Support NeoGAF

[Bumblebeetuna]

It's worth keeping in mind that a lot of devs that are supporting GamePass are only doing so with older content that's relatively low-risk. For newer games, Microsoft is paying an insane amount of money - more than is probably sustainable long-term.

Insane amount of money for what new games? The games that launch on the platform are mostly smaller titles. Newer titles are typically titles that have already hit massive sale status at retail and either have DLC they can try to sell you or have sequels coming soon so they probably see no big deal in having the previous game on GamePass. It seems like a good strategy.

It's not like they've had a CoD or something launch on the service. What have they had that you think requires "insane" money?

 

[Kumomeme]

from my understanding, nobody said it bad..it great model especially for consumers..but for developers side is different....nobody said it bad..but there tons of concern regarding it especially in long term, 10 years later for example, of what might change in gaming industry landscape

there few concern from what i see:

-what happened to gamepass when big publisher put out their similliar subscribtion services..for example is EA, Ubisoft etc( there reason why ms acquired lot of studio which is for their exclusive content so they no need to solely depend on 3rd party content like how netflix spend tons of money for it in their channel)
-there concern that devs gonna introduce lot of microtransaction to cover up the expenses..game development is different than stuff like music and movie..they still had cinema,concert etc compare to game industry(especially AAA game), buying game get replaced by subscribtion services...but personally i doubt it go away..like bluray movie still exist today.
-like people above said, less funding less quality and quantity jump..AAA game pretty expensive nowdays with 4-5 years take to develop before launch to recover the devs cost
-you dont own the game..what happened when the services suddenly shutdown?similliar concern with streaming services

the bussiness model great for consumer..it amazing..but for developers side, there entire story of concern..well this model pretty new, so it makesense that there tons of concern and lot of stuff that yet to be ironed out.

personally i doubt either subs or streaming will replace current model..what we have now wont go away..same with physical disc which is still gonna be relevant in future...as additional option it great but i doubt it would replace everything

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

Gamepass is great for both gamers and developers, especially indies. There are so many games made each year that they have problems selling their games. Thanks to GP players learn of a new dev/genre they havent tried before and devs have a dependable source of income. Remember - nobody makes them put their games on GP. They have to agree to it and get paid.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Oh please. What even is an "Xbox gamer" these days? Do I count as a gamepass PC subscriber? Do I count as a guy with an Xbox One packed away in a box?

This whole mentality (Microsoft share it as well unfortunately) of doubling down on only appealing to "Xbox gamers" is what got them into this mess. These "Xbox gamers" whose mantra has been "wait for E3" year after year throughout the generation while starving for first party games. "Xbox gamers" who think there is a media conspiracy against Xbox because mediocre games like Crackdown 3, Sea of Thieves and Recore got aptly judged by the gaming press and general gamers. "Xbox gamers" who get their pants in a twist when you dare mention the fact that their PC store isn't fit for purpose and that UWP is shit ("wait for //build" I think it was).

They need to expand their potential customer base, not continue to shrink it. They need to stop worrying about what "Xbox gamers" want, they have them on board even if they took a direct shit in their mouth (we saw this in all it's glory around the time of the Xbox One reveal). They need to start thinking about how to get everyone else outside of that circle on board.

Thank you!!!

 

[Panajev2001a]

Gamepass is great for both gamers and developers, especially indies. There are so many games made each year that they have problems selling their games. Thanks to GP players learn of a new dev/genre they havent tried before and devs have a dependable source of income. Remember - nobody makes them put their games on GP. They have to agree to it and get paid.

As good as it may seem early on it still leads to consumers' perceived value of game's erosion where it becomes impossible to sell gamers a $59 anymore... think App Store and mobiles. Result? F2P crapola.
Tons of micro transaction and predatory analytics and real-time tweaks to get you to spend money post initial download.

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

P Panajev2001a Why should I care about people not wanting to pay 60 bucks? Most of you probably play on used copies anyway. If games become f2p lookalikes then people wont play them and subscribe to GP. It's really that simple - If they dont deliver sufficient quality, people wont subscribe to it.

 

[Panajev2001a]

P Panajev2001a Why should I care about people not wanting to pay 60 bucks? Most of you probably play on used copies anyway. If games become f2p lookalikes then people wont play them and subscribe to GP. It's really that simple - If they dont deliver sufficient quality, people wont subscribe to it.

Or that is all they get and have little choice. Look at apps and games on mobile phones: F2P predatory business practices and subscriptions per game.

The concept is about game price erosion which changes the nature of the games once customers en masse refuse to pay for games: it does influence the game design, it changes the dynamic from a post sale mostly just enjoy yourself to engagement and post download micro transactions and ads and gameplay mechanics designed to extract money out of players. This has little to do with the apparent quality or face diversity of the games, but the business model that partake in.

Also, most of you, unless you are in everyone's heads, may be a bit of a baseless stretch .

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

P Panajev2001a people playing on smartphones arent "hardcore gamers" so its not about choice. They just dont want to pay and want something to keep them busy while, for example, travelling by bus.

 

[Panajev2001a]

P Panajev2001a people playing on smartphones arent "hardcore gamers" so its not about choice. They just dont want to pay and want something to keep them busy while, for example, travelling by bus.

Consoles could turn into that too. It would not be instantaneous either.

 

[Kumomeme]

P Panajev2001a Why should I care about people not wanting to pay 60 bucks? Most of you probably play on used copies anyway. If games become f2p lookalikes then people wont play them and subscribe to GP. It's really that simple - If they dont deliver sufficient quality, people wont subscribe to it.

but to deliver sufficient quality need cost..there no way around...this is one of devs concern..they worried that it could affect future game budget especialy AAA ...good quality will attract people to buy not vice versa and devs might introduces stuff like microtransaction in the game to cover for expenses since people dont pay full price anymore

and regarding f2p game..there are reason why this type of game usually had tons of microtransaction slapped to player face ..and there is concern of game quality due to f2p model..well thats entire different story

 

[darkinstinct]

Ever since I got Game Pass I have spent so much money on DLC. I can totally see their strategy working. My expenses just for last year:

210 € microtransactions in Gears 5
85 € microtransactions in Minecraft
55 € microtransactions in Sea of Thieves
20 € DLC for Forza Horizon 4
20 € DLC for Tomb Raider
10 € DLC for Mudrunner

I used to buy two full price games a year plus some DLC plus Gold. Now I pay for Game Pass Ultimate (156 € a year) plus 400 € in additional downloads. So basically from 180 € a year to 556 € a year. It's ridiculous. But I am not even mad (well, aside from being a collector and buying almost every single skin they offer for no reason at all), the overall value I get out of Game Pass exceeds what I pay. I would never go back. Haven't bought a single game since I joined two years ago.

 

[DanielsM]

Ever since I got Game Pass I have spent so much money on DLC. I can totally see their strategy working. My expenses just for last year:

I'm so fucking confused, other people were telling me with Game Pass I would spend less.

 

[ksdixon]

Here ya go, Op:

Some Xbox One Users Can't Play Games They Own Because of 'Game Pass'

Some Game Pass users lose access to games they actually own if they let their subscription expire.

www.vice.com

Weather they're explicitly linked to GamePass or not, I know I've personally lost digital Xbox 360 purchases for Bloodforge, Eat Lead and I Am Alive so far.

• Eat Lead I've just had to repurchase this morning.
• I believe I picked-up I Am Alive on a cheap Steam Sale.
• Bloodforge I still have installed on my Xbox 360, thankfully. But xbox one wants me to repurchase it and can't "see" my 360 purchase.

 

[Gek54]

Pretty much never bought DLC before gamepass now that it feels like I am getting so much content at such a good price that I feel good about indulging in a lot the extra DLC. So many indie games that I would have never even looked at I have now played and loved because they were on gamepass. I really hope this model is sustainable.

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

I'm so fucking confused, other people were telling me with Game Pass I would spend less.

Nobody made him pay the money. I didn't pay a cent for any microtransaction because they are all cosmetic. I saved fuckloads of money thanks to GP and finished almost 70 games last year for almost nothing.

 

[DanielsM]

Nobody made him pay the money. I didn't pay a cent for any microtransaction because they are all cosmetic. I saved fuckloads of money thanks to GP and finished almost 70 games last year for almost nothing.

Well, nobody makes anyone pay money. At $120 a year the average gamer isn't going to be a winner, someone has to lose. You're the whale, and really why the model won't really work on a large scale as a primary or sole way of getting game revenues.

One person is saying the gamer is a huge winner, the next person comes along and says the developer/publishers is the huge winner.

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

D DanielsM Firstly, get your definitions straight, because I'm not a whale since I didnt pay any unnecessary money. Secondly - from my short stay here i learned that you are a troll and MS hater so i dont even know why I'm replying to you.

 

[DanielsM]

D DanielsM Firstly, get your definitions straight, because I'm not a whale since I didnt pay any unnecessary money. Secondly - from my short stay here i learned that you are a troll and MS hater so i dont even know why I'm replying to you.

So, you paying $120 to have access to hundreds of games and than paying for a whole bunch of DLC and microtransaction for games you don't own... and you're not a game whale?

By my definition, your picture would be in the dictionary under the word.

Way to dodge my comments, the name calling strategy.

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

D DanielsM What are you talking about? You either have problem with understanding english sentences or you dont even know who you are replying to. I never paid for microtransactions and i buy DLC rarerly.

 

[DanielsM]

D DanielsM What are you talking about? You either have problem with understanding english sentences or you dont even know who you are replying to. I never paid for microtransactions and i buy DLC rarerly.

Oh sorry, I though you were the other guy, my bad.

Okay, so in your case.... you win and the developers lose, which is what the other people are concern with (not me).

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

Oh sorry, I though you were the other guy, my bad.

Okay, so in your case.... you win and the developers lose.

How come they lose, lol? MS pays them. Nobody knows how much they get, but its probably not a small amount, because publishers have no problems with games being on GP. Selling microtransactions is like cherry on top of a cake.

 

[DanielsM]

How come they lose, lol? MS pays them. Nobody knows how much they get, but its probably not a small amount, because publishers have no problems with games being on GP. Selling microtransactions is like cherry on top of a cake.

Well... if there is a big difference in what you are paying vs what you are getting than someone is the winner and someone is the loser right? I mean you can have a transaction where both side have a good solid neutral deal, but that is not what you are claiming. You're saying your getting the better end of the deal by a wide margin.... so there is loser on the other side i.e. developers. Microsoft doesn't lose as they're simply the middleman.

As far as my own opinion, game rentals will not be much more than a small revenue stream, as games are front loaded in return on investment..... so whoever is the winner and loser has very little material effect as the business is so little any how with game rentals.

New games make money, old games not so much.

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

You're saying your getting the better end of the deal by a wide margin.... so there is loser on the other side i.e. developers. Microsoft doesn't lose as they're simply the middleman.

Wat. Its Microsoft that's losing money because of those $1 deals. Use your brain. Who in their right mind would allow a company to use their intellectual property just to lose money.

 

[manfestival]

My personal issue with game pass(which I have for PS+ too) is that since I do not actually own any of these games. I refuse to drop any money(on dlc and etc) because I may never have access to the game again due to a myriad of reasons.

 

[Syn Marnotrawny]

manfestival You could get the DLC, play the game and enjoy it and buy the base game when its $5 or lower and you want to play it again. I stopped thinking the way you do some time ago and life is easier. Collecting games is stupid anyway, because most of the time you dont go back to them.

 

[manfestival]

manfestival You could get the DLC, play the game and enjoy it and buy the base game when its $5 or lower and you want to play it again. I stopped thinking the way you do some time ago and life is easier. Collecting games is stupid anyway, because most of the time you dont go back to them.

There are too many games for me to play to be spending that money for DLC. I definitely like to hop from game to game(playing plague tale and beat like 6 games on game pass so far). I collect the completions of these titles in my heart more than DLC or the actual titles themselves. Though I like the comfort of knowing that I can go back to the game whenever I want without having to be gated by money for something I have already dropped money on(the DLC itself). That is just your own justification for it and that is fine. I just can't justify it to myself.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Wat. Its Microsoft that's losing money because of those $1 deals. Use your brain. Who in their right mind would allow a company to use their intellectual property just to lose money.

He knows what he's doing. He'll drag out his anti-MS posts all year.

since nobody knows how much MS pays for GP deals he'll FUD his way trying to make it look like MS pays them nothing because there's no data out there.

no different than Sony with PS+ games. since nobody knows how much Sony pays for PS+ games it must mean the devs are taken advantage of by Sony as the devs give away their games for free.

PS Now too. There's 100s of old games in there from different devs

never knew Capcom, Konami and all the others are willing to give away all their ps1 - ps4 games away for cheap