I think you grossly undervalue the games on GP, tbh. And PS+ users largely agree with me on that.
A couple new smaller games are worth 10 Sony exclusives 3 or 4 years after the fact, hence why the game with the highest number of players on PS+ is the cat game (one of the only day and date games on the service). And MS has a game coming out soon that will likely rival the sales of anything Sony can release in the entire generation (if performance is similar to the previous releases from the studio). The mix of large and small NEW games is 100x more valuable than a EAplay type service built on games most have already played.
The older games MS mixes in have some value, they shouldn't stop including those all together, but the real value comes in day one games of all sizes.
What drugs are you smoking if you think Starfield, without PlayStation and Switch, will rival the long-term sales of let alone Spiderman 2, needless to say anything like the next God of War?
While they aren't everything in terms of being a good measure, trailer views on Starfield are notably lower than anything compared to Spiderman 2. Most of Starfield's interest online seems to be from enthusiasts but the rule with that is, there are fewer enthusiasts yet they talk about the same thing way more & louder than the majority.
Since PS+ also entails online play, the game with the highest # of players actually isn't Stray. It's likely a game like COD, or GT7, or SF6 etc which would at least be much higher than Stray in cumulative player counts via PS+. I'm not even going to touch the rotten apple that is equivalating a couple smaller releases on GP equal to 10 Sony 1P games/exclusives 3-4 years later. If that were actually true among the majority, Game Pass subscription numbers would be better across the board.
But they haven't done this (XLG and PC Game Pass are still options). Reading too much into redeemable rewards that often are removed and re-added is a mistake. Microsoft Rewards is also one of the poorest run programs that Microsoft offers and is often is various states of being broken. You just don't hear a lot of complaints because of the nature of the program.
Isn't the purpose of Game Pass Core to finally phase out XBL Gold? If it isn't, then MS management at Xbox need to be summarily fired, today. The way I read it, Core basically replaces XBL Gold; you can even buy Core for an annual price, just like Gold today.
PC Game Pass I will say is still an option, and always will be. But, that has nothing really to do with the console side, IMO, and that's where I'm focused. I don't know any of the BTS issues with MS Rewards, but there was the recent discovery that in some territories it went missing for Game Pass, so people are speculating it's being removed as an option. Which, if true, is quite drastic.
Though even if it isn't, I'm expecting MS will scale back the amount of points people can redeem towards Game Pass monthly, so point-hoarding will basically be skimmed down. I don't know if people can gift MS Reward points to others but if so, I could see them cutting that too. Although, if they hard-cap the amount of redeemable points (maybe even basing that amount around what tier of Game Pass you are subscribed to, and for how long, like in terms of continuous subs), it wouldn't be necessary.
cool textwall ya fuckin essay writer
you should be writing news articles not staying on gaf
But the real solution is to bargain hard with other companies like Capcom, Fromsoft and Sega to get their biggest releases on GP day one. If Xbox is going to use MS money at least use it smartly. Sub service gamepass would be infinitely more of a selling point than just Starfield or Forza would ever be. They push gamepass like their life depends on it (tbf it actually does) but the new games they add are either dated stuff that's been out for 6+ months already or indie junk.
They should be doing that, for what games they legally can anyway (i.e any 3P game Sony has a marketing deal with likely has a no-Game Pass clause in there, for obvious reasons). The problem for Microsoft is, the cost to pay to cover for potential loss revenue on multiple platforms (not just Xbox) would be massive.
We're talking about losing x% of B2P sales on Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo, and Steam due to Day 1 Game Pass availability. Then, the knock-on effect of some players on those platforms just waiting for a steep sale while also refusing to join Game Pass to get the game, nullifying a big part of Microsoft's strategy with those deals. Publishers also know that the majority will buy the game at launch if the perception of value through quality is there, and that's a lot of easy revenue otherwise left on the table.
If anything, Microsoft could try arranging deals where those with a Game Pass sub get a 15% discount off the game on Xbox platforms, but they otherwise still have to, y'know, buy the game. Or maybe have certain DLC or MTX perks tied in to the game for those subbed to Game Pass. That would be their best approach, otherwise getting those big 3P AAA releases Day 1 into the service might be perceived as too costly for them (ironic, I know, but at least with spending $69 billion on ABK they own all that content in perpetuity).
