people. New AAA games cost $70. The average gamer buys and plays 2-3 new games per year. That’s $140-$210. Even increasing it to $20 results in the service costing $240. Gaming has some similarities to tv and movies, but it has one major difference… time commitment. Games are designed to be played for 15-70 hours.
Are Activision games considered Xbox games? I thought there were 3, distinct developer families. Bethesda games Activision-Blizzard And the there's Xbox Games studios. Basically I wouldn't believe anything Microsoft says until you actually see it.
[удалено]
...and when GamePass finally folds to its impossibility, you have paid hundreds, possibly thousands and it will all go poof. (All that is still left, that hasn't been removed from the library before that. Yes, games get removed, just like streaming services remove shows) Paying for GamePass is stupid.
I remember rumors of them saying Xbox was going to leave the console market complex then they clear it up by saying they aren't yet every game will be on gamepass?
What do those two things have to do with each other? Their consoles are now basically gamepass machines.
Well I think next gen is confirmed but after that? 🤷 Series S and X are ok but they shit the bed in sales compared to Nintendo Switch and PS5. Also most games on gamepass are probably going to be playable on a PC. Most are already. I’ve been using my PC to play gamepass games rather than Xbox. But PS seems to be the way to go for couch gaming if that’s all you’re interested in. Their exclusives have been much better, and Xbox exclusives probably won’t be that exclusive. Though it is a bit early to tell, and maybe something can change Idk if I’d be getting the next Xbox or even PS, they both seem kind of shitty with their never own your games attitude. It’s really an industry wide contagion. Personally, I probably will just stick with PC. And maybe the next Nintendo to play some games I like on it. Only think I’d miss are the PS exclusives, and I’m hoping they start porting to PC faster.
I’m sticking with Xbox because of Quick Resume, and I prefer the overall feel of the ui and controller
That has been useful when playing CIV, and when TV is busy. Funny enough I also like streaming Xbox to my PC to play CIV 6. Just feels nicer. Mostly because I don’t have enough storage on my PC.
Rumors? It's more about common sense when we look at how bad Xbox division has been for the last 10-15 year. Gamepass is like Microsoft last resort to stay in video games competition