Support NeoGAF

[damidu]

They have to do their job, or Sony won't give them their checks.

nah I'll do it for free,
ms and their desperate obfuscated metrics need to be ridiculed at every opportunity.
its public service.

otherwise you'll have idiots parroting their "successful, sustainable" bs, only to get shocked when it all comes down crashing.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

What's AGS?

Arrowhead Game Studios bruv

 

[BigLee74]

nah I'll do it for free,
ms and their desperate obfuscated metrics need to be ridiculed at every opportunity.
its public service.

otherwise you'll have idiots parroting their "successful, sustainable" bs, only to get shocked when it all comes down crashing.

Our saviour!

 

[DeepEnigma]

Arrowhead Game Studios bruv

 

[ReBurn]

It's a meh game with fantastic visuals and great music. Everyone who think this is a decent game must play Clair Obscure and don't fool themselves.

I thought South of Midnight was a decent game. Not great, not bad, just decent. I fail to see what Clair Obscur has to do with this game. The two aren't even the same genre. One is a narrative action adventure and the other is a turn-based party RPG.

 

[Heisenberg007]

With most people trying this game "for free" on gamepass and not buying it, be it on Steam or Xbox, it means it's a huge bomb for Microsoft.
If they have to use the player engagement metric to pad their numbers, then it's a certified flop.

It really is that simple.

Clair Obscur sold 1 million copies in < 3 days, which exceeded their expectations. They announced it proudly.

Although the game launched on Game Pass (so obviously way more than 1 million buyers would have played the game), but they didn't announced "number of players." They announced the only meaningful metric that actually matters, i.e., number of copies sold.

Here, when we see Dragon Age Veilguard, Indiana Jones, Avowed, and South of Midnight, etc. announcing "players", you know what they actually feel about the sales of their game.

 

[Critical Hit]

One is a narrative action adventure and the other is a turn-based party RPG.

Both are narrative-driven games with strong art design. But SoM fails in a narrative and gameplay (what a waste of art) where Clair is miles ahead.

 

[Topher]

Decent game - no more than a 7 from me (maybe slightly less). Definitely one and done, won't touch again.

That's the trouble though - if it takes 100 folk 5 years (don't know if true - just something I read above) to make such a game, the industry is in big trouble. That is not sustainable.

I don't think this is the studio or game to gauge the industry with. Compulsion released We Happy Few in 2018, nearly seven years ago. Say what you want about South of Midnight, but I see nothing about the game that suggest it should take that long to be made.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

Recently, Game Rant chatted with Compulsion Games CEO and Studio Head Guillaume Provost. During the discussion, Provost noted that South of Midnight had accomplished an impressive feat in reaching over 1 million players since its full launch on April 8, 2025. He went on to say why he thinks the game has landed so well for audiences, and how Compulsion endeavors to deliver quality experiences for Xbox Game Studios.

Article:

South of Midnight Hit a Major Sales Milestone

Source: https://gamerant.com/south-midnight-sales-milestone-1-million-players-interview/

That's what they get for mocking and insulting their audience.

 

[Sintoid]

How many gaming minutes?

 

[BigLee74]

I don't think this is the studio or game to gauge the industry with. Compulsion released We Happy Few in 2018, nearly seven years ago. Say what you want about South of Midnight, but I see nothing about the game that suggest it should take that long to be made.

Maybe, maybe not.

But there is no denying games in general are getting much more time consuming and expensive to make. To the point now where one mediocre game can bust a studio.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Maybe, maybe not.

But there is no denying games in general are getting much more time consuming and expensive to make. To the point now where one mediocre game can bust a studio.

This is true, but then games are also selling way more than ever before.

Sony now has so many games that have crossed the 20 million mark. That wasn't the case in previous generations. Same goes for Nintendo first-party games that sold even more.

We can say that it is now a high-risk-high-reward industry, where one mega flop could bring your studio down, but one mega hit could also set up your success for years and years.

The problem with Compulsion Games, specifically, is that they always released commercial failures, never a commercially successful game.

 

[Topher]

Maybe, maybe not.

But there is no denying games in general are getting much more time consuming and expensive to make. To the point now where one mediocre game can bust a studio.

Perhaps, but at the same time I see plenty of smaller studios putting out top notch games and doing very well. Sandfall Interactive went from non-existant to making one of the best games this gen in less time it took Compulsion to make South of Midnight. I'm at the point now that I'm becoming more and more skeptical about what we are being told about the "state of the industry". Is it really taking longer and costing more? Or is it just to the advantage of some to make everyone believe that?

 

[Judge Death]

They have to do their job, or Sony won't give them their checks.

Careful mate, you'll get the blue cultists coming in to tell you to stop being horrible to them and to let them shit on the game in peace.

 

[BigLee74]

Perhaps, but at the same time I see plenty of smaller studios putting out top notch games and doing very well. Sandfall Interactive went from non-existant to making one of the best games this gen in less time it took Compulsion to make South of Midnight. I'm at the point now that I'm becoming more and more skeptical about what we are being told about the "state of the industry". Is it really taking longer and costing more? Or is it just to the advantage of some to make everyone believe that?

My boy went from a squeaky voiced teen to a hulking brute of a man in the time it took south of midnight to be developed.

Ridiculous amount of time, and I believe it is indicative of how things have been in the industry for a while now. I don't think anybody is pulling the wool over our eyes. With that said, I would NEVER hand over £70/£80 for a game - they are just not worth that.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Perhaps, but at the same time I see plenty of smaller studios putting out top notch games and doing very well. Sandfall Interactive went from non-existant to making one of the best games this gen in less time it took Compulsion to make South of Midnight. I'm at the point now that I'm becoming more and more skeptical about what we are being told about the "state of the industry". Is it really taking longer and costing more? Or is it just to the advantage of some to make everyone believe that?

Industry is obviously strong arming players when it comes to physical games, subscriptions etc.

Bizarrely, gamepass is supposed to be doomed and go away in a few years as per some posters here. But those $80 day 1 titles say otherwise.

Game dev time, am not finding to be out of ordinary really. CO Exp 33 had country PM come down to congratulate their team. Doesn't look like a low profile title to me.

Games these days are more accomplished, have deeper gameplay systems and support longer playtimes without boredom setting in. I can believe that stuff takes time to build.

SOM also has fair bit of craft. It has like 5-6 folk tales stiched together, pretty well realised, fleshed out game world.

It feels like a accomplished title, not made in a hurry.

 

[Heisenberg007]

My boy went from a squeaky voiced teen to a hulking brute of a man in the time it took south of midnight to be developed.

Ridiculous amount of time, and I believe it is indicative of how things have been in the industry for a while now. I don't think anybody is pulling the wool over our eyes. With that said, I would NEVER hand over £70/£80 for a game - they are just not worth that.

I think American developers are more f'ed up in this regard than other devs.

Japanese developers cut corners here and there, but they are productive at least, e.g., Sega / FromSoftware, etc.

Now, Korean and Chinese developers are showing everyone how it should be done. They make games super fast, reasonably good looking and competitive, and without breaking the bank. Even Sandfall Interactive, a French studio, came to the party out of nowhere. Several European developers have also been doing a relatively good job of producing good games in reasonable budgets, e.g., HouseMarque, Techland, etc.

That really only leaves American developers that are taking longer than ever to produce below-par games.

 

[Topher]

I think American developers are more f'ed up in this regard than other devs.

Japanese developers cut corners here and there, but they are productive at least, e.g., Sega / FromSoftware, etc.

Now, Korean and Chinese developers are showing everyone how it should be done. They make games super fast, reasonably good looking and competitive, and without breaking the bank. Even Sandfall Interactive, a French studio, came to the party out of nowhere. Several European developers have also been doing a relatively good job of producing good games in reasonable budgets, e.g., HouseMarque, Techland, etc.

That really only leaves American developers that are taking longer than ever to produce below-par games.

Would not be surprised if American developers are hoping they are going to get rich quick by being gobbled up by some corporation.

 

[BigLee74]

I think American developers are more f'ed up in this regard than other devs.

Japanese developers cut corners here and there, but they are productive at least, e.g., Sega / FromSoftware, etc.

Now, Korean and Chinese developers are showing everyone how it should be done. They make games super fast, reasonably good looking and competitive, and without breaking the bank. Even Sandfall Interactive, a French studio, came to the party out of nowhere. Several European developers have also been doing a relatively good job of producing good games in reasonable budgets, e.g., HouseMarque, Techland, etc.

That really only leaves American developers that are taking longer than ever to produce below-par games.

This is definitely half the problem. If a game takes 5-6 years to make, then that's OK providing it was worth the time. South of Midnight had great graphics, and genuinely amazing custom written songs, but was so mind numbingly below par where it counts - gameplay - that nobody could claim it was worth the effort overall.

Nothing about the games reveal gave me the impression it would be something I would ever want to buy. I thank Gamepass for the opportunity to play it without any further outlay, and I did force myself to complete it, but I can see why it wouldn't (didn't) sell decent amounts.

One million players though isn't too bad for a game that clearly hasn't sold well. I see people band about 'but there's 30 million Gamepass subscribers, so 1 in 30'. I don't think there are 30 million ultimate subscribers (the only tier that gets the game), so who knows what the true percentage is.

FWIW, not everybody downloads and tries every game. As an example, I have no interest in expedition 33, as I hate turn based combat!

 

[Fess]

The definition of 'players' is completely arbitrary, there's no industry standard to measure it

I'm trying to wrap my head around a world where AC Shadows had 3 million "players" but this game had 1 million "players"

Obviously Ubisoft and Microsoft aren't using the same definition of "players" because there's no way an AssCreed game only had 3 times the number of "players" this random indie game had

A player is a player but there are 20 or so million subscribers to Gamepass that can just hit install on South of Midnight and start playing.

Assassin's Creed Shadows is on Ubisoft+ in similar ways but that's a smaller service, meaning actual sales is what will boost the player count there.

 

[poppabk]

It really is that simple.

Clair Obscur sold 1 million copies in < 3 days, which exceeded their expectations. They announced it proudly.

Although the game launched on Game Pass (so obviously way more than 1 million buyers would have played the game), but they didn't announced "number of players." They announced the only meaningful metric that actually matters, i.e., number of copies sold.

Here, when we see Dragon Age Veilguard, Indiana Jones, Avowed, and South of Midnight, etc. announcing "players", you know what they actually feel about the sales of their game.

Fortnite announcing players?
It isn't that simple - announcements of sales or figures outside of financial statements are marketing pure and simple. A 3rd party might announce sold because they already got their gamepass money and want to advertise how well the game is doing while also advertising that you can buy it.
If you own a subscription service you want people to subscribe to your service rather than buy the game so you go with players as the bigger number and which also signals that you can play it without buying it

 

[Hawk The Slayer]

It really is that simple.

Clair Obscur sold 1 million copies in < 3 days, which exceeded their expectations. They announced it proudly.

Although the game launched on Game Pass (so obviously way more than 1 million buyers would have played the game), but they didn't announced "number of players." They announced the only meaningful metric that actually matters, i.e., number of copies sold.

Here, when we see Dragon Age Veilguard, Indiana Jones, Avowed, and South of Midnight, etc. announcing "players", you know what they actually feel about the sales of their game.

Amen, if a game actually sold well for it's budget, they'll announce the actual copies sold usually.

Oblivion Remaster and Clair Obscur both did extremely well for their budget

Oblivion Remaster sold 1.4 million copies on Steam and 590k copies on Playstation. While Claire Obscur sold 708k copies on Steam and 344k copies on Playstation
With over 3.2 million players on gamepass for Oblivion Remaster and E33 reaching 1.3 million copies on the pass at the same time

Not big numbers for big expensive AAA games but extremely big numbers for their AA budget.

 

[poppabk]

Amen, if a game actually sold well for it's budget, they'll announce the actual copies sold usually.

Oblivion remaster flopping as we speak.

 

[Hawk The Slayer]

Oblivion remaster flopping as we speak.

Super impressive actually cause they have both actual copies sold as I mention above and not just having gamepass numbers. Plus over 4 million gamepass is still impressive for a AA budget game such as Oblivoon Remaster since it's not a true remake and more of a remaster so the budget was nowhere near a AAA game.

Oblivion Remaster sold 1.4 million copies on Steam and 590k copies on Playstation. At the same time having over millions on gamepass.

 

[Principal]

Oblivion remaster flopping as we speak.

Love you for that

 

[Killjoy-NL]

They have to do their job, or Sony won't give them their checks.

How's it going with that 100M sub target?

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

How's it going with that 100M sub target?

 

[Killjoy-NL]

I did force myself to complete it,

Why would you ever force yourself to play a game?

 

[xrnzaaas]

I like this new played/sold metric. In most cases it's a good indicator whether the game performed above or below expectations.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Fortnite announcing players?
It isn't that simple - announcements of sales or figures outside of financial statements are marketing pure and simple. A 3rd party might announce sold because they already got their gamepass money and want to advertise how well the game is doing while also advertising that you can buy it.
If you own a subscription service you want people to subscribe to your service rather than buy the game so you go with players as the bigger number and which also signals that you can play it without buying it

A free-to-play game? Seriously? How will an F2P game announce 'copies sold'?

 

[havoc00]

Game isn't bad at all, easy 7/10

 

[Timberwolf25]

Finally finished it.

I'd give it a low 70s overall which is a slightly higher score than I would have given it after chapter 7. Turning off the lead vocals in the music option helped as I found the music mostly annoying, although some tracks were decent.

Best part of the game is that it looks really good at times. The cutscenes and animation were very well done as well.

The combat is easily the weakest part of this game. Boss fights were really too easy and the arena fight encounters were very repititive with only small variations.

The platforming, discovery and exploration of the game was just average compared to similar games. Nothing outstanding, but nothing terrible either even though I did die to some cheap deaths where I got stuck in the geometry. The guide tendril makes finding where you need to go next trivial although you need to explore to find the upgrade currency. I know I missed a few as I had maxed all the skills except one.

Game is preachy too, which might be where may be where Sweet Baby involvement came from. I ended up skipping most of the optional read me pamphlets and didn't care for the inner dialogue from Hazel either. Game could've done without all of that and be better overall as the main story is fine without it. Speaking of the story and somewhat of a trend is that there is no real "evil" bad people as this story tries to give you rationale every big bad. Maybe it's just me, but I wasn't feeling that all.

It's sorta the perfect GamePass game. Not something I would ever buy, but something that makes sense for a subscription service. Like stuff on Netflix, there are tons of content I've consumed there that I would never go out of my way to rent or watch in a cinema. So worth playing if you have a sub, but not something I would've bought at full price.

 

[nial]

Twice.

 

[ReBurn]

Both are narrative-driven games with strong art design. But SoM fails in a narrative and gameplay (what a waste of art) where Clair is miles ahead.

I didn't think SoM failed in narrative. I quite enjoyed the story. The gameplay didn't do anything new, but it wasn't bad by any means. But if hyperbole is your thing then have a good time, my friend.

 

[ReBurn]

Would not be surprised if American developers are hoping they are going to get rich quick by being gobbled up by some corporation.

That's what the people who run the studios want. Cash out before the investors dry up.

 

[L*][*N*K]

This game could have been very well received if it wasn't made by Xbox

 

[Heisenberg007]

This is definitely half the problem. If a game takes 5-6 years to make, then that's OK providing it was worth the time. South of Midnight had great graphics, and genuinely amazing custom written songs, but was so mind numbingly below par where it counts - gameplay - that nobody could claim it was worth the effort overall.

Nothing about the games reveal gave me the impression it would be something I would ever want to buy. I thank Gamepass for the opportunity to play it without any further outlay, and I did force myself to complete it, but I can see why it wouldn't (didn't) sell decent amounts.

One million players though isn't too bad for a game that clearly hasn't sold well.

I don't see it that way, as for me, these player counts are nothing but corporate speak, trying to pretend a game was success (via vanity metrics) when it wasn't based on the only meaningful metric - copies sold and ROI.

I see people band about 'but there's 30 million Gamepass subscribers, so 1 in 30'. I don't think there are 30 million ultimate subscribers (the only tier that gets the game), so who knows what the true percentage is.

Yeah, attachment rate is always lower, so I don't mind that.

But a lower count also means that the conception of the game was wrong. They always knew that their game was going to be available on Game Pass day one, and yet they made a game that couldn't get their core audience to even download and playeven once (at no additional cost).

FWIW, not everybody downloads and tries every game. As an example, I have no interest in expedition 33, as I hate turn based combat!

I don't like turn-based combat either (I almost never play a turn-based game), but man, Expedition 33 is special. My GOTY 2025 so far, and I don't think even DS2 or Ghost of Yotei is gonna topple that. Imagine that! Give it a go.

 

[Team Andromeda]

And cue the Gamepass haters. Like clockwork.

It's so tiresome and predictable

It's nice to see Xbox/Game Pass offering very different genres and games from its In-House teams. *SONY used to do that before, now they're just like Nintendo, right down to charging full price for basic remasters.









*Sarcasm

 

[Skifi28]

Why would you ever force yourself to play a game?

Fomo is a real sickness, millions of gamers suffer every year!

 

[Roberts]

It's not a bad number for a very niche game. It's like Beasts of Southern Wild of videogames and clearly is a passion project that was never meant to blow up charts.

 

[BigLee74]

Why would you ever force yourself to play a game?

I was already half way through when I thought about dropping it. The combat was crap, and the platforming was very very basic.

But the graphics were great, and the chapter stories interesting.

I knew it was short, so figured I was as well completing it (with combat off to hasten progress) just for the story.

Pretty sure we've all reached that point of no return in a game.

 

[Kydd BlaZe]

The visuals were surprisingly pretty great in this. Absolutely loved the art direction and setting, but the gameplay loop quickly became stale over time. It's not great, but not bad either.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

With most people trying this game "for free" on gamepass and not buying it, be it on Steam or Xbox, it means it's a huge bomb for Microsoft.
If they have to use the player engagement metric to pad their numbers, then it's a certified flop.

I know this is the regular take here, but surely if Microsoft release the game only on Xbox and PC where Gamepass is available then how does that work with regard to your insistence that it's a flop?

Should Microsoft hope that Gamepass subscribers cancel for a month, buy this game and then resubscribe the following month (before someone posts here that Gamepass is an utter failure because it doesn't have enough subscribers)?

If Netflix announce that a new show has been watched xxxx number of times then has that show failed because it doesn't have any bluray sales?

 

[winjer]

I know this is the regular take here, but surely if Microsoft release the game only on Xbox and PC where Gamepass is available then how does that work with regard to your insistence that it's a flop?

Should Microsoft hope that Gamepass subscribers cancel for a month, buy this game and then resubscribe the following month (before someone posts here that Gamepass is an utter failure because it doesn't have enough subscribers)?

If Netflix announce that a new show has been watched xxxx number of times then has that show failed because it doesn't have any bluray sales?

Simply because paying 70$ for one game is a lot more than paying 10$ for one monthly subscription.

 

[Esppiral]

The game is good, not fantastic, but good, it gets hated because you know...

 

[Certinty]

It's a good game.

Lovely setting, visuals and story.

Gameplay itself was fine but the combat was boring enough for me to turn the difficulty down to breeze through fights mid-game onwards.

Nice fun short experience overall though. Glad I played through it, reminded me of those PS2 like platformers we used to get back in the day.

 

[Chukhopops]

The game is good, not fantastic, but good, it gets hated because you know...

I want to believe people stayed away from it because of the art style or bad marketing and not because of the narrative themes and characters but I guess it's a mix of all those things.

The game is really excellent, fluid platforming, interesting story, gorgeous graphics, and possibly one of the best soundtracks in recent years (although now there's E33 in the competition) from the absolute GOAT Olivier Derivière.

Also another engagement discussion...

 

[Mr Reasonable]

Simply because paying 70$ for one game is a lot more than paying 10$ for one monthly subscription.

Well, it's not $70 for the game and it's not $10 for Gamepass either, so I can tell you're very invested in the situation, but the point I'm making is that Microsoft include the game on a service available on Xbox and PC. Must they hope that service fails so they can satisfy your criteria for how many sales the game needs to not be a flop? The Gamepass fees are part of the picture too.

Otherwise, as I said, every netflix show is a terrible failure because they don't have any bluray sales.

How do you think it should work? Gamepass subscribers on Xbox and PC should subscribe AND buy the games they're paying to access? I

 

[StereoVsn]

It's not a bad number for a very niche game. It's like Beasts of Southern Wild of videogames and clearly is a passion project that was never meant to blow up charts.

The issue is that this "passion project" took 7 years to make for an 80 person (+contractors) studio.

That's a big chunk of $$$ for the return.

 

[winjer]

Well, it's not $70 for the game and it's not $10 for Gamepass either, so I can tell you're very invested in the situation, but the point I'm making is that Microsoft include the game on a service available on Xbox and PC. Must they hope that service fails so they can satisfy your criteria for how many sales the game needs to not be a flop? The Gamepass fees are part of the picture too.

Otherwise, as I said, every netflix show is a terrible failure because they don't have any bluray sales.

How do you think it should work? Gamepass subscribers on Xbox and PC should subscribe AND buy the games they're paying to access? I

You are right, this game is a bit cheaper. 40$. And gamepass is 12$.
Still, there is a very big difference between someone that pays 40$ and someone that only pays 12$.
No matter how you cut it, MS will get a lot less money from this game.

Good thing you are talking about netflix and other video streaming services, because that is why medium budget films are almost dead.
Here is a good explanation from someone who used to make a lot of medium budget movies, and why they are almost dead, because of streaming.
And you can be sure that this is also applicable to medium budget games that are on subscription services like gamepass. And you can bet that this game, and others similar to it, will never make their money back.