Support NeoGAF

[skit_data]

Not yet, but they're strategy as you put it has changed because of GP and only a fool would say otherwise.

We'll see, they've left the door open to back out if sub services don't turn out as profitable in the long run while providing a sub service with a decent back catalogue. Gamepass was definitely an influence in that decision, but I think they also keep in mind not to overcommit since Nintendo is seeing great success with a strategy very different to Xbox.

I could see it going both ways honestly, or nowhere with each company using the strategy they use now as is.

 

[akimbo009]

Gamepass is TOO generous from a business perspective imo.

I mean, it's great from my end, but I can't see how it makes them much money.

Especially pretty much giving it away with the really blatant loophole that they apparently know about but don't care.

It really should be illegal.

 

[Walter Matthau]

Wouldn't it be better for the player if all the games they wanted were part of the subscription to begin with?

The only difference in what he's describing as a "premium release" has nothing to do with the game's content. They just want you to pay full price early then drop it on the subscription later on so you're double paying for things you may already own.

 

[Pelta88]

MODS why did you change the title?

Just asking out of curiosity.

 

[phil_t98]

still gamepass is the consumer friendly option. I have premium on my PS and its ok but doesn't compare to gamepass in my opinion

 

[Warnen]

Works for Nintendo, not so much for just about every other massive media company but keep at it.

 

[GHG]

"Into the abyss"

So transparent.

Yeh the abyss of 2022. Until they claw themselves out of it that's how it will remain.

Are you serious? Halo has development problems, nothing to do with GP stop with the nonsense. I couldn't care less about market share etc I'm not a CEO I just want value as a customer and GP delivers

100% serious. With those review scores, with it being Neogaf game of the year, Halo Infinite should have sold well as a $70 if it weren't "free" on a subscription service right? Might have given them a healthy dose of direct revenue.

You talked about pressure, where exactly is it coming from?

Hint: your personal feelings don't count - the market (and subsequent outcomes) in the real world paints an opposing picture.

 

[Menzies]

What, this kind of pressure? :

http://[URL]https://www.neogaf.com/...met-financial-expectations-brad-sams.1641636/

[/URL]

The kind of pressure that results in executives losing their jobs?

The kind of pressure that results in first party games that released in the last 12 months being absent from monthly and annual sales charts all over the world?

The kind of pressure where your hardware is firmly in 3rd place across the world?

The kind of pressure that results in you needing to spend upwards of $80 billion in order to even have a chance of staying competitive?

Sounds tough.

Sony executives are immune to risk and losing their jobs? Sony hasn't closed a studio?

Sales charts across multiple entertainment industries must surely be losing relevancy. Most played charts would show better data.

Not sure many thought, (after last generation), Sony with all the momentum, this would change in the first 2 years. Bethesda's first new game just released on the platform.

Not sure why on a gaming enthusiasts forum we have such staunch defense against more affordable gaming libraries. Some want to overtly protect Sony's interests more than their own. Microsoft has a vision to expand the industry and make it affordable. Fuck them right.

Thankfully we have Sony not only protecting gamers, but now they're protecting the industry at large with their price hikes.

 

[MikeM]

I saw an article posted here talking about Halo being a failure financially. I wonder if that game would still be deemed so if sold at full price and not given away on GP.

MS has all their eggs in the GP basket. As a studio, you need to be aware that one box wants to sell your game (Sony) while the other box wants it on a sub service (Xbox). Come to think of it, it makes sense why most studios sign exclusive deals with Sony over MS.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

Sony and Nintendo are sticking with a model that they know has worked for years.
Microsoft is banking on tons of people signing up for Gamepass and making a ton of money off of microtransactions for games like COD. Until then, I simply do not see how it is profitable.

 

[GHG]

Sony executives are immune to risk and losing their jobs? Sony hasn't closed a studio?

Sales charts across multiple entertainment industries must surely be losing relevancy. Most played charts would show better data.

Not sure many thought, (after last generation), Sony with all the momentum, this would change in the first 2 years. Bethesda's first new game just released on the platform.

Not sure why on a gaming enthusiasts forum we have such staunch defense against more affordable gaming libraries. Some want to overtly protect Sony's interests more than their own. Microsoft has a vision to expand the industry and make it affordable. Fuck them right.

Thankfully we have Sony not only protecting gamers, but now they're protecting the industry at large with their price hikes.

You would think on an enthusiast forum people would be more concerned with the quality of experience they are getting over price, but apparently not.

Thankfully the market paints a picture that says otherwise. It has proven on a consistent basis that people are willing to pay for quality.

If all you personally want is cheap as possible then you currently have a number of options available to you, not every company needs to cater to your personal needs though.

The less said about "Microsoft's vision" the better. They are increasingly advocating for cloud gaming and means that erode consumer ownership, if that doesn't raise red flags as an "enthusiast" then I don't know what will.

 

[Punished Miku]

You would think on an enthusiast forum people would be more concerned with the quality of experience they are getting over price, but apparently not.

Thankfully the market paints a picture that says otherwise. It has proven on a consistent basis that people are willing to pay for quality.

If all you personally want is cheap as possible then you currently have a number of options available to you, not every company needs to cater to your personal needs though.

The less said about "Microsoft's vision" the better. They are increasingly advocating for cloud gaming and means that erode consumer ownership, if that doesn't raise red flags as an "enthusiast" then I don't know what will.

Theyre not eroding ownership until they do. Cloud is 100% optional. Subs are 100% optional. They're actually honoring BC purchases more than the competion and reinforcing ownership currently.

 

[GHG]

Theyre not eroding ownership until they do. Cloud is 100% optional. Subs are 100% optional.

"increasingly advocating" :

They are increasingly advocating for cloud gaming and means that erode consumer ownership

All of their current marketing is driven towards gamepass as far as games are concerned. So much so that recently there was initial confusion as to whether goldeneye was gamepass exclusive or not. They didn't even state up front how to get access to it without gamepass.

It shouldn't need to be said but if you perpetually subscribe to gamepass and then decide to cancel at any point you walk away with nothing. That's what they want.

 

[Menzies]

You would think on an enthusiast forum people would be more concerned with the quality of experience they are getting over price, but apparently not.

Thankfully the market paints a picture that says otherwise. It has proven on a consistent basis that people are willing to pay for quality.

If all you personally want is cheap as possible then you currently have a number of options available to you, not every company needs to cater to your personal needs though.

The less said about "Microsoft's vision" the better. They are increasingly advocating for cloud gaming and means that erode consumer ownership, if that doesn't raise red flags as an "enthusiast" then I don't know what will.

And you decry anyone repeating the publisher of the year award, when you and so many just throw out the quality line ad nauseum.

Their vision has lead to their increase in investment (finally at long last), and this quality gulf isn't at large as some portray.

An enthusiast would be someone wanting access to a large amount of content. If you're in this category and already subscribed, why would you pay to own something that never leaves the service?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

This is the right call. Games are unlike TV, Movies etc...

 

[yurinka]

I see... so, PlayStation Game Pass is going to be announced soon?

It was announced and released years before Game Pass existed.

Nobody thought Sony would step up to start offering a bunch of their first party games for free as part of a catalog in a subscription service in addition to cutting deals to bring even third party AAA games to that catalog.

Sony started to to this back in 2010 with the release of PS Plus. As I remember it also did have time limited game trials, PS1 and PSP games back then btw.

Later they released a game subscription with a catalog of hundreds of games, before MS did it. And cloud gaming service targeting first console but also other devices announcing day one that down the road it would reach mobile and PC too, also before MS did it.

But Sony won't include their AAA games on the service day one because it's a suicidal financial move and they already have other strategy instead that it's super profitable and is generating them the biggest amount of yearly revenue than any console maker ever did in gaming history.

It would be dumb to give away the exclusives that are selling over 10 or 20 million copies.

Soon they'll do console and PC day and date releases.

Sony said multiple times they don't plan to do this, and shown a graph with their scheduled releases for each platform for the current fiscal year and the fiscal year that ends in 2026. For both years they had a total of zero PS+PC release, when there was a PS4+PS5 group separated of the PS5 group.

 

[Punished Miku]

"increasingly advocating" :




All of their current marketing is driven towards gamepass as far as games are concerned. So much so that recently there was initial confusion as to whether goldeneye was gamepass exclusive or not. They didn't even state up front how to get access to it without gamepass.

It shouldn't need to be said but if you perpetually subscribe to gamepass and then decide to cancel at any point you walk away with nothing. That's what they want.

The blue ocean is not bound to a device. As long as thats optional I'm cool. They are transparent about trying to be Netflix.

 

[DarkMage619]

Sony and Nintendo are sticking with a model that they know has worked for years.
Microsoft is banking on tons of people signing up for Gamepass and making a ton of money off of microtransactions for games like COD. Until then, I simply do not see how it is profitable.

I still keep hearing about MS and their profitability with their service. As a gamer why do you care how much money MS is making? I could understand if people had an issue with Game pass because it was a bad value but not because it doesn't make MS enough money. Phil Spencer has said many times the service is sustainable and the price hasn't been raised since its inception. The companies work for us not vice versa. It is not our responsibility to make sure they are making enough money. If MS wants to provide its customers a superior value that is all I care about. We shouldn't lose focus on who really matters, the gamers not the corporations.

 

[Fake]

Why do you love him?

- Charisma
- Post photos of food and with their competitors like Phil and Reggie
- Don't care about CoD
- Support indies
- Support japanese devs
- Show his trophy list

 

[Menzies]

It was announced and released years before Game Pass existed.

That's why they were constantly fielding questions left and right from journalists asking when they would release a proper competitor. And why they felt the need to enable downloads. And why they had to rebrand the service.

That tells less than half a story.

 

[M16]

It's an obsolete business model, and Sony will find out the hard way, when it's too late. But on the other hand, they have no choice because they don't have the financial means to do it. There's a reason microsoft said Sony is not their competitor.

 

[GHG]

And you decry anyone repeating the publisher of the year award, when you and so many just throw out the quality line ad nauseum.

Their vision has lead to their increase in investment (finally at long last), and this quality gulf isn't at large as some portray.

An enthusiast would be someone wanting access to a large amount of content. If you're in this category and already subscribed, why would you pay to own something that never leaves the service?

We've discussed this before - the "quality" aspect is exactly why I question people parroting the "publisher of the year" tagine like PR drones. Like I've said before, it's akin to dragon age inquisition winning in 2014. Nobody will look back and think "what a year".

Ethusiasts tend to enjoy and value ownership. It tends to be important to them. I'll take it a step further, people who are serious enthusiasts tend to enjoy physical ownership (we have those people on this very forum), they won't even touch digital due to the nature of digital licenses. A similar phenomenon is happening in the home movie/entertainment industry (including music). Netflix (and streaming in general) is for casuals who aren't overly concerned about the quality of their experience whereas those who are real enthusiasts will purchase physical media and all the hardware necessary to get the most out of the experience.

 

[Lognor]

Yeh the abyss of 2022. Until they claw themselves out of it that's how it will remain.



100% serious. With those review scores, with it being Neogaf game of the year, Halo Infinite should have sold well as a $70 if it weren't "free" on a subscription service right? Might have given them a healthy dose of direct revenue.

You talked about pressure, where exactly is it coming from?

Hint: your personal feelings don't count - the market (and subsequent outcomes) in the real world paints an opposing picture.

Good thing they were publisher of the year last year. This year isn't great but they're still riding high from that massive win. And 2023 looks to be even better!!!

 

[BennyBlanco]

PlayStation haven't 'followed' the model. They introduced it.

The very first subscription game plan, PS+, all the way back in June 29, 2010.

They then introduced PlayStation Now (Cloud + Rotating games catalogue) in January 28, 2014.

Even without first party games, Steam could make a sub plan with a rotating curated list of third party games. According to some, it would be a 'win-win', since gamers would pay a low monthly fee (and yet somehow spend more money in the ecosystem?), and Steam would have recurring monthly revenue. So why haven't they?

Humble Choice is basically this except the games stink now

 

[GHG]

Humble Choice is basically this except the games stink now

I wouldn't go as far to say that they "stink". Recent months have been a lot better but it's certainly not what it used to be that's for sure. IGN purchasing them was the beginning of the end.

It's also important to note that the games from that subscription are yours to keep forever, even after cancelling your subscription. That's a key differentiator.

 

[jroc74]

Different companies have different business goals.

Who woulda thunk.

And to all the believe in generations madness, please tell me how many current gen only games are out and by which devs, publishers.

Exactly.

 

[yurinka]

That's why they were constantly fielding questions left and right from journalists asking when they would release a proper competitor. And why they felt the need to enable downloads. And why they had to rebrand the service.

That tells less than half a story.

What do you mean? Doesn't Sony's game sub had like twice the game subs of MS? Didn't Sony's game division generate more revenue than any other console maker in gaming history? Didn't Sony has like over twice the console installbase than MS? Doesn't Sony sell more games?

The one who has to become a proper competitor in gaming, consoles, game subs and cloud gaming is Microsoft, not Sony. In all the numbers we saw to compare Sony was above MS, not the opposite.

You may prefer MS's services or products, but this doesn't make them more successful than their direct competitor. The market numbers we have available show that MS numbers are smaller than the Sony ones.

It's an obsolete business model, and Sony will find out the hard way, when it's too late.

It is so obsolote that Sony is generating now more revenue than any other console maker in gaming history. Super obsolete!

There's a reason microsoft said Sony is not their competitor.

Yes, that MS saw they couldn't compete against Sony and Nintendo selling consoles and console games, so they moved out to try other stuff.

 

[Physiognomonics]

If anyone believes this, I have a bridge to sell you. No one thought Sony would start releasing their games to PC either. Nobody thought Sony would step up to start offering a bunch of their first party games for free as part of a catalog in a subscription service in addition to cutting deals to bring even third party AAA games to that catalog. They initially resisted EA Play also before they relented on that.

Soon they'll do console and PC day and date releases. And eventually they will also end up releasing their biggest first party games day one on PS Plus. It's only a matter of how soon will they be forced to do so.

Actually releasing their games on PC after some exclusive time on console doesn't contradict Shuhei at all. It even reinforces his point. That's for instance the strategy used by Rockstar games.

I don't think you understood Shu's argument here about lifecycle management.

 

[Lognor]

Different companies have different business goals.

Who woulda thunk.

And to all the believe in generations madness, please tell me how many current gen only games are out and by which devs, publishers.

Exactly.

Hey jimbo said it in response to Ms committing to cross gen for the first 2 years. He is being held accountable which makes sense. He's the one who said it for points against his competition

 

[Menzies]

We've discussed this before - the "quality" aspect is exactly why I question people parroting the "publisher of the year" tagine. Like I've said before, it's akin to dragon age inquisition winning in 2014. Nobody will look back and think "what a year".

Ethusiasts tend to enjoy ownership. I'll take it a step further, people who are serious enthusiasts tend to enjoy physical ownership (we have those people on this very forum). A similar phenomenon is happening in the home movie/entertainment industry (including music). Netflix (and streaming in general) is for casuals who aren't overly concerned about the quality of their experience whereas those who are real enthusiasts will purchase physical media and all the hardware necessary to get the most out of the experience.

Thankfully I'm not bound by your definition of enthusiast.

I don't care to own things I already have access to. And I especially don't like collecting little plastic landfill boxes and stash them about my living space.

I do care about quality games though, and the oft-mocked throwaway "tagline" of review aggregates, for me at least, delivers a stronger reality than individual claims.

 

[jroc74]

There was a PlayStation sub plan before Game Pass was a thing. You know this.

All they did was combine (streamline) it into one naming convention

I guess some ppl didnt know PS Plus IGC started on the PS3......interesting.

And included the Vita games.

All this was 2 console generations ago...

Hell, there was a games sub model on Xbox before Game Pass or Games with Gold. EA Access.

Hey jimbo said it in response to Ms committing to cross gen for the first 2 years. He is being held accountable which makes sense. He's the one who said it for points against his competition

OK, and which devs and publishers have current gen only games? Here's a hint: one is Sony and Sony studios.

There's nothing to be held accountable for...when they have actual current gen only games....

That this is still a thing ppl are arguing about is wild.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

I still keep hearing about MS and their profitability with their service. As a gamer why do you care how much money MS is making? I could understand if people had an issue with Game pass because it was a bad value but not because it doesn't make MS enough money. Phil Spencer has said many times the service is sustainable and the price hasn't been raised since its inception. The companies work for us not vice versa. It is not our responsibility to make sure they are making enough money. If MS wants to provide its customers a superior value that is all I care about. We shouldn't lose focus on who really matters, the gamers not the corporations.

First off profitability != sustainability.
My only issue is, at some point, all companies are going to want to be profitable which would mean that their product it is no longer sustainable.
AT THAT POINT, if MS has figured out profitability without sacrifice to game quality, AND muscling out the competition due to its subscription service; creating less options, then fine. No issues. I'm happy.
If either of those two issues are a thing, there draws my concern.

 

[SmokedMeat]

The less said about "Microsoft's vision" the better. They are increasingly advocating for cloud gaming and means that erode consumer ownership, if that doesn't raise red flags as an "enthusiast" then I don't know what will.

I think the idea behind cloud gaming is to play your library, or Game Pass sub wherever. Until they start offering Game Pass exclusive games, I don't think they're trying to get rid of consumer ownership.

Then again, they were trying to do that at the launch of Xbox One, until the backlash.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

I expect day one on Playpass by the end of the generation.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

It's an obsolete business model, and Sony will find out the hard way, when it's too late. But on the other hand, they have no choice because they don't have the financial means to do it. There's a reason microsoft said Sony is not their competitor.

So owning your games is now obsolete? We should all be forced into monthly subscriptions forever?

 

[GHG]

Thankfully I'm not bound by your definition of enthusiast.

I don't care to own things I already have access to. And I especially don't like collecting little plastic landfill boxes and stash them about my living space.

I do care about quality games though, and the oft-mocked throwaway "tagline" of review aggregates, for me at least, delivers a stronger reality than individual claims.

Hey if it's taken a subscription rental service to make you an "enthusiast" then so be it. Everyone has to start somewhere.

 

[remember_spinal]

I expect day one on Playpass by the end of the generation.

If they could make money doing that they'd be doing it already. They've already crunched the numbers on it, unless you're convinced sony isn't greedy and doesn't want more money?

 

[Menzies]

What do you mean? Doesn't Sony's game sub had like twice the game subs of MS? Didn't Sony's game division generate more revenue than any other console maker in gaming history? Didn't Sony has like over twice the console installbase than MS? Doesn't Sony sell more games?

The one who has to become a proper competitor in gaming, consoles, game subs and cloud gaming is Microsoft, not Sony. In all the numbers we saw to compare Sony was above MS, not the opposite.

You may prefer MS's services or products, but this doesn't make them more successful than their direct competitor. The market numbers we have available show that MS numbers are smaller than the Sony ones.

I never once made any of the claims that you've rewritten my post to have asserted.

Can't discuss anything with you, not going to try.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

If they could make money doing that they'd be doing it already. They've already crunched the numbers on it, unless you're convinced sony isn't greedy and doesn't want more money?

Their current business model makes sense for now. I'm claiming that it won't make sense anymore five years from now.

 

[Lognor]

I guess some ppl didnt know PS Plus IGC started on the PS3......interesting.

And included the Vita games.

All this was 2 console generations ago...

Hell, there was a games sub model on Xbox before Game Pass or Games with Gold. EA Access.


OK, and which devs and publishers have current gen only games? Here's a hint: one is Sony and Sony studios.

There's nothing to be held accountable for...when they have actual current gen only games....

That this is still a thing ppl are arguing about is wild.

Not arguing about just calling him out on his bs. The biggest Sony games are cross gen. Hzd2, gow2, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if spiderman 2 is cross gen. And again, jimbo said this after ms committed to cross gen for first couple of years. Ryan said what he said only to score points. PR. So he should absolutely be called out when he goes back on what he said.

 

[TheGodfather07]

You can see why sony are perfectly happy with the traditional way when they have games like god of war ragnarok that could potentially sell 5m copies on launch week. Things could change in the future, but for now, they will stay the way they are.

 

[Menzies]

Hey if it's taken a subscription rental service to make you an "enthusiast" then so be it. Everyone has to start somewhere.

Thanks - I'll start and end with enjoying all the exact same content as you, for the same amount of hours as you, for half the cost. Thanks for protecting the industry though

 

[Klayzer]

What, this kind of pressure? :

http://[URL]https://www.neogaf.com/...met-financial-expectations-brad-sams.1641636/

[/URL]

The kind of pressure that results in executives losing their jobs?

The kind of pressure that results in first party games that released in the last 12 months being absent from monthly and annual sales charts all over the world?

The kind of pressure where your hardware is firmly in 3rd place across the world?

The kind of pressure that results in you needing to spend upwards of $80 billion in order to even have a chance of staying competitive?

Sounds tough.

 

[DarkMage619]

First off profitability != sustainability.
My only issue is, at some point, all companies are going to want to be profitable which would mean that their product it is no longer sustainable.
AT THAT POINT, if MS has figured out profitability without sacrifice to game quality, AND muscling out the competition due to its subscription service; creating less options, then fine. No issues. I'm happy.
If either of those two issues are a thing, there draws my concern.

Proof my man. Show the proof of the lower game quality. Prove it isn't sustainable. Show how MS has muscled out competition from '3rd place' which people keep repeating. You'd think the 3rd place company would be simply ignored.

What I am concerned about is higher console and game prices. Who has risen both of these recently? MS? When game quality goes down and prices go up on Game pass then people can complain but right now neither of those things are happening so all the concern is unsubstantiated.

 

[Ghost of Caelid]

This is the way. Look at all of the hype for Sony's big games like GoW Ragnarok and Spider-man 2

People are hype for the games. Not spending 70$. If it launched it PS plus there would be even more hype because money saved.

 

[Haggard]

For a publisher with mostly SP games that can be completed rather quickly and wouldn't warrant subscriptions for longer than a month at a time that's probably a healthy mindset. I know I'll never spent more on a SP game that's on GP than what a month costs... So 1-15€ vs 80€. That's 65+€ less in the publisher's pocket from my side per game.
I played H:I and Gears 5 for 1€.... That simply can't be good for the developer.

 

[Loxus]

Do I have to explain the joke?

First you must find out if these games were always meant to release on PS4 regardless of if there was a PS5 or not.

The mere fact there is a PS5, means they believe in generations.

 

[Ghost of Caelid]

If Xbox could make profit at $70 a game they would

They can but their investing in a business model that is more profitable long term at the cost of a front end loss. If you can afford it it makes sense.

 

[GHG]

Thanks - I'll start and end with enjoying all the exact same content as you, for the same amount of hours as you, for half the cost. Thanks for protecting the industry though

It's fine, you don't care about your gaming library (or even care to have one by the looks of things) and I do. You don't care about what games you have access to, I do. I like to decide exactly which developers and publishers get my money, you don't.

You're free to identify as an "enthusiast" all you want though. It's 2022, everyone is free to be whatever they believe.

 

[Chukhopops]

We've discussed this before - the "quality" aspect is exactly why I question people parroting the "publisher of the year" tagine like PR drones. Like I've said before, it's akin to dragon age inquisition winning in 2014. Nobody will look back and think "what a year".

Ethusiasts tend to enjoy and value ownership. It tends to be important to them. I'll take it a step further, people who are serious enthusiasts tend to enjoy physical ownership (we have those people on this very forum), they won't even touch digital due to the nature of digital licenses. A similar phenomenon is happening in the home movie/entertainment industry (including music). Netflix (and streaming in general) is for casuals who aren't overly concerned about the quality of their experience whereas those who are real enthusiasts will purchase physical media and all the hardware necessary to get the most out of the experience.

So many blanket statements and veiled insults it's ridiculous.

I don't think being an enthusiast and having a collector mindset are the same thing, and I think people who play a lot and enjoy a variety of genres find more value in subs compared to casual players. If you complete 40+ games a year it makes a lot more sense than if you buy the 3 big AAA coming out every year.

Not to mention enthusiasts are more likely to be playing on PC where physical ownership isn't even an option anymore.