Support NeoGAF

[Mibu no ookami]

Come on people. Don't make these stupid points.

Is GamePass more likely to succeed with the acquisition of Activision Blizzard? If so, logic dictates it's more likely to fail without it.

That you don't understand that suggests you have a problem with critical thinking skills.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

How do a majority of their 23 studios make "bad to average" games? That's nonsense. They have numerous studios that always put out good stuff.

You can claim Halo Infinite or Gears 5 aren't as good as previous entries, but they are still good games. Without looking at an actual list of there studios, maybe Compulsion and Undead Labs have a history of "bad to average" games? Who else?

 

[adamsapple]

Is GamePass more likely to succeed with the acquisition of Activision Blizzard? If so, logic dictates it's more likely to fail without it.

That you don't understand that suggests you have a problem with critical thinking skills.

Game Pass has been seeing double digit growth every year since its inception. It has not bottomed out yet or losing subscribers. It is not dependent on Activision Blizzard.

Your logic is flawed.

 

[feynoob]

Is GamePass more likely to succeed with the acquisition of Activision Blizzard? If so, logic dictates it's more likely to fail without it.

That you don't understand that suggests you have a problem with critical thinking skills.

That is stupid logic.
Gamepass is succesful without this merger. 25m userbase is no joke.
This is for 2023. Then you have to account the other half of the year.

January 19	Persona 3 Portable	Console, PC, TBD
January 19	Persona 4 Golden	Console, PC, TBD
January 20	Monster Hunter Rise	Console, PC, TBD
January 31	Age Of Empires 2: Definitive Edition	Console, Cloud
January 31	Inkulinati	Console, TBD
January TBD	Roboquest	Console
February 21	Atomic Heart	Console, TBD
March 3	Wo Long Fallen Dynasty	Console, PC, TBD
March TBD	Amnesia: The Bunker	Console, TBD
March TBD	Way To The Woods	Console, TBD
Spring TBD	Blazblue: Cross Tag Battle	Console, PC, TBD
Spring TBD	Flintlock: The Siege of Dawn	Console, PC, TBD
Spring TBD	Forza Motorsport	Console, PC, Cloud
Spring TBD	Guilty Gear Strive	Console, PC, TBD
Spring TBD	Lightyear Frontier	Console, TBD
Spring TBD	Minecraft Legends	Console, PC, TBD
Spring TBD	Planet of Lana	Console, TBD
Spring TBD	The Last Case of Benedict Fox	Console, TBD
Spring TBD	Valheim	Console
TBD	Large Batch Of Activision Games (Wont happen if deal fails)	Console, TBD
TBD	Age Of Empires 4	Console, Cloud
TBD	Age of Mythology: Retold	PC
TBD	Ara: History Untold	PC
TBD	Ark 2	Console, TBD
TBD	Bounty Star	Console, TBD
TBD	Cocoon	Console, TBD
TBD	Dungeons 4	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Ereban: Shadow Legacy	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Flock	Console, TBD
TBD	GoldenEye 007	Console, TBD
TBD	Hollow Knight: Silksong	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Lies of P	Console, TBD
TBD	Party Animals	Console, TBD
TBD	Railway Empire 2	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Ravenlok	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Redfall	Console, PC, Cloud
TBD	Replaced	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Spirittea	Console, PC, Cloud
TBD	Stalker 2	Console, PC, Cloud
TBD	Starfield	Console, PC, Cloud
TBD	The Texas Chain Saw Massacre	Console, PC, TBD
TBD	Thirsty Suitors	Console, TBD
TBD	Turnip Boy Robs A Bank	Console, TBD
TBD	Warhammer 40k: Darktide	Console

you also have to add Zenimnax studios and other MS studios output.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Is GamePass more likely to succeed with the acquisition of Activision Blizzard? If so, logic dictates it's more likely to fail without it.

No, logic dictates that it will still grow but slower.

Big difference is that Sony isn't crying around asking for people to feel sorry for them for not having enough exclusives.

Sony is literally crying that without COD they will leave the gaming market, won't be able to invest in their own platorm and their studios cannot produce the games that sell their console.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Let's be real here. A majority of gamers are on playstation.
If IPs owned by ABK goes to Microsoft and Microsoft does not release them on PlayStation, it effectively removes something for the majority of gamers. It's called an attrition war, and whoever has the biggest warchest wins at the end. Guess who ?
So bottom line : for the majority of gamers, this deal is bad.

I think you overvalue IP, especially Activision's.

I would never spend 70 billion dollars, largely on one IP.

Ultimately, I don't think gamers would really lose out on anything. Someone else will come up with a COD rival that IS multiplatform and people would gravitate to that. Franchises rise and fall. Medal of Honor used to be a bigger deal than Call of Duty. Call of Duty hit it big with Modern Warfare and there really at the time wasn't a solid competitor. Only Battlefield transitioned effectively from WW2 FPS to modern FPS. Medal of Honor tried in 2012 but EA didn't put their full weight behind it.

Not sure why when they gave the keys to Respawn they pushed for it to be a VR game... which isn't in their wheelhouse in the first place and is a niche market.

CoD is so successful because it has no competent competition. Most FPS aim for different segments either because they don't have the resources to compete directly with CoD or are afraid to.

 

[feynoob]

Sony is literally crying that without COD they will leave the gaming market, won't be able to invest in their own platorm and their studios cannot produce the games that sell their console.

Both are hypocryptic, and you cant ignore the other, while calling out the other.

MS "We are shit with our output"
Sony "Without COD we are useless"

 

[feynoob]

I think you overvalue IP, especially Activision's.

I would never spend 70 billion dollars, largely on one IP.

Ultimately, I don't think gamers would really lose out on anything. Someone else will come up with a COD rival that IS multiplatform and people would gravitate to that. Franchises rise and fall. Medal of Honor used to be a bigger deal than Call of Duty. Call of Duty hit it big with Modern Warfare and there really at the time wasn't a solid competitor. Only Battlefield transitioned effectively from WW2 FPS to modern FPS. Medal of Honor tried in 2012 but EA didn't put their full weight behind it.

Not sure why when they gave the keys to Respawn they pushed for it to be a VR game... which isn't in their wheelhouse in the first place and is a niche market.

CoD is so successful because it has no competent competition. Most FPS aim for different segments either because they don't have the resources to compete directly with CoD or are afraid to.

Except this deal includes all the package.

Mobile with King.
Consoles with Activision
PC with Blizzard.

If it was COD, MS would just do marketing rights, and overpay for that.

 

[Topher]

Sony is literally crying that without COD they will leave the gaming market, won't be able to invest in their own platorm and their studios cannot produce the games that sell their console.

Literally? Ah man......please provide that quote. I must have missed it.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Both are hypocryptic, and you cant ignore the other, while calling out the other.

The irony is that Microsoft is saying exactly the same talking that people use against Microsoft on the internet and in the media - "Xbox has no games", "Game Pass is failing" and so on.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

How do a majority of their 23 studios make "bad to average" games? That's nonsense. They have numerous studios that always put out good stuff.

You can claim Halo Infinite or Gears 5 aren't as good as previous entries, but they are still good games. Without looking at an actual list of there studios, maybe Compulsion and Undead Labs have a history of "bad to average" games? Who else?

Can you tell me any of the studios who could consistently put out a game that would sell at least 5 million copies? Hard to say I know with GamePass, but let me know what you can put together.

Game Pass has been seeing double digit growth every year since its inception. It has not bottomed out yet or losing subscribers. It is not dependent on Activision Blizzard.

Your logic is flawed.

The growth of GamePass has stalled and Microsoft themselves has said this. What you don't realize is that Microsoft needs to justify this subscription with better margins. We don't know just how profitable GamePass is at the moment (not the same as whether it is profitable at all) because Microsoft doesn't discuss this, but because they don't discuss it we can assume the profits are limited. In business, especially at the scale of Microsoft, you have to look at opportunity costs. If they spend 20 billion dollars to generate a profit (not revenue) of 1 billion dollars, where they could have otherwise generated 40 billion dollars on something else, they'll look to do something else.

That is stupid logic.
Gamepass is succesful without this merger. 25m userbase is no joke.
This is for 2023. Then you have to account the other half of the year.

you also have to add Zenimnax studios and other MS studios output.

Quite a number of these games were not even Microsoft games. Second, subscriber bases aren't permanent. You have to retain people constantly and drive your margins, which is hard to do when you raise prices, which you have to do when content becomes more expensive, lest your margins dry up.

No, logic dictates that it will still grow but slower.


Sony is literally crying that without COD they will leave the gaming market, won't be able to invest in their own platorm and their studios cannot produce the games that sell their console.

See above and I don't see Sony saying they'll leave the gaming market lol...

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Literally? Ah man......please provide that quote. I must have missed it.

In their response to CMA (I remember Hoeg had a video about that) they said that they won't be able to invest in their own platform. Other things were mentioned in the very beginning too (people were even discussing that Sony throws their studios under the rug)

 

[feynoob]

Quite a number of these games were not even Microsoft games. Second, subscriber bases aren't permanent. You have to retain people constantly and drive your margins, which is hard to do when you raise prices, which you have to do when content becomes more expensive, lest your margins dry up.

And I just showed you how they do that now. Or do these list not exist in your eyes?
You dont need MS own games only, You need more than that to retain those userbase.
Things like these are what retaining users.

 

[feynoob]

The irony is that Microsoft is saying exactly the same talking that people use against Microsoft on the internet and in the media - "Xbox has no games", "Game Pass is failing" and so on.

This console war shit is very beneficial to them for this deal. The more people look down on xbox, the easier they can justify their argument.

Its garbage tactic, but that is real world for you. Use whatever necessary to achieve your goals.

 

[Topher]

In their message to FTC (or CMA, one of regulators - I remember Hoeg had a video about that) they said that they won't be able to invest in their own platform. Other things were mentioned in the very beginning too (people were even discussing that Sony throws their studios under the rug)

That's quite a leap from that (if accurate) to "leaving the gaming market". Nothing "literal" about it.

The irony is that Microsoft is saying exactly the same talking that people use against Microsoft on the internet and in the media - "Xbox has no games", "Game Pass is failing" and so on.

Just as MS didn't say any of that. What was actually said is just lawyer hyperbole in any case.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

As we've said XGS has 23 studios.

please rank these studios by tiers based on their ability to produce sales then compare them to Sony's studios based on sales/sales potential.

It's not even close.

 

[feynoob]

What was actually said is just lawyer hyperbole in any case.

pretty much this.

You dont see your parent company CEO coming out and say these stuff without any lawyer consultant. Sadly its working very well, with how much coverage its getting these days.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

In their response to CMA (I remember Hoeg had a video about that) they said that they won't be able to invest in their own platform. Other things were mentioned in the very beginning too (people were even discussing that Sony throws their studios under the rug)

You have mis-cited the original comments where Sony was discussing that there wasn't a 3rd party studio capable of making CoD right now. They don't make any mention of their own studios let alone saying they'll leave the industry...

Wow... what a thing to say based off of a statement you got wrong in the first place...

 

[Topher]

pretty much this.

You dont see your parent company CEO coming out and say these stuff without any lawyer consultant. Sadly its working very well, with how much coverage its getting these days.

These guys are certainly giving console warriors a hell of a lot of material for years to come.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

And I just showed you how they do that now. Or do these list not exist in your eyes?
You dont need MS own games only, You need more than that to retain those userbase.
Things like these are what retaining users.

We're talking about Xbox right? This proves my point even more...

 

[feynoob]

As we've said XGS has 23 studios.

please rank these studios by tiers based on their ability to produce sales then compare them to Sony's studios based on sales/sales potential.

It's not even close.

Sales means nothing when you have tons of live service games, which can print out alot of money.
People understimate how much mtx makes these days.
IF Ragnorak sells 20m this year with average of $60 price, that is $1.2b revenue.
MS can generate that much money by actually doing season pass for $10. That is $120 a year, by 10m people purchase and you will get $1.2b revenue.
As long as MTX exist, the game with higher MTX wins in term of revenue.

 

[feynoob]

We're talking about Xbox right? This proves my point even more...

This disapproves your point.
Gamepass has tons of userbase with variety of interest. First party games alone cant maintain a service like that.

Its why its important to have tons of 3rd party games, with different genre. This way you can satisfy everyone and gain more userbase.

Look at PS4. A console with huge userbase and only 18% bought their 1st party games. People dont care about console manufacuters first party games aside of nintendo. Gamepass wont work well with MS 1st party games. They need 3rd party games.

 

[Pelta88]

2. Thinking COD will fail under Microsoft is pure stupidity with no actual facts or logic to back it up. COD is a well-oiled machine thats going nowhere for the foreseeable future, no matter who owns it

I thought the same thing about Halo.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Assuming that rumor was true it was only going to be a timed exclusive like Deathloop was. So eventually it would have come to other platforms.

But of course that's only assuming it was true.

Anyways there will be no more Bethesda games on PlayStation. People just need to accept that.

We don't know what the contract is like for Indiana Jones. Also, MMOs from Zenimax Media Online are most likely to still come to Playstation.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Sales means nothing when you have tons of live service games, which can print out alot of money.
People understimate how much mtx makes these days.
IF Ragnorak sells 20m this year with average of $60 price, that is $1.2b revenue.
MS can generate that much money by actually doing season pass for $10. That is $120 a year, by 10m people purchase and you will get $1.2b revenue.
As long as MTX exist, the game with higher MTX wins in term of revenue.

I think the problem you have is that you assume that Sony can only do Ragnarok... They are beginning to focus resources to perpetual revenue as well, but they can have their cake and eat it too, they've just got significantly better studios than Microsoft at this point.

It reminds me a lot of Nintendo and Sony in the 90s when Nintendo just had better quality first party games and it wasn't even close.

Nintendo probably still has better first-party games than Sony, but Nintendo's quantity is down while Sony's is up.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

I thought the same thing about Halo.

I know there are a lot of console warriors on here, but Halo Infinite hasn't failed. 20 million players after a month isn't a failure. It has remained one of the most played games on Xbox Game Pass and across Xbox consoles period since its release. Many other titles have come and gone and Halo Infinite is still regularly present in the most played list above other successful games.

The game also reviewed incredibly. Reviews for the campaign were fantastic. It is literally one of the best playing Halo campaigns ever made. Halo Infinite is quite literally a better game than Modern Warfare 2 and any recent COD... just not a better live service.

Seems to me the main people saying Halo failed are people who don't play Halo at all, and don't want to see new Halo titles. Halo Infinite MP is still in the top 20 (#19) in the USA right now. It's top 3 on Game Pass in the USA. Halo Infinite has consistently been among the most played game amongst not just Game Pass subscribers (which is kind of the point...) and also amongst all Xbox gamers.

In the latest list from newzoo, Halo Infinite is the #10 most played xbox game worldwide on Xbox Series X|S consoles. It jumped up 10 spaces (I wonder what changed recently?) Destiny 2 remains unchanged from before at #17. This was just with the winter update, new match xp beta and the other recent changes and additions like campaign co-op, forge, and a multitude of other changes and enhancements.

How has Halo failed if its top 10 most played across the latest Xbox consoles? And this was just with the winter update... Not even a whole traditional season.

https://newzoo.com/insights/rankings/top-xbox-games-series-s-x-global

 

[Mibu no ookami]

This disapproves your point.
Gamepass has tons of userbase with variety of interest. First party games alone cant maintain a service like that.

Its why its important to have tons of 3rd party games, with different genre. This way you can satisfy everyone and gain more userbase.

Look at PS4. A console with huge userbase and only 18% bought their 1st party games. People dont care about console manufacuters first party games aside of nintendo. Gamepass wont work well with MS 1st party games. They need 3rd party games.

What you don't realize for some reason is the cost of 3rd party games will continue to rise for GamePass.

This is something Netflix realized and shifted focus on their own content. This is why Disney has been able to grow Disney+ so quickly, while Apple TV+ is lagging. Apple TV+ is focusing on internal content too rather than expensive 3rd party deals.

The more expensive the 3rd party content, the higher the price of the subscription service has to be in order to maintain profitability.

You said it yourself the 3rd party content is key, so what happens when studios start doubling and tripling their rates?

Your example is kind of silly. When you sell to 120 million people, you're generally not going to create a game that caters to all of them. Even Nintendo first party games don't sell 100 million copies. Sony's big first party games are in line with a lot of what Nintendo does on its system, but the PlayStation ecosystem is certainly more varied than Nintendo's from an audience standpoint.

Or maybe you're under the belief that 3rd parties aren't going to increase their prices, they already have and some 3rd parties don't want their content on GamePass at all... +

 

[Topher]

I know there are a lot of console warriors on here,

 

[Mibu no ookami]

This disapproves your point.
Gamepass has tons of userbase with variety of interest. First party games alone cant maintain a service like that.

Its why its important to have tons of 3rd party games, with different genre. This way you can satisfy everyone and gain more userbase.

Look at PS4. A console with huge userbase and only 18% bought their 1st party games. People dont care about console manufacuters first party games aside of nintendo. Gamepass wont work well with MS 1st party games. They need 3rd party games.

Take-Two CEO Doesn't Want New Games On Game Pass

Strauss Zelnick says it "doesn't really make sense" to launch new games into subscription services.

www.gamespot.com

"Our views remain unchanged. We think a subscription model can make sense for deep catalog titles. But it doesn't really make sense for frontline titles. For any business model to make sense in the entertainment business, it has to work for the creators of the entertainment as well as the consumers of the entertainment. I think catalog can make sense for the publishers, it can make sense for the consumers who are avid, who really want access to a lot of product. But if you're getting into frontline product, then the economics are much more difficult to make sense of," he said during Take-Two's earnings call.

 

[feynoob]

I think the problem you have is that you assume that Sony can only do Ragnarok... They are beginning to focus resources to perpetual revenue as well, but they can have their cake and eat it too, they've just got significantly better studios than Microsoft at this point.

Its just example. MTX in this gen makes too much money.
The era where companies made tons of money from normal games is slowly fading, due to this new form of revenue.

Its a shit reality, but when players are spending 10$ and 20$ like its nothing, it makes sense for companies to pursue this model.

Here is how bad it is.
https://www.yahoo.com/now/singapore... father was shocked,wallet in the mobile game.

 

[feynoob]

http://[URL]https://www.gamespot.co...snt-want-new-games-on-game-pass/1100-6494686/

[/URL]

That is day1.
MS can just get them after 1 year release like they do. And people would still stay on the service.
Its much cheaper and they can get alot of games that way,

 

[Mibu no ookami]

That is day1.
MS can just get them after 1 year release like they do. And people would still stay on the service.
Its much cheaper and they can get alot of games that way,

What you'll see if people start to cancel their subscriptions and only subscribe when a game becomes available and then cancel afterward.

This will inevitably result in either Microsoft increasing the price, making it harder to cancel (i.e. minimum 3 month subs or 6 month subs, or 1 year subs) if not both.

This is why it's harder to do a game sub than a tv/movie sub. It's pretty easy to produce a lot of content for netflix even internally, but gaming is difficult. It takes a lot of work and a lot of time.

XGS as a result is going to focus on smaller and cheaper titles and they'll also have to support the Series S as well. There will be few AAA blockbusters from Microsoft in this generation and dev cycle and they know that which is why they want to close on Activision as soon as possible.

If you look at Sony and their deals with Haven (who they bought), Deviation, and Firewalk... they know these games won't be ready until 2024/2025, buy they aren't relying on these games. They have their internal studios who they are relying on. Microsoft is just too late into this gen to be producing the type of games they need to produce.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

http://[URL]https://www.gamespot.co...snt-want-new-games-on-game-pass/1100-6494686/

[/URL]

Except the economics do work, they just may not work for a company that doesn't have as strong or as diversified a business as Microsoft's.

Microsoft is a company that can afford to initially take the financial risk till there are enough subscribers to make it work. There are currently plenty of subscribers to game pass to make it work, over $25 million.

The reason many game companies want their money upfront is because they need access to those funds right away for other priorities. Microsoft due to the overall strength of their various business segments, can gladly sacrifice upfront sales and capitalize over time throughout the course of the year by way of a growing number of subscribers. As it is currently structured, game pass is guaranteed to, at miminum, be making over $3 billion this year in revenue. Game Pass for consoles alone made $2.9 billion just last calendar year.

So Game Pass could easily end up at over $4 billion in revenue this year alone depending on number of ultimate subscribers and how many new people subscribed, and how early they did it.

 

[The_Mike]

Well, you're wrong. Sony has not replaced Killzone and Resistance. They left the FPS shooter genre altogether. Same with the platformer genre after Crash, Spyro, Jak and Daxter and Sly Cooper got shelved. Same with vehicle combat genre after Twisted Metal got shelved

 

[feynoob]

What you'll see if people start to cancel their subscriptions and only subscribe when a game becomes available and then cancel afterward.

This will inevitably result in either Microsoft increasing the price, making it harder to cancel (i.e. minimum 3 month subs or 6 month subs, or 1 year subs) if not both.

Price increase would happen, but mass unsubscribe wont happen, unless there is a major issue with the service.

This is why it's harder to do a game sub than a tv/movie sub. It's pretty easy to produce a lot of content for netflix even internally, but gaming is difficult. It takes a lot of work and a lot of time.

You need to do more research. We have tons of games that are released yearly. MS doesnt need to make tons of games themselves. They need to get those games to their service.

XGS as a result is going to focus on smaller and cheaper titles and they'll also have to support the Series S as well. There will be few AAA blockbusters from Microsoft in this generation and dev cycle and they know that which is why they want to close on Activision as soon as possible.

This is nonsense. If you believe that, then I believe I can have a date with margot robbie.

If you look at Sony and their deals with Haven (who they bought), Deviation, and Firewalk... they know these games won't be ready until 2024/2025, buy they aren't relying on these games. They have their internal studios who they are relying on. Microsoft is just too late into this gen to be producing the type of games they need to produce.

Again, gaming world has more studios and games. All MS needs to do is negotiate with those studios to put their games on their service.
Either day1, 1 year later after release, or some time later.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Except the economics do work, they just may not work for a company that doesn't have as strong or as diversified a business as Microsoft's.

Microsoft is a company that can afford to initially take the financial risk till there are enough subscribers to make it work. There are currently plenty of subscribers to game pass to make it work, over $25 million.

The reason many game companies want their money upfront is because they need access to those funds right away for other priorities. Microsoft due to the overall strength of their various business segments, can gladly sacrifice upfront sales and capitalize over time throughout the course of the year by way of a growing number of subscribers. As it is currently structured, game pass is guaranteed to, at miminum, be making over $3 billion this year in revenue. Game Pass for consoles alone made $2.9 billion just last calendar year.

So Game Pass could easily end up at over $4 billion in revenue this year alone depending on number of ultimate subscribers and how many new people subscribed, and how early they did it.

Again, you're failing to realize or ignoring that the content on GamePass is going to get more expensive and the more expensive it is, the more expensive the service will be or the less content the service will have, either will drive away consumers, new and old.

I'm not saying GamePass is going to fail, but it's certainly in its infancy right now and we have no idea how it will shake out when Microsoft starts to demand consistent profitability.

 

[ReBurn]

Let's be real here. A majority of gamers are on playstation.
If IPs owned by ABK goes to Microsoft and Microsoft does not release them on PlayStation, it effectively removes something for the majority of gamers. It's called an attrition war, and whoever has the biggest warchest wins at the end. Guess who ?
So bottom line : for the majority of gamers, this deal is bad.

That's not being real, though. It's only real if you exclude everything ABK releases everything games on except PlayStation and Xbox consoles.

The majority of gamers are on mobile, which is what Microsoft said this deal was about, but everyone can only talk about of Call of Duty. Nothing changes for mobile gamers with this deal. There are over 110 million Switch consoles out there. Nothing changes for those gamers with this deal unless Microsoft keeps their promise and brings a version of Call of Duty to Switch, which could make this deal better for them. Nothing changes for PC gamers or Xbox gamers except maybe they could get access to future ABK games through game pass as an alternative to purchasing them outright.

The bulk of Activision development resources are focused on Call of Duty, so we're really only talking about Sony facing attrition from people who buy PlayStation primarily to play ABK games, and most likely only Call of Duty. That is probably a significant number of customers for Sony, which they are rightly concerned about losing if Call of Duty goes away. But it is not a majority of gamers.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Price increase would happen, but mass unsubscribe wont happen, unless there is a major issue with the service.

You need to do more research. We have tons of games that are released yearly. MS doesnt need to make tons of games themselves. They need to get those games to their service.

This is nonsense. If you believe that, then I believe I can have a date with margot robbie.

Again, gaming world has more studios and games. All MS needs to do is negotiate with those studios to put their games on their service.
Either day1, 1 year later after release, or some time later.

Netflix lost subscribers for the first time in a decade. What is/was the major issue with the service?

 

[thismeinteil]

The irony is that Microsoft is saying exactly the same talking that people use against Microsoft on the internet and in the media - "Xbox has no games", "Game Pass is failing" and so on.

What's really hilarious is seeing Xbox fanboys who kept trying to defend against these attacks, blindly buying into Xbox PR, all of a sudden take them up as talking points because they think it'll help the deal go through. Like how PS didn't really have games that were that good or interesting, but now all of a sudden they have all the great games and MS needs Activision to compete. Or going from boasting that COD was definitely becoming exclusive, which was funny cause all those PS fans are now salty, to pretending that was never said or would never happen under good guy MS.

 

[gothmog]

Again, you're failing to realize or ignoring that the content on GamePass is going to get more expensive and the more expensive it is, the more expensive the service will be or the less content the service will have, either will drive away consumers, new and old.

I'm not saying GamePass is going to fail, but it's certainly in its infancy right now and we have no idea how it will shake out when Microsoft starts to demand consistent profitability.

It's not going to fail but it is going to go through Netflix levels of quality differences. There was a point in Netflix's history where all of those early streaming content deals either expired or got a huge bump in cost through renewal negotiations. I think I basically stopped subbing for almost 2 years at some point. I'm pretty close again to dropping it because most of the content is basically clickbait in video form via shitty reality shows and discovery channel level drivel.

I imagine we will see similar things when developers start realizing how much others are charging for their games to be on GP.

 

[feynoob]

Netflix lost subscribers for the first time in a decade. What is/was the major issue with the service?

Disney plus and other services.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Again, you're failing to realize or ignoring that the content on GamePass is going to get more expensive and the more expensive it is, the more expensive the service will be or the less content the service will have, either will drive away consumers, new and old.

I'm not saying GamePass is going to fail, but it's certainly in its infancy right now and we have no idea how it will shake out when Microsoft starts to demand consistent profitability.

Game Pass has been around since 2017. Xbox first party AAA exclusives have been launching on it since then. You say the content on Game Pass is going to get more expensive? Okay, let's go with that. Isn't Game Pass progressively making more revenue as it gains new subscribers each year also? Microsoft since the start has not changed the price of Game Pass yet. It started out at $9.99, and nothing has been taken away from that $9.99 tier since it launched in 2017 despite Microsoft's acquisitions and despite how many more games they have in development.

They introduced ultimate at $14.99, but did so by adding value, without taking anything away from the previous $9.99 tier. Now even should Game Pass' price go up, it won't go up nearly so much to be a deal breaker. How much would it go up by? $2-$3? Maybe $5?

Game Pass has been in its "infancy" for 6 years now. And I've been saying it from the jump. If Xbox Game Pass come next month is at 29 million, much less at or above the 30 million mark, that's going to be a wakeup call for a whole lot of people despite a year without many AAA first party releases. Game Pass is primarily about Microsoft's first party games, but the third party support has been pretty damn strong as well. HIgh On Life is a legitimately great damn time, among other additions this year.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Telling lies to disconnected people. Argue here that Sony and Nintendo are out of position then argue there that they are the underdog.

Let's be clear here, 360 was a massive success and it was Microsoft mega corp mentality of trying to shift the industry to their own goals that got them the Xbox One generation.

Buying big IP left and right, going for the biggest 3rd party publisher, shout from the rooftops about the success of gamepass and Xcloud and then tell bold faced lies about their position in the market. Microsoft continues to be the same piece of shit company we always knew they were.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

It's not going to fail but it is going to go through Netflix levels of quality differences. There was a point in Netflix's history where all of those early streaming content deals either expired or got a huge bump in cost through renewal negotiations. I think I basically stopped subbing for almost 2 years at some point. I'm pretty close again to dropping it because most of the content is basically clickbait in video form via shitty reality shows and discovery channel level drivel.

I imagine we will see similar things when developers start realizing how much others are charging for their games to be on GP.

But that is where gaming and tv/movies differ. In gaming, you really can't be independent due to costs. There is a multitude of independent tv/movie studios and directors out there.

Netflix was able to quickly pivot to its own productions and IP. Microsoft isn't there yet and may never be there.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Game Pass has been around since 2017. Xbox first party AAA exclusives have been launching on it since then. You say the content on Game Pass is going to get more expensive? Okay, let's go with that. Isn't Game Pass progressively making more revenue as it gains new subscribers each year also? Microsoft since the start has not changed the price of Game Pass yet. It started out at $9.99, and nothing has been taken away from that $9.99 tier since it launched in 2017 despite Microsoft's acquisitions and despite how many more games they have in development.

They introduced ultimate at $14.99, but did so by adding value, without taking anything away from the previous $9.99 tier. Now even should Game Pass' price go up, it won't go up nearly so much to be a deal breaker. How much would it go up by? $2-$3? Maybe $5?

Game Pass has been in its "infancy" for 6 years now. And I've been saying it from the jump. If Xbox Game Pass come next month is at 29 million, much less at or above the 30 million mark, that's going to be a wakeup call for a whole lot of people despite a year without many AAA first party releases. Game Pass is primarily about Microsoft's first party games, but the third party support has been pretty damn strong as well. HIgh On Life is a legitimately great damn time, among other additions this year.

Are the rate of new subscribers (paying full price) in line with or greater than the increase in cost due to 3rd party and internal development?

That's the only question that really matters.

Microsoft hasn't changed the price because they understand price elasticity, but they're already talking about increasing prices next year.

You said even if GamePass goes up, because you know it will. 5 dollar a month might be a deal breaker for many. Especially if the content doesn't get better.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Disney plus and other services.

And there are competitors in the game space as well across the board from sub and nonsub a-like.

You have Steam and PS as major competitors to the growth of GamePass on console and PC.

Even mobile is a detriment to GamePass.

Do you know what happens in a recession? Subscription services will be the first to take a hit unless they show clear value over replacement.

Everything that takes a gamer's time away from wanting to use a sub-service and thus takes them from wanting to pay for a sub-service is a problem for Microsoft.

Every time someone buys a PS5, that's one less likely person to sub to GamePass in the next 5+ years.

 

[feynoob]

And there are competitors in the game space as well across the board from sub and nonsub a-like.

Not on Xbox console.

You have Steam and PS as major competitors to the growth of GamePass on console and PC.

Those are not competition to gamepass.
PS+ extra or premium is. Same as how GeForce and PS now are competitor to xcloud.

Even mobile is a detriment to GamePass.

You are grasping for things at this point.

Do you know what happens in a recession? Subscription services will be the first to take a hit unless they show clear value over replacement.

Dumb statement. It's 70$ which gets hit, not cheap entry with tons of games. If anything, services like gamepass thrive on this environment.

Everything that takes a gamer's time away from wanting to use a sub-service and thus takes them from wanting to pay for a sub-service is a problem for Microsoft.

Don't know if you are serious at this point.

Every time someone buys a PS5, that's one less likely person to sub to GamePass in the next 5+ years.

Another dumb argument.

Just say you don't know what you are talking about. It will save you some face.

 

[gothmog]

But that is where gaming and tv/movies differ. In gaming, you really can't be independent due to costs. There is a multitude of independent tv/movie studios and directors out there.

Netflix was able to quickly pivot to its own productions and IP. Microsoft isn't there yet and may never be there.

Not sure I agree on that. Indie games can be pretty low cost (hundreds of thousands) to make if you have a group of talented developers. Indie movies are still going to cost you millions just on staffing alone.

Microsoft just isn't a creative company so I feel like they will not be successful no matter how many companies they acquire. They're just not built like that. This deal is about control which is why I'm against it. The best Microsoft is a hungry Microsoft that has to compete via investment versus acquisition.

 

[Pelta88]

How do a majority of their 23 studios make "bad to average" games? That's nonsense. They have numerous studios that always put out good stuff.

You can claim Halo Infinite or Gears 5 aren't as good as previous entries, but they are still good games. Without looking at an actual list of there studios, maybe Compulsion and Undead Labs have a history of "bad to average" games? Who else?

You're asking this in a thread where XBOX Execs have gone on record stating that their competition makes better games than they do?

You can't be serious, right? XBOX's legally binding admission is that their barometer of a good game, is PS... And by that measure, let me ask you this. When was the last time XBOX put out a game that entered the mainstream consciousness? No. It's not Psychonauts or Bleeding edge. It's not Flight Sim or any of the releases currently sitting in GP.

It was Halo 2 and Gears 2 back in 2004/8 And I'm not saying that any of the other games I mentioned are terrible. Just that they did not move the needle outside of the core audience. That's not hate. That's XBOX exec regulatory admissions and argument as to why they need COD.

 

[feynoob]

You're asking this in a thread where XBOX Execs have gone on record stating that their competition makes better games than they do?

You can't be serious, right? XBOX's legally binding admission is that their barometer of a good game, is PS... And by that measure, let me ask you this. When was the last time XBOX put out a game that entered the mainstream consciousness. No. It's not Psychonauts or Bleeding edge. It's not Flight Sim or any of the releases currently sitting in GP.

It was Halo 2 and Gears 2 back in 2004/8 And I'm not saying that any of the other games I mentioned are terrible. Just that they did not move the needle outside of the core audience. That's not hate. That's XBOX exec regulatory admissions and argument as to why they need COD.

Are we really arguing about lawyers talk?