mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Other Executives agree with him though.
Game Pass creates an ecosystem where developers are not valued and rewarded, says ex-Bethesda and Microsoft exec Pete Hines
- Thread starter LakeOf9
- Start date
Other Executives agree with him though.
mayham2199
Member
It doesn't matter. They will excuse and dismiss whatever anyone says. They did the same thing when devs were complaining about the Series S. They just dismiss and insult the people trying to make valid critique.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Because executives are the most trust worthy people in the world are aren't selfish pieces of shit that only care about themselves and lining their own pockets by stealing from hardworking people underneath them. Yeah, I'll trust that group's motives.
Plus to add to that......
Former Bethesda Exec Says Gaming Subscription Services 'Worth Jack S***' Without Proper Support for Game Developers - IGN | shawn layden | 21 comments
Final Friday post: I'm just going to leave this here. I believe Pete's colorful quote hits this nail right on the head. The question is not, "is the service profitable for the platform". Is it healthy and helpful for the developer is what we need to ask. https://lnkd.in/guHygh-v | 21 comments...www.linkedin.com
Bobby Kotick Won't Allow Call of Duty on Subscription Services on Day One, Franchise Earns Over 2x on PS Than Xbox
CEO Bobby Kotick says he won't put CoD on subscription services on day one, and that PlayStation earns twice as much as Xbox through the franchise.mp1st.com
Take-Two CEO Says Launching New Games Into A Subscription Service Like Game Pass Makes No Sense
"I don't think that ever made sense. I still don't think it makes sense."www.gamespot.com
It's EXTREMELY obvious at this point that GamePass overall isn't rewarding for most developers and publishers.
the dynamics of launching new games into a service like GamePass would differ if you're third party vs first party.
Microsoft gets recurring revenue from GP subs to offset retail losses. Third party AAA publishers cannot. It makes sense for the then Activision CEO and Take 2 CEO to be adamant that it wouldn't work for them without crazy money
The hilarious thing about this example is that we're most of the way through the gen and devs have adjusted.
All the scaremongering about the console 'holding back the gen' have been proven to be unfounded, third party devs haven't dropped the platform and the baseline for the gen is dropping even lower to the Switch 2.
But if you were truly here for logic, you'd understand that MS going third party effectively quashes the arguments in the OP.
Not_A-Cop_Maybe
Member
All this is great but people here seem to be missing the point of how games get brought onto game pass or just how business works.Plus to add to that......
Former Bethesda Exec Says Gaming Subscription Services 'Worth Jack S***' Without Proper Support for Game Developers - IGN | shawn layden | 21 comments
Final Friday post: I'm just going to leave this here. I believe Pete's colorful quote hits this nail right on the head. The question is not, "is the service profitable for the platform". Is it healthy and helpful for the developer is what we need to ask. https://lnkd.in/guHygh-v | 21 comments...
Bobby Kotick Won't Allow Call of Duty on Subscription Services on Day One, Franchise Earns Over 2x on PS Than Xbox
CEO Bobby Kotick says he won't put CoD on subscription services on day one, and that PlayStation earns twice as much as Xbox through the franchise.mp1st.com
Take-Two CEO Says Launching New Games Into A Subscription Service Like Game Pass Makes No Sense
"I don't think that ever made sense. I still don't think it makes sense."
It's EXTREMELY obvious at this point that GamePass overall isn't rewarding for most developers and publishers.
Profitability of developers and publishers are not the concern of Xbox. Specifically, outside of Xbox owned studios- How the sausage gets made, has nothing to do with Xbox.
Xbox pays developers and publishers to put thier game on gamepass. What the developers and publishers do with that money involves nothing from Xbox other the promise of putting that game(s) on gamepass. The cost they paid you to put it on gamepass was to offset whatever the company deemed fit- that cost can offset payroll, r&d, marketing, pulishing, etc. Xbox doesnt give a shit- they only care that you either brought the game to xbox or to gamepass.
Assuming the lot of you work a job. There is always the company you work for and the customer, whom the company provides goods and services to.
If a customer comes to you and says, "hello- i would like to purchase X, how much would that cost me?" - The company says - "yes, it will cost Y". The customer then gets to say yes or no to that transaction once quoted a price.
If the customer says yes- the customer does not give a shit how the company spends Y to make X. The only term of that deal was to provide X for Y. The customer gets no say in things like "oh make sure 25% of Y on your employees, 50% on your exec's on their hookers and blow budgets, and then 25% on QC for X product" - That's not how the relationship works.
The first party games that are day one on game pass are financed through how either game pass revenue or dictated by Xbox themselves.
The people that have been clamouring about how gamepass eats away at sales, puts devs and publishers at risk- Yeah no shit- But they got paid to do that.
The costs of game devlopement have frankly got so inflated, and in many cases the teams are often far too large for what actually gets made. Thats not on Xbox, that's an industry wide problem.
If devs and publishers are complaing they are going out of business because of gamepass, then they are simple scapegoating the wrong thing. The real fundamental issues is that executives and shareholders drive profits over everything.
There have been several devs who after putting there game on gamepass have said, that the success of their game not only being released and potentially to critical acclaim is due to the fact that they were given money to put the game on gamepass.
If you put your game on gamepass, you get an incentive by xbox- whether that is money, assistance to publish, etc. Its not on xbox to make you profitable, thats your company's job. If your game does not sell well, but was only able to get released cause to took that gamepass cash to invest in your company, fine tune the game, market the game, etc- that has nothing to do with xbox.
If anything the gamepass model means developers and publishers have to not only ensure their game is actually good, but actually puts the onus on that company's management to make sure they actually manage their finances, people, quality- shit that they are exactly supposed to do.
This guy clamoring that devs arent valued? Thats not on xbox or the consumer. You want to get valued? - Make good games. You want your company to profitable- spend less money on shit like SBI and put the game's vision directly in the hands of the devlopers- not execs or shareholders.
Like no shit bobby "im not as bad as weinstein" kotick and the take two guys have a problem with subs- they make enough money to fund their shit- they dont need xbox to pony up money to "take away" revenue for a dog shit game they can sell to the public for 70 dollars. They are too big to fail. They know, that if they put their game on a sub like gamepass- more people will likely be willing to try the game, but that also means more people are willing to play the game, see if its even worth their time to play. If its not, word of mouth will affect game sales as more people can see what kind of game you've made- Is it a turd or is it actually good.
I as a consumer want choices- Everything costs more- Whether you live under that orange cheeto in the US, or you live under Lukashenko in Belarus, everything costs more. I dont want to spend money on a game that is dog shit. If i have a service like gamepass, i can play the game, and still choose to support the dev/publisher by buying the game at full price, discount, etc; literally nothing stoping me from doing so. If its on a sub like gamepass, the devs got paid- if they go out of business cause their execs decided we need 10% more revenue to look good, thats not on me or gamepass. Why would you as a conusmer want anything that makes your spending power worse? How in the world does that make it better for us who want to play as many games as possible in this economy?
Last edited:
coffinbirth
Member
Actually, it showed us Xbox surpassing Playstation for CoD players for the first time in nearly TEN YEARS.
That was the FIRST CoD game to release into Game Pass day one, mind you. They gained 12% marketshare in one year. That's pretty big for the biggest IP in the industry.
mayham2199
Member
It's hard to know cause we just got reports that gamepass users spend like 5 mins in a game. So sure maybe they had more players but I think at the end of the day what MS cares about is where is the majority of their revenue coming from? My guess is from the people who spent $70 on the game.
Punished Miku
Gaslighter Pro: 16.7 Fireflops
You got a random comment talking about Indiana Jones and trying to make the beginning more appealing. You didn't get any damn "reports."
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
So you think they are all lying about GamePass given the context? Why would they do that?
Understood. But two of those people at one point in time also worked for Microsoft though. And they still said what they said about GamePass. Specially Xbox's old VP where she said.....
This is a very interesting point that she made, but it seems like some people don't want to have that conversation (not to say GP is all bad of course).
coffinbirth
Member
They didn't spend five minutes in CoD on GamePass and then go buy it on another platform. They garnered 12 marketshare. All Xbox metrics are up year over year besides hardware. Record profits in that regard. Xbox player retention for CoD is up too. MTX generates more profits than the base game. You do the math.
PlayStaytion
Member
The reason consoles won't allow games like Schedule 1 to be made is the same reason we don't usually get what we want, it's enshittification.
BlackTron
Member
This isn't some one-off cryptic comment, it's a direct statement that they know how Gamepass users behave, from the game's director. So what if he got there by talking about the beginning of games? Whether it's a good or bad thing is a different topic. For you to think it's good though, you must think the reports are valid enough.
PlayStaytion
Member
The %1 for nicknames and badges. I'm %110 certain, with money, way more than that for sure. Not everyone wants to show their faces and talk about it.
Punished Miku
Gaslighter Pro: 16.7 Fireflops
It's not "reports." It's a developer speaking casually in an interview about design goals for a subscription. You can't take that as some fact based claim about all games in a literal sense and call it "reports." Just say what it is.This isn't some one-off cryptic comment, it's a direct statement that they know how Gamepass users behave, from the game's director. So what if he got there by talking about the beginning of games? Whether it's a good or bad thing is a different topic. For you to think it's good though, you must think the reports are valid enough.
I don't doubt that developers focused on maximizing gamepass retention might want to make the beginning appealing. Doesn't mean I take this one guy's casual comment in an interview as some factual breakdown of playtime for all titles. As usual, only people with a permanent axe to grind jump on things like this. It's not even a negative. If you just think about it for 5 seconds, they obviously will eventually pick a title they like and play it for more than 5 minutes. They're trying multiple games. The way that this comment about 5 minutes was twisted is absurd, like people literally never play a game more than 5 minutes on GP.
Last edited:
BlackTron
Member
"As for Game Pass, we know the behavior of players."
So he lied?
Again, maybe separate whether it is positive or negative from whether it actually happened or is "allowed" to be referenced.
Punished Miku
Gaslighter Pro: 16.7 Fireflops
Try reading my reply to you slowly.
The real question is why you're avoiding the conversation that these concerns are now moot, now there is more than sufficient platform for retail sales of good games to thrive.
Outer Worlds 2 will release day one on PS5 and Steam, along with Xbox. In that situation, do you think it would make any iota of sense to blame any retail shortfall on GamePass?
Bumblebeetuna
Banned
Yes Peter Hines, the same guy overseeing Bethesda when Redfall devs were being forced to make it an always online service game.
Have whatever opinions you want about GamePass and its effect on the industry. But let's not start acting like executives are some bastion of knowledge and truth in the gaming world. They are literally the source of all of the problems in the industry right now. Borderlands 4 is about to launch with characters and parts of the map locked behind a paywall. Games will be $80 going forward. Shitty anti-consumer nonsense like this is because of executives.
Obviously they aren't going to like GamePass.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Not if doing the bolded means less people buy into the Xbox ecosystem. Ultimately MS wants more GamePass subscribers. And the best way to do that is through increased Xbox hardware sells.
Are we talking about the same Microsoft that raised prices on their consoles, while announcing plans to essentially go multiplatform?
Lmao
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Funny and ironically enough, we are lol. I don't know what they are doing either.
