• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.

ToadMan

Member
MS has actually shifted to the subscription model for pretty much everything. All their MS office contracts with businesses are subscription based. If you want MS word and Excel, you now have to buy their yearly sub at $69. I remember thinking $120 back in the mid 2000s was expensive, but now they want you to renew it every year lol

And Netflix didnt make any profit for over a decade and only just started posting profits, and they seem to be doing fine. this is a long term investment. Netflix now has 200 million subscribers, and they are still investing $19 billion in programming for 2021. Their revenue was in 2020 was $25 billion. You have to continue to invest in order to keep people from switching to other services. Which is good for the industry.

Both MS and Sony will have to spend hundreds of millions every month to fill their services with content and like Netflix they will eventually realize that original programming costs far less than getting third party content.

MS already have those office products in house - they are milking a cash cow they already own and cornered the market with. For GP you're suggesting they pay 3rd parties for content and receive 0% ROI in the transaction - not gonna make the money MS want.

Oh and netflix?
Netflix shares plunge amid fears coronavirus boom is over

Netflix isn't profitable and never has been - yes they may have more money in the bank than they spent over 1Q, but accounting for amortisation and spending on new content, they've always been making a net loss...
 
Last edited:

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Netflix isn't profitable and never has been
Netflix has never not been profitable.

Where do you guys get this myth, and why do you keep repeating it?

And Netflix still grew lol.. their stock plunged because of crazy expectations.. the stock market is reactive to stupid shit.. Netflix long term is an insanely solid company. Not that the comparison is that great to game subs in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Which is a strange fear since the entire industry moved that way many years ago.

There is no increase of microtransactions for sub based games, that already happened years ago in the entire industry.
There is still a big difference for the console games I can and buy now and what I see on mobile, so no… the train has not left the station…
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
MS already have those office products in house - they are milking a cash cow they already own and cornered the market with. For GP you're suggesting they pay 3rd parties for content and receive 0% ROI in the transaction - not gonna make the money MS want.

Oh and netflix?
Netflix shares plunge amid fears coronavirus boom is over

Netflix isn't profitable and never has been - yes they may have more money in the bank than they spent over 1Q, but accounting for amortisation and spending on new content, they've always been making a net loss...
That's exactly what I said. Netflix kept investing and investing instead of sitting on their laurels. That's why they never made any profit for over ten years. But they HAVE finally started posting profits and stopped borrowing since last year. Their revenue is $25 billion a year and their programming budget is $19 billion. They can cut down that budget to half and double if not triple their profits right away, but they aren't because they know how important it is to continue supporting their platform with content.

As for paying 3rd parties, MS has to do that now because they dont have any first party titles available at the moment. Netflix didnt either and they were paying out of their ass for third party licenses. They still do. IIRC, they paid $500 million for office and more than that for Seinfeld. But they also heavily invested in original programming which costs far less and that's partly the reason why Microsoft bought zenimax. I agree, paying 3rd parties $300 million for one game isnt particularly attractive. But like Netflix, they know that. Like $13 billion of that $19 billion Netflix has budgeted is spent on original programming.

And with Disney+ and HBO breathing down their neck, Netflix pretty much has no choice but to continue to invest in original programming. Which IS good for consumers and thats why I am no longer a gamepass skeptic. MS cant afford to lose subscribers. Especially when Sony decides to join and MS has to start competing with another gaming service.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
MS already have those office products in house - they are milking a cash cow they already own and cornered the market with. For GP you're suggesting they pay 3rd parties for content and receive 0% ROI in the transaction - not gonna make the money MS want.

Oh and netflix?
Netflix shares plunge amid fears coronavirus boom is over

Netflix isn't profitable and never has been - yes they may have more money in the bank than they spent over 1Q, but accounting for amortisation and spending on new content, they've always been making a net loss...
Maybe you should look at their financials once in a while.

they’ve been profitable since 2003 when they were mailing DVDs. You’ve only had 18 years to check them out.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Netflix has never not been profitable.

Where do you guys get this myth, and why do you keep repeating it?

And Netflix still grew lol.. their stock plunged because of crazy expectations.. the stock market is reactive to stupid shit.. Netflix long term is an insanely solid company. Not that the comparison is that great to game subs in the first place.
People have an assumption anything subscription based loses money.
 

reksveks

Member
I am sure we keep cycling through the same debates.

- Jim Ryan is a dumbass
- Gamepass isn't profitable (this includes the Netflix debate about their profitability)
- Some stupid thing about RDNA 2/1.1
- UE5 demo running on a laptop

It's kinda like being stuck in a loop.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
I am sure we keep cycling through the same debates.

- Jim Ryan is a dumbass
- Gamepass isn't profitable (this includes the Netflix debate about their profitability)
- Some stupid thing about RDNA 2/1.1
- UE5 demo running on a laptop

It's kinda like being stuck in a loop.
I will take this over the debates last two years when some folks were convinced github leaks were real and PS5 was 9 tflops. And that was after Gonzalo which was only 1.8 ghz or 8 tflops. They would NOT let it go. Even after Sony revealed the final tflops count.

Sony had confirmed hardware RT back in October 2019, but because of github, we had to entertain this software only nonsense up until launch.

I also remember people mocking Cerny when he said his SSD was faster than any SSD on the market back in April 2019. After going through all this nonsense for years, this current loop doesnt seem too bad.
 
Last edited:

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
There is still a big difference for the console games I can and buy now and what I see on mobile, so no… the train has not left the station…
Gamepass is $120 a year, $180 if you want to play online. It's not "free to play" games.

It's not really designed to be cheap.. or somehow make less money than selling games for $60. It's designed to scale and bring in a near guaranteed large revenue stream not directly tied to a series of game releases.

That's it. Get people in ecosystem; give them what appears to be a pretty good deal.. sell them lots of other stuff.
 
Last edited:

Great Hair

Banned
This to me explains how MS was able to get Outriders and MLB in the same month. They have a lot of cash to hand out every month. I think they can easily afford RE8.
You are assuming that they have a high retention rate. But what if 50% jump off after 30 or 60 days and back onto the wagon whenever they see fit.
Assuming MS has to pay back (80%) to 3rd parties.
Retention Rate 100% stay subbed
Brutto
: $230 million per month or $2.7bln per year
(lets assume this is 80% 3rd party games revenue and 20% MS studios published titles)

"Netto":
20% of 230mln = $46mln (MS studio games)
80% of 230mln = $184mln (with 3rd party games, of which MS gets to keep 30%? platform fee = $55mln)
3rd party revenue per month = 230 * 0.80 - (*0.3) =$129mln

subtotal MS = $46mln + $55mln = $101mln * 12 = $1.2bln. per year
subtotal 3rd party = $129mln * 12 = $1.5bln per year

not taking into account following costs
(lets say another 30% cut?):
licensing costs for tools like UE, Unity (xx%), maintenance (service, server, hard&software) (xx%) and xx$ for acquiring new games (xx%) + other

MS Studio avg. $0.6bln.
total $0.8bln. per year with a retention rate of 100%
total $0.4bln. per year with a retention rate of 50%

3rd Parties avg. $1.1bln.
total $1.5bln. per year with a retention rate of 100%
total $0.7bln. per year with a retention rate of 50%
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Gamepass is $120 a year, $180 if you want to play online. It's not "free to play" games.

It's not really designed to be cheap.. or somehow make less money than selling games for $60. It's designed to scale and bring in a near guaranteed large revenue stream not directly tied to a series of game releases.

That's it. Get people in ecosystem; give them what appears to be a pretty good deal.. sell them lots of other stuff.
I think we are going in circles, I get what it is designed to do ($120/180 per player a year is still small if you spread it across all publishers and still look at games not made optimised for it… the “sell them lots of other stuff” which really means we agree here) and the engagement model that powers it or Netflix.

I disagree that right bow the console experience is as microtransactions heavy as you put it and far far removed to a scenario where all gamers paid the yearly subscriptions and the perceived value of games cratered which would leave predatory microtransactions as the answer.

Again, the games I can and do buy now are not the predatory kind this model would breed more and more of.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
I think we are going in circles, I get what it is designed to do ($120/180 per player a year is still small if you spread it across all publishers and still look at games not made optimised for it… the “sell them lots of other stuff” which really means we agree here) and the engagement model that powers it or Netflix.

I disagree that right bow the console experience is as microtransactions heavy as you put it and far far removed to a scenario where all gamers paid the yearly subscriptions and the perceived value of games cratered which would leave predatory microtransactions as the answer.

Again, the games I can and do buy now are not the predatory kind this model would breed more and more of.
Netflix doesn't have that engagement model though.. they only have a sub service to sell.

That's my point; the comparisons are flawed.

And I'm not just talking about engagement for the games on the service, you are missing what I'm saying; a fraction of games available on Xbox are on GamePass. The vast majority that are, aren't on GamePass indefinitely, and you are encouraged to buy them. Netflix doesn't have $60 movies for sale that aren't on the sub, Netflix isn't selling you movies as they leave the service either.

Either way, the service exists to make.. more money, from games, than MS was making before.. and it doesn't exist to do that with microtransactions. It exists to do that by scaling enormously, which I believe MS will fail at.

They aren't trying to make a shitty service where every game makes you wait 3 hours to build a tank unless you pay $1 to speed up the tank building.. they are creating a service for the types of games that are already being created.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
It also just might literally be Sony throwing a few free movies at PS Plus subscribers for the next year as a way to advertise the video store and isn't any real service coming.

Who knows? We'll have to wait I guess. Either way this is content Sony owns, an easy bonus to give.
Yup, again, they are offering it free for PS+ subscribers. Its their own movie service. There's nothing extra to do as a user right now. Its like claiming the games for the Plus IGC. Either do it or dont.
I will take this over the debates last two years when some folks were convinced github leaks were real and PS5 was 9 tflops. And that was after Gonzalo which was only 1.8 ghz or 8 tflops. They would NOT let it go. Even after Sony revealed the final tflops count.

Sony had confirmed hardware RT back in October 2019, but because of github, we had to entertain this software only nonsense up until launch.

I also remember people mocking Cerny when he said his SSD was faster than any SSD on the market back in April 2019. After going through all this nonsense for years, this current loop doesnt seem too bad.
I agree with this 100%.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
You are assuming that they have a high retention rate. But what if 50% jump off after 30 or 60 days and back onto the wagon whenever they see fit.
Does it matter what the retention rate is if they have more than doubled their monthly userbase in a year? They had 10 million subs in April 2020. 23 million today. And its been a gradual increase like I mentioned above. They didnt just get to 23 million just for April. They have been growing.

As for the rest, I dont think they have to pay a cut. They pay the cost upfront. Netflix paid $500 million for Seinfeld and the Office. That's their upfront cost. This isnt like game sales where they get to keep a cut. Their cut is all the revenue they make every month. The first check they write is all they have to pay.
 

Great Hair

Banned
Does it matter what the retention rate is if they have more than doubled their monthly userbase in a year?

They also claimed having 25mln. playing Forza 4 Horizon and 20mln. Sea of Thieves but have not for like a decade shared any concrete numbers. If GPU was this successful, wouldn´t they at least share what the splitt is, wouldn´t every publisher jump on?

Anyway, we are comparing a $60 service with a $120 to $200 one. And Gamepass PC is still leagues behind the console counterpart for some strange reason.
 

LiquidRex

Member
YhNekhc.jpg

FidelityFX present in The Village PS5 demo. 🤷‍♂️
 

ethomaz

Banned
YhNekhc.jpg

FidelityFX present in The Village PS5 demo. 🤷‍♂️
FidelityFX is a set of algorithms/tools available for developers using AMD hardware.... it is available to use since the hardware supports it.

Said that you need look at the names... MS announce and these being used in PS5 REVIII are different.

FidelityFX Contrast Adaptive Sharpening (CAS)
FidelityFX Single Pass Downsampler (SPD)
FidelityFX Combined Adaptive Compute Ambient Occlusion (CACAO)
 
Last edited:

oldergamer

Member
With regards the UE5 demo where they commented on the nearly 500 statues, all those statues were loaded in even off screen right? hence why they stated the number of Polygons in that room... So there was no culling/scrubbing... This would mean with cache scrubbing and loading in only what the player sees, would mean the demo could have run at a much higher resolution and much higher fps. 🤷‍♂️🤔
That logic is whack
 

ethomaz

Banned
Interesting.

What's your opinion on this DJTaurus DJTaurus ?

Edit: Thanks for the explanation ethomaz ethomaz . I was confused thought that Fidelity FX was exclusive to Xbox. I guess it boils down to how marketing sells those features.
It is open source.
There are several FidelityFX features/tools and which one can be used depend of the hardware support.

FidelityFX is a open source image quality toolkit optimized to RDNA and RDNA 2.

Due the open source nature even nVidia can use and optimize it but that will never happen :D

You can read more here: https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/radeon-software-fidelityfx

Or here: https://gpuopen.com/effects/
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
That definitely makes sense because both consoles are based off RDNA2.
I did shadow edit.
It is not exactly exclusive to AMD hardware because it is open source but only AMD hardware support it right now so it is the same than exclusive to AMD hardware.

I don’t believe nVidia will ever support it because they have similar tools in their proprietary set.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom