I am not understanding the Game Pass hate if a game costs 50 million to make and MS gives you 10 million to put in Game Pass and you still have the ability release it Day One on PC, Playstation, Steam, Xbox, and Nintendo. Why is that frowned upon when in actuality that is good business? I am not saying that those are the actual figures but do people not understand business? It's especially useful the earlier in development you can get that money. Is that really different than Sony moneyhatting games for Playstation but without the exclusivity? It seems to me that going to Game Pass is a win win situation especially for small to medium developers. Now established games don't need Game Pass but I don't see how it's hurting the industry especially for smaller developers. If the game is a hit then you won't need Game Pass for the sequel or your next title. If it flops then Game Pass actually helped you soften your losses.
Why is it viewed as negative if a developer can use Game Pass to help them reach profitability faster?
- Thread starter FMX
- Start date
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
heh
MiguelItUp
Member
Prepare for fun replies.
jshackles
Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
I think the negative view comes from the perception (on the consumer side) that the game is now "free", and therefore its value has been lowered before the game even releases. Most third party releases on Game Pass, with a few notable exceptions, are cheaper indie games and mobile ports, so that doesn't help the perception either. This almost always hurts games sales.
Finally, games released on Game Pass tend to later release "engagement numbers" (number of people who played the game) rather than sales numbers, further leading to the speculation that unit sales numbers over all platforms are affected by a game being included in Game Pass.
Finally, games released on Game Pass tend to later release "engagement numbers" (number of people who played the game) rather than sales numbers, further leading to the speculation that unit sales numbers over all platforms are affected by a game being included in Game Pass.
Windom Earle
Member
Because fuck Sloppass
Zacfoldor
Member
In our capitalist society things succeed and fail based on their own merit.
Thus we benefit from this evolution, as it were, of the hobby. Good games will grow and iterate and bad or unpopular games will die on the vine.
When we remove natural selection from game development we start to get games not based around our needs but rather the needs of the publisher or the developer.
Allowing bad games to fail is required in order to allow us, the consumer to continue to have say in how our hobby progresses.
For example, if Concord was on Gamepass it would still exist and a sequel would be in the works and many games who since changed course would still be woke. It's true. If you want the real answer here it is. We can't vote with our wallet on gamepass and we mustn't trust a company enough to allow them to take that power away from us.
Thus we benefit from this evolution, as it were, of the hobby. Good games will grow and iterate and bad or unpopular games will die on the vine.
When we remove natural selection from game development we start to get games not based around our needs but rather the needs of the publisher or the developer.
Allowing bad games to fail is required in order to allow us, the consumer to continue to have say in how our hobby progresses.
For example, if Concord was on Gamepass it would still exist and a sequel would be in the works and many games who since changed course would still be woke. It's true. If you want the real answer here it is. We can't vote with our wallet on gamepass and we mustn't trust a company enough to allow them to take that power away from us.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
People hate GP because their platform has a crappier sub plan.
But when their platform's sub plan gets some good games added to the service, suddenly it's good news or they dont bring it up.
But when their platform's sub plan gets some good games added to the service, suddenly it's good news or they dont bring it up.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Every dev should take MS´s money bag accounting for the full production of the game. i don't think this statement is that controversial.
The overall issue with GP is that as a business model doesn't make sense. Fortunately, there is no way GP/MS store competes on PC against Steam. So, MS losing money is a good thing in my book.
The overall issue with GP is that as a business model doesn't make sense. Fortunately, there is no way GP/MS store competes on PC against Steam. So, MS losing money is a good thing in my book.
Chupanibre
Member
LordOcidax
Member
Take one pill.. $80 games or GP. You can't have both here OP.
Last edited:
Jaybe
Member
Game Pass is interesting with its perception. I've generally had disdain for it as a model for being a race to the bottom, devaluing gaming software. "Wait for Game Pass" or "I thought that was going to be on game pass come up a sentiments that hold back purchases. You also get perceptions lol "looks like a game pass game" and "game pass fodder". I think Microsoft has reduced the revenue they get from their development efforts, leading to first party studio closures. Then they have the gall to cajole Sony into doing day 1 releases during the activision trail of course knowing that it destroys revenue. Several of the game pass deals have had timed exclusivity as a part of the contract.
As a developer entering into a game pass contract, it's probably great for them, otherwise why make the deal. You are one of the "haves" that get revenue and additional marketing support in showcases/blogs, etc. The challenge comes for the "have nots", who don't get the deal and generally sell less on the Xbox platform, leading some to skip the platform or delay release until there is a game pass deal available.
For consumers, it's generally good. I had a locked in three years conversion annd overall I enjoyed it, aside from some months that were very dry especially box first party. That seems to have changed from Dec 2024 on. Getting a month here and there makes a lot of sense if some releases come out worth playing, or if you go into the rewards redeeming option.
As a developer entering into a game pass contract, it's probably great for them, otherwise why make the deal. You are one of the "haves" that get revenue and additional marketing support in showcases/blogs, etc. The challenge comes for the "have nots", who don't get the deal and generally sell less on the Xbox platform, leading some to skip the platform or delay release until there is a game pass deal available.
For consumers, it's generally good. I had a locked in three years conversion annd overall I enjoyed it, aside from some months that were very dry especially box first party. That seems to have changed from Dec 2024 on. Getting a month here and there makes a lot of sense if some releases come out worth playing, or if you go into the rewards redeeming option.
Little Chicken
Member
Because its Xbox.
LordOcidax
Member
Not even ChatGPT can do a conclusion so well
Baemono
Member
Yes.
Financing a game to have it exclusive to a console = gives more value to the said console, better exposure for exclusive games, more attention, and sometimes better sales.
For eg: Monster Hunter Rise was a Switch exclusive, and was a success, and pushed Nintendo Switch sales even further.
But in the case of Game Pass deals, as you can subscribe for 1$ trial, you don't even need to buy the game, nor the service, just play it and even can get a refund. And you don't even need to buy an Xbox to play the game
Last edited:
Sebastian1295
Member
LordOcidax
Member
But he has a valid point in this thread… Why some people here hates GP? I also fail to understand this…
Why is it a big deal if developers use completely optional microtransactions to help them reach a profit faster?
On first glance, these are two completely separate issues. A closer look reveals though that most of us don't want gaming to turn into a hellscape of subscription services where we own nothing and games are monetized primarily post-sale.
On first glance, these are two completely separate issues. A closer look reveals though that most of us don't want gaming to turn into a hellscape of subscription services where we own nothing and games are monetized primarily post-sale.
Sebastian1295
Member
I don't hate GP tbh. I said before that i believe it's good in certain situations like if you have kids or if your someone who likes to play alot of games and beats games quickly. I just feel like it's failed because people are tired of subscription services and are cutting down on what they subscribe too.
Last edited:
HeisenbergFX4
Member
I guess you own physical copies of all your games and can play them offline?
Felessan
Member
You really don't if you ask such questions.
It's like asking why people should use credit cards with care, it's immediate cash at hands, "stupid" not to grab it immediately.
You grab money but kill sales. Not only for your game, but for ~every~ game on specific platform, making that platform a dead land for paid games, that are at mercy of what money MS will offer you. On paper it's 30 mil consoles, in practice it's a sum MS willing pay to you and it might be a quite small, because you have zero negotiation power. It destroys overall value.
Typical short-term win, long-term loss. Not a wise decision business wise.
LordOcidax
Member
There are gamers that don't like to play a lot of video games?
Sebastian1295
Member
There's gamers who don't beat games quickly or they take there time with them. In that case maybe it'd make more sense to buy a game at a reduced price 'games sales happen often' instead of subscribing to a service monthly and paying a fee.
Last edited:
LordOcidax
Member
I put more than 300 hours on Lies of P and more than 1000 hours in Microsoft Flight Simulator… What's the relation with time and GP? I don't get it…
Bumblebeetuna
Member
1. Its Xbox
2. Gamers for the most part are scared of change
It's better to just ignore it. GAF has predicted the end of GamePass for like six years running.
2. Gamers for the most part are scared of change
It's better to just ignore it. GAF has predicted the end of GamePass for like six years running.
Killjoy-NL
Member
I don't think people say it's a problem if developers get paid upfront.
What agenda? I asked a valid question to fellow gamers.
Sebastian1295
Member
I just explained it man haha. Take for example metaphor refantazio ok since it's coming to gamepass. That game is a huge time sink and takes around 60 to 80 hrs to beat i believe. 60 to 80 hrs is alot of time to commit to one game especially when you have a job, family, bf/gf or wife/husband etc. So some people might only have a couple of hrs a week to game meaning metaphor might take them over a month or 2 months to beat. So it dosen't make alot of sense to pay for a subscription service monthly when you can just buy the game on sale and not have to pay a monthly fee.
Sebastian1295
Member
Dr.Morris79
Gold Member
Real men already know if a games worth buying from the off and not relying on shitty rental services from a company that makes shitty, shitty in-house games
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
Nah but i like owning them and play whenever
HeisenbergFX4
Member
Ahh if they are digital then you don't really own them, you own a license to use the content, not the content itself
So the whole Gamepass equals renting thing is null and void if your purchased library is mostly digital
Laptop1991
Member
You won't see GTA 6 on gamepass and there is a simple reason why it will sell mega amounts and GP would slash it's sales so the games going on GP are not the same quality they use to be mostly mid level because they are not selling loads mostly outside GP and making profit on Steam etc, there are plenty of examples of this including the just released Doom, The quality of the games has gone down due to GP, and the revenue, why pay 80 quid or more when you can sub for 20 and MS hopes you stay but then it's 4 or 5 months to pay for one single game to buy they tell you, you don't own.
LordOcidax
Member
Valid point, in that case you can pay for just one month or buy the game at full price in the store… I prefer to pay the GP monthly. When a good PS5 or Nintendo game comes out, i don't pay for that month.
Last edited:
Sebastian1295
Member
GP as of this moment is still a great value especially with the retro stuff coming and game prices going up. So overall gamepass is still a great service.
Last edited:
MMaRsu
Gold Member
There is absolutely nothing wrong with renting games. Never has been.
Its such a stupid opinion to hold.
Especially if it gives you the ability to try a game before you buy it.
Last edited:
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
GP is awesome and people that don't have it have to make up something to trash it with so they don't feel they are missing out. Story of the last several years.
HeisenbergFX4
Member
Which can all be pulled at any time from you as you don't own the contentI can still play all my ps3,ps4 and ps5 games
No subs no nothing
Look it up
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
Again dumb edge case.
And people will not be ok with this.
And yes i would pirate the fuck out of my console if this ever happens
Last edited: