Support NeoGAF

[NickFire]

My advice is just wait for sales numbers to trickle in if you care about it. They're giving people every possible option to play the game. PS, Xbox, PC, or GP. Play it however you want. If people don't show up to play it, that's just how it is sometimes. Lots of stuff I've enjoyed in the past has bombed. Up to them to regroup and figure out what they want to do. I'll just play the stuff I think looks good.

I honestly don't understand why you'd even bring up decreasing quality because of GP strictly as a hypothetical with zero evidence. The game is clearly not lower budget than the previous games. It has an 85 MC. It looks like the 2016 one is 79 and Eternal is 88. Most people that have played it on here are saying it's a good game. It's a single player game with no tacked on modes or GAAS stuff. I don't even understand what you're hypothetically pointing to.

Decreasing quality is an absolute risk if the planned release mechanism is subscription. Quantity / steady flow matters for subs. It is what it is. All that said, MS is still in the business of selling games, and has actually expanded the locations where they sell games further than ever. And they are making bank looking at who is dominating PS charts recently. So I am not overly worried about them focusing more on quantity over quality at this point in time.

On the more direct topic, I think its also obvious that becoming reliant on subs is a risk for developers. The more reliant they become the more they can be leveraged when they are not as needed. And we all know there have been devs shuttered after release. But again, there are positives. Sub revenue can help float a new dev or help whether a crunch. They might get exposure they couldn't have dreamt of in a million years. Heck, they might get a chance to develop a game that no one would otherwise think was commercially viable even.

Subs can also help or hurt the consumer. Some may get a treasure trove of games at a cheap cost. Some may overpay compared to buying the few they play. Pros and cons abound. Personally, I think subs will cause the devs / publishers to juice all of us even more on micros and retail prices. But it is what it is. If it becomes too much I'll just buy less overall, buy more on sale, and/or try to avoid getting caught in micro traps. Not a huge deal.

 

[Punished Miku]

Decreasing quality is an absolute risk if the planned release mechanism is subscription. Quantity / steady flow matters for subs. It is what it is. All that said, MS is still in the business of selling games, and has actually expanded the locations where they sell games further than ever. And they are making bank looking at who is dominating PS charts recently. So I am not overly worried about them focusing more on quantity over quality at this point in time.

On the more direct topic, I think its also obvious that becoming reliant on subs is a risk for developers. The more reliant they become the more they can be leveraged when they are not as needed. And we all know there have been devs shuttered after release. But again, there are positives. Sub revenue can help float a new dev or help whether a crunch. They might get exposure they couldn't have dreamt of in a million years. Heck, they might get a chance to develop a game that no one would otherwise think was commercially viable even.

Subs can also help or hurt the consumer. Some may get a treasure trove of games at a cheap cost. Some may overpay compared to buying the few they play. Pros and cons abound. Personally, I think subs will cause the devs / publishers to juice all of us even more on micros and retail prices. But it is what it is. If it becomes too much I'll just buy less overall, buy more on sale, and/or try to avoid getting caught in micro traps. Not a huge deal.

If it was sub exclusive I would be a lot more critical. So I agree there for sure.

 

[Unknown?]

"$80 video games are a steal."
- Shuhei Yoshida, 1 week ago

I'm cool with the dangerous situation of playing non-stop cool shit for cheap on Gamepass, thanks.

Just to explain what he means in the above, $80 video games are literally so cheap he thinks you're stealing. He wants to go much higher than that.

And thanks to Nintendo, it will!

 

[Generic]

Dude wants games to cost $80.

 

[poppabk]

Just keep in mind the old adage of "you get what you pay for".

Game Pass is having a helluva run right now, but it wasn't that long ago that the Game Pass releases were lackluster at best and people were complaining about a severe lack of quality first party games. Wasn't that long ago that people were denigrating Game Pass by calling it "Indie Pass".

Eventually this current run will turn into a drought, again.

But that is counter to his argument. He is saying that as more first party games end up on the service, indies etc will be squeezed out, if there is a drought of first party then MS will be filling the gaps with deals for indie and other games.
He has a point though - part of the advantage of a subscription service for the owner is that overtime you build up a catalog of your own content that can just sit there on the service not costing you anything. MS could fairly quickly fill up most of the catalog with stuff they own, leaving others out in the cold.
If MS were in a stronger position it would be concerning, but with the current market it is irrelevant.

 

[Unknown?]

Dude wants games to cost $80.

Nintendo wanted it more.

 

[Durin]

Honestly if the implementation was better, I think Nintendo's model is probably healthier for the industry.

When you pay a sub to have access to a big library of older games, it gives younger people a cheap way to get introduced to older classics, people who weren't interested enough another chance to play, and it doesn't devalue new product. Again, their implementation could be better in what games they give you, and not having an ala cart buy option sucks...but making a sub just a big bundle of old stuff I think is a good value-add.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

He's right about the fear of corporate censorship. Imagine if Microsoft was in charge of what games would be allowed to be made lmao

 

[Holammer]

IMO the problem is engagement requirements. For a developer to get the maximum payout when having a game on Apple Arcade or Game Pass, they need to retain users for as long as possible. Which leads to filler content, daily challenges and currency/time-locked content.
It's not as bad on Game Pass [yet] since the games are sold elsewhere, but if the service becomes more popular, developers will attempt to maximize daily engagement and console games will be built like gacha Skinner boxes.

"Want to unlock the next Zone? Haha! Not so fast buddy, you need to collection 120 Rubies first."

 

[AtomicStarving]

He is not wrong. The hole MS got itself into was: increasing the price of the service no matter what. It's a snowball effect.

 

[near]

I think Game Pass is fantastic value for consumers, at least right now. I don't have an Xbox or subscribe to PC Game Pass myself, but it's easy to see the appeal. The issue is more about the long term implications if it grows the way Netflix did, a shift toward devalued content and games designed around engagement metrics rather than creative vision, resulting in generic, risk averse output.

That kind of future isn't guaranteed, especially since the marketplace doesn't revolve around Microsoft or Xbox at the moment, and other major platform holders haven't embraced the same subscription model.

Still, Shu is absolutely right to raise concerns. His point isn't that Game Pass is inherently bad, but that a subscription dominated ecosystem, where the platform owner curates what gets in could end up gatekeeping creativity. If subscriptions become the primary way to access games, only titles that align with the platform's priorities may get exposure or funding. That's a serious risk for innovation and indie development.

 

[{insert code here}]

I'd pay 25/month for a script that had every PS1/PS2/PS3 game on it. I think this model works best (and maybe only works) for games/hardware that are out of print.

I'd also be okay with a publisher-specific model. I'd pay Capcom or Square or Sega 10/month if they gave me a catalog of every game they produced up through the PS4 era.

 

[yogaflame]

I agree. For example Netflix has been very bad to the cinema, movie and tv industry which affected producers and actors and actresses profit and the movies and tv show quality has been going down, and worse very much woke infested in Netflix. Same with Gamepass, it is cannibalizing the suppose to be earnings for developers and also affecting games quality.

 

[Little Chicken]

Am I supposed to trust the judgement of the man who thought Demon's Souls was shit?

 

[Spukc]

Am I supposed to trust the judgement of the man who thought Demon's Souls was shit?

Demon souls was shit.
Dark souls however…

 

[damidu]

luckily game subscription did not and will not take off. already plateud.
seems like it is more dangerous to platform holders if you bet your whole business on it.

 

[Humdinger]

Just to point out a nuance that people might be overlooking, Shu stated, "If the only way for people to play games is through subscriptions, that's really dangerous, because what games can be created will be dictated by the owner of the subscription service."

I understand his concern, but we are a long ways off from subscription services being "the only way for people to play games."

 

[Punished Miku]

Just to point out a nuance that people might be overlooking, Shu stated, "If the only way for people to play games is through subscriptions, that's really dangerous, because what games can be created will be dictated by the owner of the subscription service."

I understand his concern, but we are a long ways off from subscription services being "the only way for people to play games."

It's just nonsense. If PC, phones, handhelds and consoles cease to exist then subs could be dangerous. Is he talking about a global EMP terrorist attack or some kind of catastrophic solar flare that sets us back to the pre-electrical age?

Even with movies and music where subs have become the absolute dominant way to consume the content, you can still release it outside subs anytime you want.

 

[rm082e]

Demon souls was shit.
Dark souls however…

 

[Humdinger]

It's just nonsense. If PC, phones, handhelds and consoles cease to exist then subs could be dangerous.

Is he talking about a global EMP terrorist attack or some kind of catastrophic solar flare that sets us back to the pre-electrical age?

Haha, no, I think he's talking about sub services becoming so dominant, such the automatic default choice, that only a small minority obtain games in other ways.

I suppose anything is possible, but I don't think that scenario is likely. Not anytime soon, anyhow.

 

[Gambit2483]

I generally try to steer clear of subscription services. It's not the way I want to engage with my entertainment. They create a sort of innate stress that I have to play and watch as much as I can to get value from the monthly sub fee.

Exactly. Not only that but the way that we engage with games are much different from tv shows.

Games are a bigger time investment and require hours and hours of engagement whereas with tv you can watch several shows or movies in the same amount of time it would take you to finish just one game. You're just not getting the same amount of content per time/money.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

I mean, after the dust settled (along with Microsoft in PS Store) reality tells us that he's not wrong. Nor was Ryan, for that matter.

 

[PlayStaytion]

Yes, thinking of and referring to your customers (and potential customers) as idiots always works so well.

The FPS genre is safe, there's bias towards fps in the industry as well as some other genre. Fortunately, even dangerous platforms like X and Reddit can't change the bias.

 

[Spukc]

 

[POKEYCLYDE]

Former Playstation exec praises what Playstation is doing and warns that their competitor's strategy may harm the industry. Shocking.

Here are a few examples of games that are recently killing it without being in a subscription service: Schedule 1, Mouthwashing and 9 Kings.

Here are some games that eventually came to sub services but killed it regardless: Balatro, Nine Sols and Vampire Survivors.

And here are some games that despite being day 1 launched in a sub service, did extremely well: Expedition 33, Palworld and Oblivion Remastered. (If you take issue with Oblivion sub that in for Another Crab's Treasure)

All that to say; Quality games sell if they are in a subscription service or not. Games find success without sub services and they find success in sub services.