Support NeoGAF

[MarkMe2525]

Subscription services absolutely cannabilize traditional sales, but the point is to get enough people that normally don't spend any or much money in their ecosystem, to counteract the lost revenue.

 

[Edmund]

The concept of the positive effect is this:

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

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

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

 

[NEbeast]

I'm not a shareholder in MS so I couldn't give a shit how much money they make or don't make on their division. Game Pass is a good deal as far as I'm concerned.

It might be for now. Its clear from OP that it's clearly going to hurt the industry long term and "xbox" are willing to take that hit because their parent company is fucking massive. It clearly isn't growing organically or they wouldn't be buying up massive third party publishers which hurts everyone not in MS ecosystem.

 

[Ezekiel_]

Subscription services absolutely cannabilize traditional sales, but the point is to get enough people that normally don't spend any or much money in their ecosystem, to counteract the lost revenue.

That's how I see it too.

Let's say they have data that suggest that an average player buys 10 games through the whole console generation, if they can get that person to spend 15$ per month instead, then it's a win.

But the calculus breaks down when you have to offer hundreds of games, and spread the revenue to third parties and your internal teams too.

If a publisher can have 10 high quality, sought-after GaaS, then putting all those in a subscription service bundle could make financial sense.

Edit : A subscription service offering older catalog games also can make financial sense, since the publisher will get recurring revenue from games that have already recoup it's cost.

 

[Gudji]

Yo this is so much worse than I thought. I nean I'm not surprised. Everyone knows that was the case. But the fact xbox did this to itself

 

[jakinov]

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

He's not saying that you end up with more units sold than compared to if you didn't have it on gamepass though. He saying the elevated popularity gets additional people to buy the game which contributed to an increase in sales but no where does he say that overall game sales are higher from being a day one gamepass game vs being just sold. In the overall context of the quote, he's not arguing about how this is the best most lucrative model because you end up with more units sold, he's explaining why it's been healthy business model for them.

 

[Soosa]

Gamepass is the reason why I dont buy games for xbox.

Maybe it depends if you have 1 or more consoles, and which is the main one.

But I see no reason to buy games for series x, because GPU were like 30€/year with that 1€ upgrade trick + cheap gold with VPN trick, and there is plenty of games on the gamepass, and there isnt games that are not on the gamepass. By that I mean that there arent many exclusives for xbox that either are already not in the gamepass or are probably coming to it. And for 3rd party games, it is better to buy them for ps5 as ps5 games are easier to re-sell.

I have bought 1 game for xbox in a year, and that were xbox one versio of the quarry for 10€, cheap enough.

Without gamepass I would clearly have to buy more games for xbox. And I dont say it sucks, it is great deal for second system and there is games that I would never pay for, but for "free" I have tested and played them now.

But yes, I can imagine that it can drop bought games to almost zero for some gamers, that get what they want from the gamepass.

 

[MarkMe2525]

That's how I see it too.

Let's say they have data that suggest that an average player buys 10 games through the whole console generation, if they can get that person to spend 15$ per month instead, then it's a win.

But the calculus breaks down when you have to offer hundreds of games, and spread the revenue to third parties and your internal teams too.

If a publisher can have 10 high quality, sought-after GaaS, then putting all those in a subscription service bundle could make financial sense.

Edit : A subscription service offering older catalog games also can make financial sense, since the publisher will get recurring revenue from games that have already recoup it's cost.

I imagine a future where gamepass consist of primarily 1st party games. 3rd party content is just there to prop up the service while Xbox attempts to get their internal teams to a point where they get a new release every couple of months. I imagine indies will always be apart of the service as well to fill in gaps.

 

[Ezekiel_]

I imagine a future where gamepass consist of primarily 1st party games. 3rd party content is just there to prop up the service while Xbox attempts to get their internal teams to a point where they get a new release every couple of months. I imagine indies will always be apart of the service as well to fill in gaps.

Unless it's GaaS type updates every few months for their games, I don't see how that subscription service would be viable.

Full new games already take 3+ years to release, so to expect a publisher to release one of those every few months to maintain subscribers, I don't see how that's possible.

I see it as a publisher owning 10 successful GaaS in different genres, fully maintained and frequently updated with new content, and all bundled under one subscription service.

I assume this was MS plans all along, with how they set up Halo as being a '10 year' game. They could have a Forza 'infinite', a Gears of War 'infinite', a Fallout 76, a Elder's Scroll Online, etc.

The problem is that you still need good management and talent retention to pull it off...

ABK could have bolstered that plan, but, thankfully, regulators need to protect consumers and healthy market competition.

 

[Fuz]

Anyone that thought any different was either lying or dumb

 

[MasterCornholio]

 

[MarkMe2525]

Unless it's GaaS type updates every few months for their games, I don't see how that subscription service would be viable.

Full new games already take 3+ years to release, so to expect a publisher to release one of those every few months to maintain subscribers, I don't see how that's possible.

I see it as a publisher owning 10 successful GaaS in different genres, fully maintained and frequently updated with new content, and all bundled under one subscription service.

I assume this was MS plans all along, with how they set up Halo as being a '10 year' game. They could have a Forza 'infinite', a Gears of War 'infinite', a Fallout 76, a Elder's Scroll Online, etc.

The problem is that you still need good management and talent retention to pull it off...

ABK could have bolstered that plan, but, thankfully, regulators need to protect consumers and healthy market competition.

Well they have 23 studios with multiple teams and they are attempting to purchase one of the largest publishers on the planet. To me, it looks like they are setting the table for what I spoke of previously. Remember, I said primarily 1st party, not exclusively 1st party.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

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

Are you unable to read, or do you believe that all physical games are sold in Brazil? You do understand that companies do different things in different regions? For example Sony raised the PS5 price in some regions, but not all. Please let me know when MS removes all physical games.

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

Your link literally says there will always be a place for single player games. Please let me know if you are ok.

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

The article is about GamePass getting smaller story based games and episodic games because it's a good way to distribute them.

What the article isn't about is MS taking all of their games and making them episodic. Did you maybe link the wrong article? Because what I said and what you posted aren't related at all. I hope you are ok.

It's ok man, I am sure that those who believe in lizard people and 5G implants view others are crazy, too. Like I said, maybe eventually one day probably potentially you guys might be partially correct or something. Feel free to bump when it happens.

 

[twilo99]

Subscription services absolutely cannabilize traditional sales, but the point is to get enough people that normally don't spend any or much money in their ecosystem, to counteract the lost revenue.

That would be me.

I used to buy one game a year (CoD) but now I technically pay a little more but play 10x more titles for that extra money.

It's super convoluted, but hopefully I'm a net positive for the industry.

I'm also the target audience for this whole activision deal.

I would benefit greatly from CoD being in gamepass, but for whatever reason consumers like me are ignored by the government agencies and they are only concerned with the potential harm to PlayStation gamers.

 

[Batiman]

Fine by me. Just keep gamepass like it is and I won't be complaining

 

[SHA]

Yeah unfortunately Halo wasn't the same without Bungie and not a good launch for Xbox One.
They werent selling Halo 3 numbers anymore, so Subsciption sounded good on paper. While Nintendo and Playstation were selling 10+ million for 1st party games. Nintendo even more at times

I wonder what the board thought of it back then compared to now?

Its fans back in the day were old , I remember playing the ps2 while the og xbox if existed, something like 1 in 15 ratio, what's worse the demographic were old , it was futuristic but appealing to older players since the beginning , most kids said it's complicated, look how Sony build their demographic, they were all young and even with their age differences, their thoughts and ideas towards games were the same ,they have a lot in common and it was a compliment to share similar thoughts ; steam is a monopoly, they shouldn't have issues as they are if they demanded the 30% ,its just common sense, they shouldn't work for free ,no body does that , its community is bad ,there's no point on shielding with steam and demonizing ms, this isn't the 80s anymore, I don't understand demonizing ms as if they work for free and do all the s.

 

[DragonNCM]

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

[/URL][/URL]

Edit:

I need to see% of that cut first how much is it......1?2?5? or 25 ?
Till then this is talking bullshit to get some fame....

 

[DeepEnigma]

Till then this is talking bullshit to get some fame....

 

[mckmas8808]

I imagine a future where gamepass consist of primarily 1st party games. 3rd party content is just there to prop up the service while Xbox attempts to get their internal teams to a point where they get a new release every couple of months. I imagine indies will always be apart of the service as well to fill in gaps.

That'll put way too much pressure on MS to deliver though. Gamepass is as great as it is because it has alot of 1st and 3rd party games.

 

[chonga]

Subscription services absolutely cannabilize traditional sales, but the point is to get enough people that normally don't spend any or much money in their ecosystem, to counteract the lost revenue.

Which is fine if you a) don't claim otherwise and b) actually do replace that lost revenue.

We now know A was another lie to add to the long list of now proven lies and whilst B will only be known in the fullness of time it has been clear to many wise heads for a while now that they're failing on that front. They've been missing subscriber targets - growth just isn't where it needs to be. That means they need to up their game or up their prices. Well, there's also the option of cutting costs to gain margin.

 

[mckmas8808]

Which is fine if you a) don't claim otherwise and b) actually do replace that lost revenue.

We now know A was another lie to add to the long list of now proven lies and whilst B will only be known in the fullness of time it has been clear to many wise heads for a while now that they're failing on that front. They've been missing subscriber targets - growth just isn't where it needs to be. That means they need to up their game or up their prices. Well, there's also the option of cutting costs to gain margin.

Aren't they still at or around 25 million GP subs?

 

[SportsFan581]

That's how I see it too.

Let's say they have data that suggest that an average player buys 10 games through the whole console generation, if they can get that person to spend 15$ per month instead, then it's a win.

But the calculus breaks down when you have to offer hundreds of games, and spread the revenue to third parties and your internal teams too.

But 70% of a standard digital sale goes to the publisher/developer anyway and the development costs have to be covered regardless of if the game is purchased or rented (do the platform holders even get 30% on a physical sale? I have no idea). Any way you slice it, if you can entice your customers in to spending more money over the console cycle that seems like a win.

If the group spend nature of it results in players having access to a lot more software, that's a bonus for them.

 

[mdkirby]

Well duh…
Long term, ie generationally, the problem will be even more acute, particularly if the activision acquisition goes through.

It hugely shifts the value proposition, and value perception for gamers. We're seeing, and they are noting early indications of that. But once all guns are firing, ie all their many studios are regularly releasing many of the most popular IP's each year, "for free", and a generation of gamers grows up expecting most the years big tent pole releases, along with many others to be "free" in their yearly sub, that entire generation will be extremely adverse to spending £70 on a single AAA game, whether that is a playstion, Nintendo game, or just a third party game. Hell they'll also be highly adverse to spending £20 or £30 on small indies, which they will expect to either be in the service immediately or not long after release.

On the flip side, currently microsoft have been taking a loss leader approach with jamming the service with games, to grow the service whilst they've had limited first party offerings, and as such have been paying over the odds to secure titles for the service. Once all their first party games are regularly releasing (and assuming acti goes through), the pressure to cram the service with third parties will be lower, and I would expect those payments to be lower. At the same time trained player expectation for an entire generation will mean many studios have no choice but to be on the service and accept what is offered. For many studios and genres fighting for profitability will become extremely difficult. Unless they structure their games to adopt supplemental monetisation models. Which we all hate. And which are not easy to get right or implement either, further increasing the burden on smaller studios.

I personally subscribe to both PlayStation premium and gamespass. I can't say I get huge value from either as for many years I've bought every game I have vague interest in at or near release. So it's not that I won't get to play any of them, but I do fear that specifically the types of games i like to play. Narrative rich single player games will struggle to be economically viable under such conditions and will continue to become rarer and rarer.

 

[MarkMe2525]

We now know A was another lie to add to the long list of now proven lies and

What are you talking about?

 

[ProtoByte]

the devs are still getting paid, the ones devaluating their franchises are MS and games devaluation ALREADY HAPPENED with steam sales.
so far the "premium" games i got with the subscription were as well put together as anything else, so i don't see the reason for the doom and gloom tbh

hell if anything we already know that a bunch of good games wouldn't have been made without gamepass according to the devs hemselves.

you see it as devaluation of the media, I see it as offering a safety net for devs to take risks

Imagine bringing up Steam sales as a counter argument to subscription services. Lol

Also: What risks?

 

[ProtoByte]

This is spin and misinformation at its finest.

The reason the game is seeing we on steam has absolutely nothing to do with gamepass. It's selling on its own merits, don't take that away from the team that worked on it.

Noting that we have no idea what it's actually selling on Steam. We only know that it peaked at arond 6.5 thousand concurrent players. Being at the top of the steam charts for a quick burst, particularly in dry periods like January-February, means nothing for actual hard numbers, as has been displayed numerous times. So we can't even label Hi-Fi Rush as a smash sales success.

 

[alphachino]

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

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

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

The concept of the positive effect is this:

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

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

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

Thank you for writing JK at the end there. Before that I thought what you were actually being serious.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Noting that we have no idea what it's actually selling on Steam. We only know that it peaked at arond 6.5 thousand concurrent players. Being at the top of the steam charts for a quick burst, particularly in dry periods like January-February, means nothing for actual hard numbers, as has been displayed numerous times. So we can't even label Hi-Fi Rush as a smash sales success.

Wait what? are you serious? I have been going off how it's been spun on here and was under the impression that it's breaking some sort of sales record.

 

[Majukun]

Imagine bringing up Steam sales as a counter argument to subscription services. Lol

Also: What risks?

imagine missing the entire point like you did

what risks?
Pentiment, one of the best titles of 2022, wouldn't have happened if not for gamepass according to the dev himself

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-new...ame-would-not-exist-without-game-pass-3351838

 

[FullMetalx117]

imagine missing the entire point like you did

what risks?
Pentiment, one of the best titles of 2022, wouldn't have happened if not for gamepass according to the dev himself

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-new...ame-would-not-exist-without-game-pass-3351838

Yeah Microsoft was throwing money left and right just to get any game on there. Kind of like arcade in the 360 days. So yeah I guess the dev is technically right - Microsoft was looking to spend money to prop up a service and I guess were the only capital provider at the time to fund this.

 

[Chozoldman]

 

[ergem]

If sub service become the norm to consume games, MS or Sony or whatever company will cash in and all other pubs and devs will have to live with whatever pity the sub service owners will give them. This will shrink the competition and creativity. All decision making will boil down to few people at the helm of the subcription service.

I'm okay with sub service as it is now where it is consumed by minority of gamers. I guess it also helps with those who are tight on budget. But as soon as it becomes the principal way for us to consume games, it would erode the competition and the kinds of games that are made now.

Hence, I like what Sony is doing keeping it only as a side project.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

I said this in the very beginning. There's no way Gamepass doesn't affect actual game sales.

 

[20cent]

What.. you guys don't buy games you already are given access to for few dollars a month?

 

[DeepEnigma]

What.. you guys don't buy games you already are given access to for few dollars a month?

 

[Crayon]

You know what's a great opportunity to use your fucking brain? Next time an indie developer with their game plastered all over the front page talks about how awesome gamepass is for their business.

 

[oldergamer]

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

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

So which is it? Someone is lying bro.

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

Why is it two things cant exist? They are saying sales dwindle after 12 months. 3rd party games are NOT typically in gamepass for 12 months!

Like seriously, increased sales early on with decreased sales later cant both be true at the same time? Its not that difficult to understand

 

[SportsFan581]

@ E ergem I think you underestimate the level of competition that would exist between the available services if subscriptions were the primary method of consumption. Just like between Hulu and Netflix, it would be extremely likely that bidding wars for marquee third-party content would drive prices up not down. However, I don't see any realistic scenario where digital purchases don't remain an important piece of the puzzle.

 

[KaiserBecks]

What was said 5 years ago must be true today!

 

[RickMasters]

Same thing happened in the music biz and the movie biz. I love my vinyl and CD collections. I also work in the music industry, and so I know first hand how tech and consumer demands can change things,in a short space of time and in some cases put people out of jobs, overnight. scary thought. . Consumer demands will always shape these things. regardless of what people think of GP right now, on GAF, subscription of services will be the future.

A game costs more than an album to make in most cases, so id imagine the cost impact being much bigger for the games biz...but long term? thats where consumers are heading. nobody cares about owning physical copies of media anymore and if people no longer feel that way about art then I hate to break it to you but video games dont stand a chance. The fact that things like fortnight, and mobile games make more money than most AAA games says it all really.



In a world thats in a recession..people struggling to make ends meet....yet video games.. a non-essential entertainment medium is getting closer to $100 a pop. And the games themselves are getting more expensive to make.... gamepass may go up in price someday. But it will always be cheaper than buying two or three full priced games. Im sure it does canibalise sales in the same way streaming hurts record and movie sales. But subs and streaming is also the distribution method all other forms or entertainment have accepted as the dominant form of consumption...gaming will sooner or later catch up with consumer habits in other areas of entertainment.



Is GP sustainable? I dunno, but is making triple AAA games that dont meet their sales projections after tens or hundreds of millions spent on development, sustainable (Im sure square could tell us a thing ort wo about that) ? And what happens when the prices go up on games again? because AAA game development isnt getting cheaper, these games require more people than ever to make in most cases...What happens when that expense is handed to the user again, people were crying about the current price?..... sure subscription prices may go up but so will game prices....but what does this subscription Vs buy-to-play argument look like when its say £150 for a years worth of GP versus 100 bucks for the latest single player action game with movie like set pieces and 30 hours of gameplay? and maybe 80 bucks more for the usual 'year one' DLC pass? is that gonna be economically sustainable for the average gamers (or parents) wallets?



On a side note: I spend a lot of time between england the US, jamaica/the carribean and latin america, and most people in some of the places ive worked can barely afford a big screen TV...but they have internet, and a smart phone, some with the odd game or two on there..they have netflix, some even have spotify because these things give affordable access to modern entertainment. For people in poorer countries with internet access things like gamepass are gonna be huge, this is something Ive seen for myself.

 

[ProtoByte]

imagine missing the entire point like you did

Your point was that the existence of steam sales (often where AAA games sell their lowest number of copies platform-by-platform by the by) somehow devalues games at all/to even nearly the same extent as a subscription service where you have access to hundreds of games, many of them on launch, for a monthly fee that amounts to a fraction of most Steam sale prices for recent tentpole releases.

It's a ridiculous idea.

what risks?
Pentiment, one of the best titles of 2022, wouldn't have happened if not for gamepass according to the dev himself

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-new...ame-would-not-exist-without-game-pass-3351838

Josh Sawyer can say that all he likes, and it makes him either a liar or a part of a truthfully incapable studio. This is what I don't like about games discourse when it comes to "taking risks" or whatever: There's nothing risky or new about a narrative adventure game with a not-so-quirky artstyle. Certainly not when it's cheap to make. Do you think David Cage's games are "risky"? They're more financially risky than Pentiment, that's for sure.

We're really going to sit here and pretend that fucking Obsidian couldn't make Pentiment without Gamepass, when a bunch of Estonian tankies came out with Disco Elysium to massive critical and financial success 3 years beforehand?

 

[Fess]

Subscription services absolutely cannabilize traditional sales, but the point is to get enough people that normally don't spend any or much money in their ecosystem, to counteract the lost revenue.

Yeah this is how all subscriptions work. Apple Music, Netflix, Spotify, Disney+. The only way sales increase through subscriptions is if the subscribers are talking so much about something new that they essentially end up like walking ads and get non-subscribers to buy something they never planned to buy.

The issue with Gamepass and especially Series game sales is that it's the core gamers who're using subscriptions, those who usually buy maybe up to 1 game per month, and the mainstream gamers aren't subbing yet and buy maybe 1 game per year and still play on their old Xbox One.
When Xbox Series exclusives starts to pop up. How will the game sales numbers look?

The only thing that will increase right now among the core group through the "Gamepass subscribers are walking ads" strategy is Steam sales. Some just don't want to use the Windows Store versions. I know I'll play Starfield on Steam, I doubt the Windows Store/Gamepass version will be as good with mods.

 

[ProtoByte]

Wait what? are you serious? I have been going off how it's been spun on here and was under the impression that it's breaking some sort of sales record.

Hi-Fi RUSH - Steam Charts

An ongoing analysis of Steam's player numbers, seeing what's been played the most.

steamcharts.com

Excuse me: I overshot the number by almost 500. Peak concurrent players was 6043. It's hovering pretty consistently at the 2.5-3k mark now.

That spin you mentioned often occurs when the Steam Top Sellers lists and sometimes even concurrent player numbers get made into headlines. There's usually no indication ofnwhat the absolute number is, and that's important.

In the case of Hi-Fi Rush though, it's clear that it is not a smash-hit seller.

 

[quest]

Your point was that the existence of steam sales (often where AAA games sell their lowest number of copies platform-by-platform by the by) somehow devalues games at all/to even nearly the same extent as a subscription service where you have access to hundreds of games, many of them on launch, for a monthly fee that amounts to a fraction of most Steam sale prices for recent tentpole releases.

It's a ridiculous idea.


Josh Sawyer can say that all he likes, and it makes him either a liar or a part of a truthfully incapable studio. This is what I don't like about games discourse when it comes to "taking risks" or whatever: There's nothing risky or new about a narrative adventure game with a not-so-quirky artstyle. Certainly not when it's cheap to make. Do you think David Cage's games are "risky"? They're more financially risky than Pentiment, that's for sure.

We're really going to sit here and pretend that fucking Obsidian couldn't make Pentiment without Gamepass, when a bunch of Estonian tankies came out with Disco Elysium to massive critical and financial success 3 years beforehand?

Considering how bad of financial shape Obsidian was in no chance in hell they make his game with out Gamepass. They were making AA games before Microsoft and had zero room for error that could of bankrupted the studio. They would only green light something safe like the outer worlds.

 

[darrylgorn]

If you look at the external documents, they clearly show that gamepass cannibalizes buy-to-play games 'that deserve it'.

 

[Yoboman]

imagine missing the entire point like you did

what risks?
Pentiment, one of the best titles of 2022, wouldn't have happened if not for gamepass according to the dev himself

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-new...ame-would-not-exist-without-game-pass-3351838

That's the benefit of Gamepass. It's a low risk platform so low risk games, low investment games naturally fit there

What doesn't work with the model is AAA high risk games

 

[Chronicle]

Look at it this way. Do you think halo would still be selling like hotcakes if it wasnt on gamepass? People on gaf tend not to look at ms without emotion involved. They wouldn't have launched game pass if it couldn't be profitable. Period. It has a clear business case. Games dont always sell at full price 12 months after launch. We are not talking about GTA or something like that.

It may be a moot point if most games sales typically dwindle after the first 4 months.

You think a game like cod that sells in the BILLIONS of dollars is going to turn that profit with gamepass? Get of the crack! It sells more on PlayStation ffs!

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Same thing happened in the music biz and the movie biz. I love my vinyl and CD collections. I also work in the music industry, and so I know first hand how tech and consumer demands can change things,in a short space of time and in some cases put people out of jobs, overnight. scary thought. . Consumer demands will always shape these things. regardless of what people think of GP right now, on GAF, subscription of services will be the future.

A game costs more than an album to make in most cases, so id imagine the cost impact being much bigger for the games biz...but long term? thats where consumers are heading. nobody cares about owning physical copies of media anymore and if people no longer feel that way about art then I hate to break it to you but video games dont stand a chance. The fact that things like fortnight, and mobile games make more money than most AAA games says it all really.



In a world thats in a recession..people struggling to make ends meet....yet video games.. a non-essential entertainment medium is getting closer to $100 a pop. And the games themselves are getting more expensive to make.... gamepass may go up in price someday. But it will always be cheaper than buying two or three full priced games. Im sure it does canibalise sales in the same way streaming hurts record and movie sales. But subs and streaming is also the distribution method all other forms or entertainment have accepted as the dominant form of consumption...gaming will sooner or later catch up with consumer habits in other areas of entertainment.



Is GP sustainable? I dunno, but is making triple AAA games that dont meet their sales projections after tens or hundreds of millions spent on development, sustainable (Im sure square could tell us a thing ort wo about that) ? And what happens when the prices go up on games again? because AAA game development isnt getting cheaper, these games require more people than ever to make in most cases...What happens when that expense is handed to the user again, people were crying about the current price?..... sure subscription prices may go up but so will game prices....but what does this subscription Vs buy-to-play argument look like when its say £150 for a years worth of GP versus 100 bucks for the latest single player action game with movie like set pieces and 30 hours of gameplay? and maybe 80 bucks more for the usual 'year one' DLC pass? is that gonna be economically sustainable for the average gamers (or parents) wallets?



On a side note: I spend a lot of time between england the US, jamaica/the carribean and latin america, and most people in some of the places ive worked can barely afford a big screen TV...but they have internet, and a smart phone, some with the odd game or two on there..they have netflix, some even have spotify because these things give affordable access to modern entertainment. For people in poorer countries with internet access things like gamepass are gonna be huge, this is something Ive seen for myself.

i think your analysis is quite wrong and misguided that i dont even know where to start.


the only thing i am going to say is this:

Subscription services are not the future but the present.

AAA dev/publishing have been already changed by the consumers.

Game Pass is just an evolution of previous services.

in poor countries where people can barely afford a big TV. what makes you believe they will waste their precious internet/mobile data playing videogames on the cloud when they can access Free games natively on their smartphone? not even mentioning that data centers are not a priority in those places.

 

[RickMasters]

i think your analysis is quite wrong and misguided that i dont even know where to start.


the only thing i am going to say is this:

Subscription services are not the future but the present.

AAA dev/publishing have been already changed by the consumers.

Game Pass is just an evolution of previous services.

in poor countries where people can barely afford a big TV. what makes you believe they will waste their precious internet/mobile data playing videogames on the cloud when they can access Free games natively on their smartphone? not even mentioning that data centers are not a priority in those places.

No offence but What you think doesnt matter. Im talking about where things are CLEARLY going. just because you dont agree dont make it a misguided point of view.




They are the preset but they are also the future..all consumer habits in pretty much all forms of enmtertainment show that we wont be going backwards anytime soon, so yeas its the future.

" AAA dev/publishing have been already changed by the consumers." and will continue to do so. Thats the nature of business.

"Game Pass is just an evolution of previous services.".... so you agree that subscrition models are the future then.

"in poor countries where people can barely afford a big TV. "....Im gonna stop you right there, as somebody that spend enough time in poorer countries to know better..firstly most are njot as backwards as you think. there are parts of the carribean and africa where with 150BMPS+ fibre optic ....also you dont need a big TV. most get by on a 32 inch LCD just fine and dont care much for NIT brightness or HDR. just being able to play a moder game is enough....... I own a WiiU, Xbox series and PS4 pro at my house in jamaica and I bought all of them in jamaica... A third world country with fibre optic and 4KTVs readily available.... I and unlimited DATA packages from about 20 bucks. I access my gamepass in jamaica all the time. you would be suprised how many people in the carribean and poorer latin america have access. and these are considered poor/third world countries They just dont have the expendable income we are used to where we can buy 2 or 3 70 dollar games a month. but poorer countries dont mean living in mud huts with a couple solar panels, mate. some are a lot more developed than you are aware of. I know people with zinc roofs who have TVs and a game system, a smart phone and netflix (even if its shared with a relative from abroad). people do what they can and must. even when poor. They still want entertainment and will pay what they can for it. you didnt know that?


"what makes you believe they will waste their precious internet/mobile data playing videogames"......The fact that consoles TV and internet are infact available in more of them than you think.

 

[supernova8]

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

You're right I was imagining it apparently haha. Only an X bundle as you say.

The S bundle I've seen is even more a joke. Bundled with... Fortnite, Rocket League, and Fall Guys!!! hahahaa fucking hell F2P games how generous!!!! I think it does include some in-game currency but that's nothing special. I suppose it's worth it if you were planning to play those games anyway.