Support NeoGAF

[Azurro]

Beats paying $500 for a console. You keep adding “on the go”, I’d imagine they would be playing these games at home for the fraction of the price you would pay to play them any other way.

So, the same type of people that care very little about games, when at home, will be the same type of people to go and find a controller, link it through Bluetooth and pay a 15 dollars subscription? How many non gamers do you ever see doing that? It's way too complicated and the userbase is not interested, it just doesn't work, it's an incredibly dumb and desperate business idea.

They want to disrupt the market without even bothering to understand their target userbase. I mean, I'm sure their objective is not to lose billions to gamepass just for the hell of it.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

So, the same type of people that care very little about games, when at home, will be the same type of people to go and find a controller, link it through Bluetooth and pay a 15 dollars subscription? How many non gamers do you ever see doing that? It's way too complicated and the userbase is not interested, it just doesn't work, it's an incredibly dumb and desperate business idea.

They want to disrupt the market without even bothering to understand their target userbase. I mean, I'm sure their objective is not to lose billions to gamepass just for the hell of it.

Probably the same people who ditched buying DVDs and Blu-rays and sub to Netflix. Oh look. Success.

Gaming sub plans are a relatively new thing. It started with probably OnLive 10 years ago and it failed. And Sony took a crack at it first on console with PS Now and that service is lousy with hardly any subs despite a giant PS4/PS5 user base, and where half the games are stream only and PC PS Now is 100% stream only. For years, that service at one time was 100% stream only at 720/30 fps. Only last few years did they finally open it up.

Game Pass is currently is the best value sub plan with the best and latest games. And it's stretching to more devices for easier access.

Xbox trying to be on as many devices (could stream or not) is up to gamers to decide. Not everyone cares about even downloading giant game files on a piece of hardware. Shit loads of people are happy playing mobile streaming games.

 

[Warnen]

So, the same type of people that care very little about games, when at home, will be the same type of people to go and find a controller, link it through Bluetooth and pay a 15 dollars subscription? How many non gamers do you ever see doing that? It's way too complicated and the userbase is not interested, it just doesn't work, it's an incredibly dumb and desperate business idea.

They want to disrupt the market without even bothering to understand their target userbase. I mean, I'm sure their objective is not to lose billions to gamepass just for the hell of it.

do you think people are dumb and can’t work Bluetooth? Most people have wireless headphones so that’s a moot point. People pay tons of money for video subs like Netflix and hbo ect and watch block buster movies on there phones why would playing a game that prob look nicer then most switch games be a bad thing?

You are just being thick. This app could be on TVs abs streaming boxes as well, no issue there right?

 

[oagboghi2]

sure a controller and a phone clip would be totally worth it over a $500 console for most people. Also what year is it that u have a 5 inch phone? Most phones have nicer screens then a switch lite and it’s fine for gaming.

1. Most phones are 5 to 6 inches

2. That might make sense in your head, but there is nothing to suggest people are excited to use their phone as a game console. Most people who want an Xbox, will buy an Xbox.

 

[Warnen]

1. Most phones are 5 to 6 inches

2. That might make sense in your head, but there is nothing to suggest people are excited to use their phone as a game console. Most people who want an Xbox, will buy an Xbox.

I would say all the people pissed that Fortnite is off the Apple store shows your 2nd point is dead wrong.

 

[oagboghi2]

Probably the same people who ditched buying DVDs and Blu-rays and sub to Netflix. Oh look. Success.

Gaming sub plans are a relatively new thing. It started with probably OnLive 10 years ago and it failed. And Sony took a crack at it first on console with PS Now and that service is lousy with hardly any subs despite a giant PS4/PS5 user base, and where half the games are stream only and PC PS Now is 100% stream only. For years, that service at one time was 100% stream only at 720/30 fps. Only last few years did they finally open it up.

Game Pass is currently is the best value sub plan with the best and latest games. And it's stretching to more devices for easier access.

Xbox trying to be on as many devices (could stream or not) is up to gamers to decide. Not everyone cares about even downloading giant game files on a piece of hardware. Shit loads of people are happy playing mobile streaming games.

Funny you mention onlive because I remember people trotting out the same bullshit rationale for why it would succeed when that was a thing.

There is no evidence that this market exists. Their idea that people desperately want to buy and play games, but are held back by consoles and handhelds a console is silly. It has been proven to fail multiple times.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I would say all the people pissed that Fortnite is off the Apple store shows your 2nd point is dead wrong.

Totally.

The mobile market is so big, those industry pie charts show mobile gaming spend is much more than console, even though consoles have $60-70 games and top sellers selling millions of copies with mtx.

And mobile gaming is still way bigger.

 

[Azurro]

Probably the same people who ditched buying DVDs and Blu-rays and sub to Netflix. Oh look. Success.
...

I'm not going to read the rest as that point is simply not valid and is a stupid analogy as it's not being thought through. What was the userbase that Netflix was targeting? Oh, look at that, people that went to blockbuster and rented movies for 3 or 4 dollars per movie and that went multiple times a month.

Netflix was a great disruptor because it served an audience that already wanted what Netflix was offering, it was just in a much improved way as the userbase could get multiple times more movies AND wanted to pay for them. Aside from Xbox's hardcore demographic, that at best covers a small fraction of the costs associated with GamePass, they need WAY more users to make those productions that cost hundreds of millions plus all of those server blades sustainable.

Let's look at the potential audience, starting with PC gamers. Well, they need A LOT of them to move to it and they are basically married to Steam. Rivals like Epic have spent hundreds of millions if not billions trying to woo them and giving away multiple games every month, and even then they have problems reaching their targets. Even IF they managed to do that, they need way more than the tens of millions they'd get from PC gaming in the best case scenario, they need the casual phone gamer to get on board.

Let's look at that type of gamer: they spent almost nothing on either games or microtransactions, they don't download many new apps per year, if at all and don't spend much time playing. Gamepass does not cover the needs of that demographic, at all. It offers many games when the userbase is happy playing one or two during commute, it asks for a 15 USD subscription when the great majority of that audience never spends above 0 dollars for any app.

Gamepass will never be the Netflix of gaming, it's a dumb, desperate idea that will end up costing them billions because they don't understand their target audience.

 

[oagboghi2]

I would say all the people pissed that Fortnite is off the Apple store shows your 2nd point is dead wrong.

That comparison makes no sense.

How many people who have Fortnite on their phone don't have a console or handheld? Again, you are just targeting the same "gamer" audience.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Funny you mention onlive because I remember people trotting out the same bullshit rationale for why it would succeed when that was a thing.

There is no evidence that this market exists. Their idea that people desperately want to buy and play games, but are held back by consoles and handhelds a console is silly. It has been proven to fail multiple times.

And when Netflix came about starting with mail-in dvds, who would had thought a snail mail service would be accepted when everyone had Blockbusters nearby? Then at some point they added digital streaming (limited content at I think $8/mth back then). Sounds ridiculous since the selection stunk and not everyone could problaby stream movies well in the 2000s either. It worked. Now it's 2021, you can stream 4k, it has tons of content and NF is a giant company.

At some point streaming games on a cellphone became standard and accepted as entertainment. But when cellphones first started the best game anyone coud play is tetris or snakes on probably a 1 inch Nokia brick phone screen.

Things evolve.

Mobile gaming sales have been higher than console software sales for years.

 

[Neofire]

Yeah I bet they so want to try to monopolize everything with their games as a service bs. I hope they fail. It's a bad direction for gaming and seeing how MS has turned almost every service they have into a subscription is even worse.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I'm not going to read the rest as that point is simply not valid and is a stupid analogy as it's not being thought through. What was the userbase that Netflix was targeting? Oh, look at that, people that went to blockbuster and rented movies for 3 or 4 dollars per movie and that went multiple times a month.

Netflix was a great disruptor because it served an audience that already wanted what Netflix was offering, it was just in a much improved way as the userbase could get multiple times more movies AND wanted to pay for them. Aside from Xbox's hardcore demographic, that at best covers a small fraction of the costs associated with GamePass, they need WAY more users to make those productions that cost hundreds of millions plus all of those server blades sustainable.

Let's look at the potential audience, starting with PC gamers. Well, they need A LOT of them to move to it and they are basically married to Steam. Rivals like Epic have spent hundreds of millions if not billions trying to woo them and giving away multiple games every month, and even then they have problems reaching their targets. Even IF they managed to do that, they need way more than the tens of millions they'd get from PC gaming in the best case scenario, they need the casual phone gamer to get on board.

Let's look at that type of gamer: they spent almost nothing on either games or microtransactions, they don't download many new apps per year, if at all and don't spend much time playing. Gamepass does not cover the needs of that demographic, at all. It offers many games when the userbase is happy playing one or two during commute, it asks for a 15 USD subscription when the great majority of that audience never spends above 0 dollars for any app.

Gamepass will never be the Netflix of gaming, it's a dumb, desperate idea that will end up costing them billions because they don't understand their target audience.

And what proof do you have making an assumption gaming subbers dont spend money on games or mtx?

If you're going to downplay GP, dont forget to downplay PS Now too. PS Now is much less successful despite being released for longer with a larger potential user base, yet it's dead silence from you about PS Now. A service where half the PS games are stream only, and on PC it's 100% stream only no matter what.

 

[oagboghi2]

And when Netflix came about starting with mail-in dvds, who would had thought a snail mail service would be accepted when everyone had Blockbusters nearby? Then at some point they added digital streaming (limited content at I think $8/mth back then). Sounds ridiculous since the selection stunk and not everyone could problaby stream movies well in the 2000s either. It worked. Now it's 2021, you can stream 4k, it has tons of content and NF is a giant company.

At some point streaming games on a cellphone became standard and accepted as entertainment. But when cellphones first started the best game anyone coud play is tetris or snakes on probably a 1 inch Nokia brick phone screen.

Things evolve.

Mobile gaming sales have been higher than console software sales for years.

People who defend gamepass always run to the same bad examples.

As Azurro just pointed out, Netflix targeted a niche of heavy video rental users and took a dominant position in the market. Over time with the streaming selection, they changed their relationship with not only how they saw renting movies, but also as a viable replacement for cable. That's when the real disruption happened

Gamepass is not disrupting the market. They are just repackaging a different way to essentially play games on MS platform. That's it. What is gamepass offering to people that are fundamentally changing how they see the market? How are they going to convince people that don't care about games, to now care about games via a new delivery method?

You're taking the growth of the mobile market, and just giving it to Gamepass? Why? Why would the billions who play candy crush on their phone now care you can stream Forza? Why would they care that their smart t.v. can stream psychonauts?

This stuff is cool to gamers, who already own consoles. They see it as a cheap backlog. Gamepass is doubling down on the existing Xbox userbase, not expanding it.

 

[Warnen]

That comparison makes no sense.

How many people who have Fortnite on their phone don't have a console or handheld? Again, you are just targeting the same "gamer" audience.

It shows phone gamers are into games other then match 3. I know plenty of people that use there phone or tablet to game on exclusively. It’s the largest and still growing sector of the market, get your head out of the ground.

 

[elliot5]

People who defend gamepass always run to the same bad examples.

As Azurro just pointed out, Netflix targeted a niche of heavy video rental users, and disrupted the market. Over time with the streaming selection, they changed their relationship with how they saw movies, and especially cable. That's when the real disruption happened

Gamepass is not disrupting the market. They are just repackaging a different way to essentially play games on MS platform. That's it. What is gamepass offering to people that are fundamentally changing how they see the market? How are they going to convince people that don't care about games, to now care about games via a new delivery method?

You're taking the growth of the mobile market, and just giving it to Gamepass? Why? Why would the billions who play candy crush on their phone now care you can stream Forza? Why would they care that their smart t.v. can stream psychonauts?

This stuff is cool to gamers, who already own consoles. They see it as a cheap backlog. Gamepass is doubling down on the existing Xbox userbase, not expanding it.

Ask yourself why people play games like candy crush on their phone.

Likely it's because they like the convenience, the low barrier of entry, and how it's always available. The exact same way Netflix is for movies and tv.

Give those casuals a way to experience premium content at a cheap cost and convenience and they'll sign up. That's why there's touch controls for these xCloud games. No accessories needed either

 

[StreetsofBeige]

People who defend gamepass always run to the same bad examples.

As Azurro just pointed out, Netflix targeted a niche of heavy video rental users, and disrupted the market. Over time with the streaming selection, they changed their relationship with how they saw movies, and especially cable. That's when the real disruption happened

Gamepass is not disrupting the market. They are just repackaging a different way to essentially play games on MS platform. That's it. What is gamepass offering to people that are fundamentally changing how they see the market? How are they going to convince people that don't care about games, to now care about games via a new delivery method?

You're taking the growth of the mobile market, and just giving it to Gamepass? Why? Why would the billions who play candy crush on their phone now care you can stream Forza? Why would they care that their smart t.v. can stream psychonauts?

This stuff is cool to gamers, who already own consoles. They see it as a cheap backlog. Gamepass is doubling down on the existing Xbox userbase, not expanding it.

What you just said about NF going from niche rental users to now (mainstream users on every device) seemed improbable. But it happened.

People love NF because you can run it on just about every device, it's cheap, the selection gets bigger over time, and there's exclusive content. Most of the stuff you can buy a disc or digital download if you really wanted to. But many dont. NF is good enough. And if they really want to see a new splashy movie, they'll hit the theatre because there's no guarantee it'll come to NF.

Same goes for GP and any other game sub. For many people, it's good enough. If they really want a new game not on in the library they'll buy it.

Things like Xcloud gives mobile users a chance to play higher budget games instead Candy Crush or F2P kinds of games.

Again, these services arent for everyone.

At the beginning I bet everyone laughed at how crappy mobile games are. Who would play these cheesy games on a tiny screen from 10+ years ago? Well, turns out lots do. Games have got better, the tech better and the mobile market is much bigger than consoles.

If mobile gamers like playing their games on the go, GP and xCloud on the go is another option.

 

[oagboghi2]

Ask yourself why people play games like candy crush on their phone.

Likely it's because they like the convenience, the low barrier of entry, and how it's always available. The exact same way Netflix is for movies and tv.

Give those casuals a way to experience premium content at a cheap cost and convenience and they'll sign up. That's why there's touch controls for these xCloud games. No accessories needed either

And also they like the game. Did you forget that part? There is plenty of big, console-like experiences on mobile. Why aren't they as popular as candy crush?

Because people who like candy crush aren't interested in those games. There are tons of cheap and accessible "premium content" on the iPhone and Android, and their sales totally pale in comparison to lighter, smaller, digestible fare. Nothing I am saying is even slightly controversial, the sales data backs me up here.

but becuase of game pass, instead of accepting different audiences want different things, and that a lot of people aren't interested in that content, we have to pretend this market is seriously craving for gears of war

 

[StreetsofBeige]

And also they like the game. Did you forget that part? There is plenty of big, console-like experiences on mobile. Why aren't they as popular as candy crush?

Because people who like candy crush aren't interested in those games. There are tons of cheap and accessible "premium content" on the iPhone and Android, and their sales totally pale in comparison to lighter, smaller, digestible fare. Nothing I am saying is even slightly controversial, the sales data backs me up here.

but becuase of game pass, instead of accepting different audiences want different things, and that a lot of people aren't interested in that content, we have to pretend this market is seriously craving for gears of war

Who ever said Gears of War would overtake Candy Crush or a F2P brawler?

So what your saying is if a game isn't a top seller like those billion dollar mobile franchises, dont bother since the mobile market doesn't want it.

Got it.

While you're at it, you can also call BMW, Audi and Mercedes to pack it up because vehicle sales skew to cheaper brands and models.

 

[oagboghi2]

What you just said about NF going from niche rental users to now (mainstream users on every device) seemed improbable. But it happened.

People love NF because you can run it on just about every device, it's cheap, the selection gets bigger over time, and there's exclusive content. Most of the stuff you can buy a disc or digital download if you really wanted to. But many dont. NF is good enough. And if they really want to see a new splashy movie, they'll hit the theatre because there's no guarantee it'll come to NF.

Same goes for GP and any other game sub. For many people, it's good enough. If they really want a new game not on in the library they'll buy it.

Things like Xcloud gives mobile users a chance to play higher budget games instead Candy Crush or F2P kinds of games.

Again, these services arent for everyone.

At the beginning I bet everyone laughed at how crappy mobile games are. Who would play these cheesy games on a tiny screen from 10+ years ago? Well, turns out lots do. Games have got better, the tech better and the mobile market is much bigger than consoles.

If mobile gamers like playing their games on the go, GP and xCloud on the go is another option.

Why? Why would people who don't care about these videogames, decide to pay 15 a month or around 180 a year, to play games they aren't interested in? Whether or not game pass is on everything like Netflix currently works is irrelevant if people aren't interested in the games.

This is where the Netflix comparison fails. People already had an interest in movies and television. Netflix was just a different way of getting it. There was already a high demand for movies/television when Netflix started. When the streaming began, and people saw the cost/benefit analysis of how much they spent on netflix/how many hours they spent using it(this is important) vs how much they spend and used cable, that's when the disruption began.

what is game pass doing that is actually disruptive? Not having to buy a console? Where is the market evidence that consoles are holding people back? There is none, as companies like OnLive proved. Consumers don't have a problem buying consoles.

I don't think people appreciate how much people don't give a shit about the games we care about. The mobile and console market has always shown interest in different games and business models.

Sony gets a lot of shit for porting their games to Pc, but at least that makes sense. They are aiming at an audience that exists. I am supposed to believe that just putting an app on a Samsung smart tv is going to convince people to spend 200 a year on things they don't care about?

 

[oagboghi2]

Who ever said Gears of War would overtake Candy Crush or a F2P brawler?

So what your saying is if a game isn't a top seller like those billion dollar mobile franchises, dont bother since the mobile market doesn't want it.

Got it.

While you're at it, you can also call BMW, Audi and Mercedes to pack it up because vehicle sales skew to cheaper brands and models.

If your argument is that this is only going to appeal to a small segment of the mobile gaming market(which is what BMW, Audi, and Mercedes are to the automobile market) then fine. That only supports my point. This is Xbox doubling down on their existing userbase. Not expanding it, like MS and many others claim they are doing.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Why? Why would people who don't care about these videogames, decide to pay 15 a month or around 180 a year, to play games they aren't interested in? Whether or not game pass is on everything like Netflix currently works is irrelevant if people aren't interested in the games.

This is where the Netflix comparison fails. People already had an interest in movies and television. Netflix was just a different way of getting it. There was already a high demand for movies/television when Netflix started. When the streaming began, and people saw the cost/benefit analysis of how much they spent on netflix/how many hours they spent using it(this is important) vs how much they spend and used cable, that's when the disruption began.

what is game pass doing that is actually disruptive? Not having to buy a console? Where is the market evidence that consoles are holding people back? There is none, as companies like OnLive proved. Consumers don't have a problem buying consoles.

I don't think people appreciate how much people don't give a shit about the games we care about. The mobile and console market has always shown interest in different games and business models.

Sony gets a lot of shit for porting their games to Pc, but at least that makes sense. They are aiming at an audience that exists. I am supposed to believe that just putting an app on a Samsung smart tv is going to convince people to spend 200 a year on things they don't care about?

Who says there isn't research showing the market wants it? You're assuming because you cant google an answer it means it doesnt exist.

At some point NF came to mobile. Google says 2007. And that was long time ago when screens were smaller and NF had a fraction of the content they have now. Who knew people loved to watch TV shows and movies on a tiny screen? I didn't. I've never used NF on a phone. I dont even use NF on my laptop. I only use NF on my TV using the tv app or console app. I'm one kind of consumer. The tv NF user. But there are some who use NF primarily on a smartphone for their reasons, and some only use it on a PC. Then some who use it on many devices. More the better.

You have a hard time understanding that more access point can lead to more users, as well as help current users use it more too.

Your view on Steam Deck must be its a failure too because handheld gaming has peaked with whichever console maker makes a handheld. Steam Deck is going for a powerful PC gaming on the go gadget. There's no research either that says PC gamers are begging to play Steam games sitting on a bus.

 

[Heisenberg007]

If your argument is that this is only going to appeal to a small segment of the mobile gaming market(which is what BMW, Audi, and Mercedes are to the automobile market) then fine. That only supports my point. This is Xbox doubling down on their existing userbase. Not expanding it, like MS and many others claim they are doing.

I read the conversation above, and I agree with you regarding xCloud, mobile, and market expansion. At the moment, Xbox is still targeting hardcore Xbox fans and existing gamers, presenting them a new way to play their games. Gamepass and xCloud. But that may not bring in a large userbase from an outside market (e.g., non-gamers who primarily watch movies in their spare time).

Having said that, I also believe that horizontal market expansion is very important for the gaming industry at this stage, and this is what Jim Ryan and Phil Spencer are trying to do in their own ways. Otherwise, the industry keeps getting stuck at the ~200-250 million userbase cap.

I'd like to know, if not this, then what do you think is a better way to expand the market horizontally?

Personally, I think Jim Ryan's method may not look as sexy but might end be as more fruitful in the end. I understand he is trying two tactics:

1. Creating movies and TV shows from existing Sony IPs. That's tapping into the other medium. If someone likes the IP, that's half the job done. Now it's the assumption that they'd like to play a video game. If they don't, that's it. If they do, they can become a Sony customer.
2. Creating mobile games based on Sony IPs. This is nothing special. It's just creating mobile games based on Sony IPs. MS will be doing the same with the help of Tencent. But it may still help expand to the casual gamers' market.

 

[Kagey K]

Wasnt there an interview a few years back where he made that statement?

That wasnt hard: 2018 article

https://www.vg247.com/2018/12/07/spencer-wants-xbox-game-pass-on-every-device/

So you have a problem with him being consistent?

Or do you have a problem with him actually pursuing that space?

Because it seems he is building in today what he talked about back then, but you see it as a negative somehow.

 

[Kagey K]

Gamepass will never be the Netflix of gaming, it's a dumb, desperate idea that will end up costing them billions because they don't understand their target audience.

I personally think you are wrong on that point. I know Shawn says it needs 500 million subscribers.

But if they are bringing in enough revenue to greenlight games with no out of pocket expenses to them it’s working.

Even if it’s not driving profit, it’s essentially making every game risk free.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

So you have a problem with him being consistent?

Or do you have a problem with him actually pursuing that space?

Because it seems he is building in today what he talked about back then, but you see it as a negative somehow.

Yup. And it's getting there.

Similar to Netflix. At the beginning it was snail mail DVDs. Then a computer app. Then at some point tv, consoles, mobile, and set top boxes all got the NF app. There's probably some more devices I forgot.

The one thing getting in the way is gaming involves gameplay and lag. So depending on the game, a streamed xcloud version may or may not work well pending the technology and how twitchy a game is needing millisecond response time. Some games need it, some dont.

Doesn't look like the typical smartphone gamer cares. They play anything from flash games to competitive F2P games on a tiny screen and it's fine for them. And mobile has by far the biggest gaming revenue. That chart which has been posted here a few times showed mobile revenue more than PC and console combined.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I personally think you are wrong on that point. I know Shawn says it needs 500 million subscribers.

But if they are bringing in enough revenue to greenlight games with no out of pocket expenses to them it’s working.

Even if it’s not driving profit, it’s essentially making every game risk free.

Exactly.

And even if game subs all fail - GP, PS Now, EA Play, UBI - and they all go back to selling $70 games, who cares.

Who wins? The gamers who took advantage and got a sweet deal for years. Who lost? Gamers who got ripped off while a competing service offers good games for dirt cheap on a sub plan.

It's like the old Columbia House CD craze in the 90s. CDs were $20 cdn back then. I got my haul from CH doing those Buy 6, Get 10 free deals. I remember it coming to about $10/CD. I got my worth out of it.

Dont worry armchair accountants. MS, Sony, EA etc.... arent going bankrupt running a sub plan. If they were, all the sub plans would be gone by now.

 

[Kagey K]

Exactly.

And even if game subs all fail - GP, PS Now, EA Play, UBI - and they all go back to selling $70 games, who cares.

Who wins? The gamers who took advantage and got a sweet deal for years. Who lost? Gamers who got ripped off while a competing service offers good games for dirt cheap on a sub plan.

It's like the old Columbia House CD craze in the 90s. CDs were $20 cdn back then. I got my haul from CH doing those Buy 6, Get 10 free deals. I remember it coming to about $10/CD. I got my worth out of it.

I don’t know if anyone outside of Canada know what Columbia House was, and I still don’t understand how they could afford to offer those deals.

Unless people actually bought the “contract” 6 or 7 CDs for crazy money after the fact.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I don’t know if anyone outside of Canada know what Columbia House was, and I still don’t understand how they could afford to offer those deals.

Unless people actually bought the “contract” 6 or 7 CDs for crazy money after the fact.

Good reads.

If I remember right, the first time you'd sign up for CH it was that awesome intro offer. I forget what it even was but could had been 9 CDs for $1 + shipping. But I know that at some point I did a Buy 5 or 6 and get 10 more free. I forget the exact terms.

I think they made money not only from the regular priced CDs you had to buy, but from people regularly buying. I'm pretty sure after the big deal, theyd entice you with shitty Buy 1 Get 1 Free. I never did those. Or from people too lazy to go to a store and just filled out the order card to buy CDs at regular price. But among the shit loads of mailings you'd get, if you waited 4-5 months youd get one of those good deals again.

Columbia House - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

How Columbia House sold 12 CDs for as little as a penny

Columbia House and BMG Music used to sell 12 CDs for a dollar or even a penny, and somehow brought in $1.5 billion in revenue at their peak.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[Kokoloko85]

Phil said Nintendo and Playstation arent competition. So why not xbox app on these consoles?

 

[Helghan]

Had it on pretty authority Xbox 100% approached Sony about Gamepass on Playstation and Sony said no for none of the reasons anyone has stated here and since I was told said reason off the record I wont be the one to bring it up

But of course MS wants it on every single platform possible and was rejected by Sony and Nintendo both

That's intriguing. Are we able to guess it? Does the reason make business sense or is it more from a petty competition reason?

 

[reksveks]

Wondering the machinations going on between valve and Microsoft

 

[pasterpl]

Wondering the machinations going on between valve and Microsoft

One of the reasons why I have pre-ordered Steam Deck is its potential as the perfect portable GamePass and xCloud device. MS sure sees that as well, could be a great opportunity for them to collaborate with Valve.

 

[Lukaku's First Touch]

As a Playstation fanboy myself that turned to pc, I gotta admit MS is crushing sony.

 

[Heisenberg007]

As a Playstation fanboy myself that turned to pc, I gotta admit MS is crushing sony.

In what way exactly?

 

[Fess]

Wondering the machinations going on between valve and Microsoft

Gamepass games on SteamOS incoming?

 

[Fess]

As a Playstation fanboy myself that turned to pc, I gotta admit MS is crushing sony.

There is no crushing going on imo. But I’d say that MS is slightly ahead because of how they’re connecting their services and devices with license and save syncing and one sub. It’s just smoother.

They still have things to do on Steam though, I get that Valve wants the 30% cut from the sale so license syncing won’t likely happen, but I don’t see any reason why you can’t at least use the same saves on Steam as on Microsoft Store and Xbox.

But back to the ”crushing”. With all the games available on Gamepass Microsoft has pushed Sony into the exclusives-only corner, that’s how I use the PS5 now. And with that said, I really don’t understand what Sony is currently doing, they started out this gen with a bang but right now they’re clearly sleeping. No E3 or summer event yet and all I know I’ll play for the rest of the year on PS5 is Kena.

 

[Gameplaylover]

With all the games available on Gamepass Microsoft has pushed Sony into the exclusives-only corner, that’s how I use the PS5 now.

That's the thing, many people do so and Sony doesn't want people to just play their exclusives. They want/need you to buy 3rd parties and subscriptions to make some money.

 

[Fess]

That's the thing, many people do so and Sony doesn't want people to just play their exclusives. They want/need you to buy 3rd parties and subscriptions to make some money.

CoD and FIFA still sell a ton and iirc Sony have marketing deals there, but it’s definitely a slippery slope to have so much focus on 1st party exclusives during periods when there are no new exclusives around.
MS was in a similar spot at the first half of the year, dodged a bullet thanks to Gamepass.

 

[M1chl]

In what way exactly?

On PC probably speculating

 

[Azurro]

That's the thing, many people do so and Sony doesn't want people to just play their exclusives. They want/need you to buy 3rd parties and subscriptions to make some money.

CoD and FIFA still sell a ton and iirc Sony have marketing deals there, but it’s definitely a slippery slope to have so much focus on 1st party exclusives during periods when there are no new exclusives around.
MS was in a similar spot at the first half of the year, dodged a bullet thanks to Gamepass.

I don't understand these messages, though it's very offtopic as we are talking about the viability of GamePass, but how is Sony being crushed when 80% of third party console sales are on PS platforms? MS is the one killing sales on their platform thanks to GamePass.

You might personally like what they do, but you should look at data before formulating a generalized opinion.

 

[Goalus]

I'm sure that all of those console games that rely on quick reactions and precise movements play GREAT on touch screens. People have been talking for years how touch screens are SO amazing at replicating buttons when emulating console games.

.../s just in case it isn't clear.

Yes, PUBG Mobile proves that it doesn't work AT ALL. Absolutely NO ONE plays PUBG Mobile, it's a total failure.

The touch controls simply do not work.

Spoiler

For old men yelling at clouds at least.

 

[kingfey]

MS is the one killing sales on their platform thanks to GamePass.

This is a big misconception, people have about gamepass.

Gamepass doesn't really kill their gamesales. You are just leasing the game for 1 year.

Let's break it down little bit.

1: people usually buy 1-5 game per month. Because games are expensive hobbies, and you will need to find the correct title to buy it. Sometimes, people don't buy a game that month.

2: aside of 1st party games, 3rd party games have 6-12 month stay time. Sometimes, 2 years depending on the contract.

3: most of the time, people don't spend above 20$ in 1 platform. For example, re8 sold 4m copies across all platforms since release date. That is around 1m copies sold on xbox, if we maintain 2x Playstation sale relationships.

4: MS adds 10-20 games a month. Gamepass as of now should have 20m+ officially, since January 2021, it was 18m.

5: You are leasing the game. You dont really own the game. The game isn't free too. So MS isn't losing any money on their sales.

These 10-20 copies of the game, are now selling 500k-1m copies per year, with gamepass, at the price of 15$(the rest are of 1st party sales).

You have 1 year contract with 3rd party games. During this time, you are selling their games at 15$ for 1 year. The money is being paid upfront for the 1st month they get dropped.

Outriders drops to gamepass this month. It has a price tag of 15$. There are other games that come with it on that month.

Gamepass users=20m users, 1 copy each.
Games on that month, 20 games.
20 games, will sell 500k copies, for a total of 10m copies. The rest of 10m goes to 1st party games.

At 10 games for that month, games will sell 1m copies.

Ms is selling 3rd party games in this case as a sale. For 15$, you are buying these games at a discount.

After the 1 year gamepass deals ends, the 15$ sales ends, and now you will need to actually buy the game to play it.

Tldr: Gamepass 3rd party games are 1 year lease. After that 1 year, you have to buy the game to play it. You are leasing the game for 15$. Every month gets a new drop of 3rd party games. Half of the sub is 1st party games, while the other half is 3rd party games.

People don't buy games alot. They buy 12 games a year. Sometimes lower than 5 games.

In sense, MS is making more money with gamepass, since they only pay the 1 year lease deal. After that, people will have to the game. Same as selling the game. In this case, people don't actually own the game. And will have to spend money again, to buy the game after it leaves gamepass.

 

[Hendrick's]

Hades via xcloud with touch controls is brilliant and plays seamlessly. Impressive stuff.

 

[MisterXDTV]

People who defend gamepass always run to the same bad examples.

As Azurro just pointed out, Netflix targeted a niche of heavy video rental users and took a dominant position in the market. Over time with the streaming selection, they changed their relationship with not only how they saw renting movies, but also as a viable replacement for cable. That's when the real disruption happened

Gamepass is not disrupting the market. They are just repackaging a different way to essentially play games on MS platform. That's it. What is gamepass offering to people that are fundamentally changing how they see the market? How are they going to convince people that don't care about games, to now care about games via a new delivery method?

You're taking the growth of the mobile market, and just giving it to Gamepass? Why? Why would the billions who play candy crush on their phone now care you can stream Forza? Why would they care that their smart t.v. can stream psychonauts?

This stuff is cool to gamers, who already own consoles. They see it as a cheap backlog. Gamepass is doubling down on the existing Xbox userbase, not expanding it.

The Netflix analogy is absolutely wrong but even if it was possible to make it, TODAY it's not working anymore because every major studio is making THEIR OWN streaming platform

And now people are beginning to realize that if I need 6 subscriptions to watch everything I care about, then I should have kept my cable subriscription that bundled everything in 1 subscription...

Right now we have:

- Netflix
- Amazon Prime Video
- Disney +
- Hulu
- HBO Max
- Peacock
- Paramount+
- Discovery+

This business model is not gonna last long... In a few years we are going back to the model where the service provider is gonna bundle everything together only instead of cable, you are gonna use the internet to watch

Big deal...

The Netflix model used to work when they could license third party content while keeping a low price...

That time has come and gone

 

[odhiex]

He kept saying that cross platforms play is the best thing for the industry. However, only one MS franchise is supporting the cross-platforms play, which is Minecraft.

Why don't they release "more" cross-platform games to PlayStation dan the Nintendo Switch? Like Sea of Thieves etc. Heck, even Steam have Microsoft studios games without having Gamepass service tied in.

Understand that they're in the business of selling the XBOX ecosystems, but Phill's narrative of breaking the barriers here, seemed not entirely true. They have their own barrier, which is the Gamepass and Xbox store.

 

[Topher]

Hades via xcloud with touch controls is brilliant and plays seamlessly. Impressive stuff.

The touch controls are ok. Much better with controller, obviously. That isn't to say the touch controls don't work. I just don't think they are practical in a game like Hades where you really need to be able to see where the enemies are.

 

[Hendrick's]

The touch controls are ok. Much better with controller, obviously. That isn't to say the touch controls don't work. I just don't think they are practical in a game like Hades where you really need to be able to see where the enemies are.

Agreed that it obviously eats up screen real estate, but found it very playable still.

 

[Fess]

I don't understand these messages, though it's very offtopic as we are talking about the viability of GamePass, but how is Sony being crushed when 80% of third party console sales are on PS platforms? MS is the one killing sales on their platform thanks to GamePass.

You might personally like what they do, but you should look at data before formulating a generalized opinion.

There is no crushing going on imo.

As I said, no crushing.
But Sony is currently sitting on their laurels doing nothing except enjoying having a popular brand. There is just too little happening. No E3, no summer event. Are they at Gamescom? Probably not. And meanwhile the snowball of Gamepass just keeps on rolling on PC and Xbox, possibly even Steam Deck if we’re lucky. I don’t judge anyone who play all multiplats on PS5 but for me it’s my Sony exclusives box.

 

[Gameplaylover]

I don't understand these messages, though it's very offtopic as we are talking about the viability of GamePass, but how is Sony being crushed when 80% of third party console sales are on PS platforms? MS is the one killing sales on their platform thanks to GamePass.

You might personally like what they do, but you should look at data before formulating a generalized opinion.

I was just saying that thanks to Game Pass Sony becomes even more of an exclusives only platform than it already was for pc gamers. Sony doesn't like this, that's why they are already heading for pc. The crushed part was not from me.

 

[Topher]

I was just saying that thanks to Game Pass Sony becomes even more of an exclusives only platform than it already was for pc gamers. Sony doesn't like this, that's why they are already heading for pc. The crushed part was not from me.

For most PC gamers, PlayStation was always an exclusives only console. Game Pass doesn't change that. I don't think Game Pass has much of an impact on PC at all, to be honest. Microsoft is selling their games on Steam and those games seem to be mainstays in the top sellers list. I think Game Pass subscriptions are heavily on the console side. I don't have any data to support that. Just a supposition.