Games are entertainment. I don't need to own them any more than I need to own a movie I go see.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
[CCN.com] Microsoft Schools the Gaming Industry with ‘Xbox Game Pass’ Success
- Thread starter Mack
- Start date
Sure, but if I don't find it a 10/10 masterpiece (or even if I do) why would playing under a subscription have me appreciate it any less.
I agree, there's no messaging problem here. Sony even mentions the ability to "download over 300 games" in nearly every post about the service on PlayStation.Blog. It's been a feature for more than a year. Anyone who's had any real interest in PS Now in the last year would have known this.
Out of over 800 games on PS Now, the "3 month" limitation only applies to about 10 of them. The other 790+ are up there for the long haul.
TLOU2 could sell like 20 million, it'll sell a ton at 60 bones.
There's still a place for full price games when the quality is there.
And? Who said there isn't? Game Pass (or PS Now) doesn't replace full priced games and doesn't devalue them if they are offered there.
You are really omitting a lot. Most of Sony's first party chart in those NPD'S and a lot of them have legs. Microsoft use to.
My point was previously the reason they bought so many developers was to bolster gamepass as to not have to rely on their checkbook with third party games. If a lot of the games they offer on their service are their own then they don't have to pay out the ass to have those on their service.
As it stands now, their first party is not pulling people in even on steam. So their third party deals with indie's and high profile games like DMC V, METRO are what they are using to ramp up excitement along with their first party. But those deals are costly. Why hasn't EA bolstered their service with other titles from different publishers? They don't have issues with a steady stream of content. Not everything is great, but they have consistency roll out of big games, and have the must have Football IP that people will sub for.
Their first party in the long run like Netflix WILL cost them less to have as the main contributor, but as it stands now it's not super great. So knowing similar to netflix's financial breakdown is important to help gauge how it's doing.
If they release it day and date on a subscription, they'd miss out on all those full price $ales.
If you have the sub you're not shelling out 60. Or if it's available on the sub you might just get the sub instead.
They wouldn't miss out on them if those sales are instead paying two or three times that over the course of the year.
For the whales that buy many of Sony's games day one, sure they might average less made on them per year. But consider all the people who buy the games when they are on sale under $20 (or not at all), if you can get a portion of them on a subscription you could make more from them over the long run.
GamePasss is doing well, not sure what your counter-argument is other than you don't seem to like Microsoft's 1st party output. To each their own, I myself have gotgen plenty of value out of GamePass and it looks like many others have as well. Both Ubisoft and EA have their own premium memberships yet it's hardly getting much focus so why are you in this thread instead of those?
This is the luxury we live in, we have GamePass, we have EA Access Premium, we have Ubisoft's Premiium service, we have PS Now. We also have multiple consoles and the PC. Lots of choices, no use hanging out in threads you aren't pleased with the performance of.
So what ? Music, movies...all is entertainment but...what ? What does that matter with the fact of "owning" ? You don't need to own as long as you pay your subscription and the game is still on the library, but one day, that game can leave the library so if you want to play it again you will have to buy the game...
Doing well with what hard numbers? What revenue are they generating? What is the break down of operation cost for the service IE netlfix's spending on license for shows like Marvel, or the films themselves. More and more they seem to try and push their own stuff now.
What numbers has Microsoft given for gamepass in how much revenue it's generated, and how much net profit they've made from it?
Worse than a game leaving the library is a game being delisted due to licensing costs or whatever. You don't buy it on digital before then and don't own a physical copy - you're outta luck. Physical game preservation is important, and it won't be until it's too late - after the subtle (or not so subtle) campaigning to influence physical media to become a thing of the past - that people start to care about access over cost/convenience.
This is a legitimate consideration that. I agree. I guess the same can be said with PS Plus IGC when it peaked during the PS3 generation.
Nevermind, you still seem hellbent on hard numbers for a subscription model you apparently don't seem to be interested in. So of course you will question CEO Satya Nadella saying Xbox Game Pass subscribers "more than doubled this quarter" because you don't know what that number was the previous quarter. Your question is legitimate but why care so much about the numbers when your only concern should be the value it represents unless you are a stockholder. You don't like the offereings, I do, so what else is there to talk about?
It appears to be in some people's DNA, they just can't help themselves.
Because the article itself is comparing services. Did you read the article?
Doing well as in more than doubling their previous quarter. The CEO of the company found it worthy enough to point out during a financial conference call with shareholders, so I think they are pretty happy with the growth lol
lol buying a game full price is considered a being a whale now?
So say they sell beacoup copies of TLOU2. And then they got another game that could sell a few months after (Ghost of Tsushima). Say combined with TLOU they sell like 25 million copies in the first few months, even with potential discounts that's a lot of money to leave on the table.
So while it might make sense for Microsoft, it doesn't make sense for Sony. It seems less risky to let the software sell because that's what's been working, than to hope you can lock ppl in long term through a subscription.
Even when they sell at 40 that's a guaranteed 40, then hoping the subscriber will stay subscribed for three or four months.
Also Sony doesn't really have GAAS games that make more sense on subscriptions, which is why again what works for Microsoft might not make sense for Sony. Same with Nintendo that has software that rarely ever goes on sale and do numbers above 10 million easily.
The article directly compares them with outdated information, not sure why it's not relevant. Not to mention that what you're saying isn't even true, there aren't more mentions of PS Now than Gamepass.
Game Pass is just mind-blowingly amazing
1.) MS first party games available DAY ONE
2.) MS first party games NEVER leave Game Pass
3.) Games fully downloadable on the console
4.) We get Ultimate Editions of the game with Game Pass Ultimate - (First Party)
5.) Even games that aren't exclusives to Xbox but still comes under first party umbrella, we play DAY ONE - EG The Outer Worlds
1.) MS first party games available DAY ONE
2.) MS first party games NEVER leave Game Pass
3.) Games fully downloadable on the console
4.) We get Ultimate Editions of the game with Game Pass Ultimate - (First Party)
5.) Even games that aren't exclusives to Xbox but still comes under first party umbrella, we play DAY ONE - EG The Outer Worlds
Lots of indie games launch day one or come a few months after launch as well.
Buying a full priced game isn't considered a whale, but someone who buys several full priced games day one every year would be. The vast majority of players aren't going to be done with the game within the first month, so you would presume their subscription (if that is what they have) will last much longer than that.
Also, the argument was never that Sony would be better off with a subscription model. It was spelling the notion that it would somehow devalue their games if they did. I own just about every significant Sony 1st part game this gen, and I didn't pay full price for any of them (including several on day one).
Actually you are right. So true. What an amazing service... almost too good to be true and that is why I worry that they might change some things next-gen. I hope not.
Microsoft recently relayed its FY20 Q2 earnings, detailing increased revenue to $36.9 billion, with impressive growth across the past quarter. That also brings a 21 percent decline in overall gaming revenue, as efforts shift toward the upcoming Xbox Series X, and fewer third-party titles leave their impact on the market. However, Microsoft's ongoing investment in Xbox subscriptions partially offset those losses, with Xbox Game Pass and Xbox Live smashing records.
Speaking on Microsoft's second-quarter 2020 earnings conference call, CEO Satya Nadella confirmed Xbox Game Pass subscribers "more than doubled this quarter," as the Netflix-style subscription steadily emerges a centerpiece of Xbox and PC offerings. Nadella also confirmed it set "a new record for Xbox Live monthly active users," primarily attributed to the strength on its Xbox consoles.
My and Fisty's point still stands. Until they actually start releasing numbers, i take that shit as PR.
If money was rolling in hand over fist you know your ass they would be shouting it on how much Gamepass generates which in some magical way will offset the cost of the service.
Believe it when I see it.
You might not be there Day 1 but millions will be there for TLOU2. And Ghost of Tsushima will not sell as crazy but do well.
So in a way they do get devalued if they're on a subscription day and date, cause why would you buy full price if it was? You wouldn't
That's two games they're selling at 60. For the day 1 market and the market that'll buy it at full price that's $120. Millions of ppl putting down 120 smackos. Say 4 million buy both these games full price, that's 480 million.
That vs. the 10 dollars a month you could get through a sub, but how long will they really stay subscribed for? I'd rather take the $120.
I mean you don't really own anything if you buy digital anyway
How many people buy two exclusive s at full price in one year?
Just look at Nintendo games, people bought Luigi's Mansion (5 million in 2 months) and Pokemon Sword and Shield (sold 16 million, released this November)
It's not hard to believe.
How many people would buy both of those games at launch full price? And how many would buy more than that?
When someone is subscribed to Game Pass for a year (not counting promos), they would have payed more than those two games. I'm not saying that no one would subscribe and then cancel a few months later, but the plan is to get people to stay subscribed year over year, and a good way to do that is ensure them that they will have access to your first party games day one.
So, I would rather take guaranteed $120+ year over year. Fortunately, both of those options exist so you get to choose which is better for you. For me the decision was incredibly easy, but it still doesn't stop me from buying other games on all of the platforms.
Of course that happens in some cases. I bought Luigi's Mansion, but not Pokemon or any other of the Nintendo games last year as far as I recall. I also bought MLB from Sony and God of War the year previous, but I also didn't pay full price for any of them because they were on sale.
Last edited:
I would say Nintendo is the exception not the rule in this case.
You can buy the games with a discount with a Gamepass subscription. So sure bring it on.
I would hardly call that a benefit of Game Pass. Even with the discount, the digital prices are terrible compared to physical. If we are talking about outright buying the game.
Depends on the game and how old it is doesn't it? Plus you can try something then buy the physical version without having to install a separate version like on PS4. Either way you have the option to buy it elsewhere or at a later time if you want.
Sure but Sony games this gen have been passing 10 million even new IP like Horizon. TLOU2 will sell beacoup numbers and break some records for Sony games.
They don't sell bonkzilla Nintendo numbers but they're doing very well.
Still Sony is betting that people will buy their games full price and aren't going to put them on a sub day 1 anytime soon. They think the games will sell, and they have been.
So it's like trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. If the games sell just let them sell.
$120 is not that much money 🤷🏻♂️ I buy almost every Sony and Nintendo exclusives day one.
Yeah but two in one year? That rarely even happens outside of Nintendo.
I just signed up last year for a month to play The Outer Worlds, and then cancelled. Similarly with Origins and Jedi Fallen Order. Renting video games has been a thing since at least the mid 80s, and it's also the way I was able to play hundreds of games over the years that were nice enough for a single playthrough (or not even that good), yet not good enough for me to actually want to revisit in the future. Hmm, $5 vs $60+? In the event that I actually do like a game enough after having finished it that I want to buy it, I'll do that, and usually it's going to be discounted by that point, so I didn't really lose money overall.
I really slowed down with services like Gamefly or even Redbox though over the years since most of the select few games that I actually want to play anymore are few and far between, and I've mostly just been buying the games I've been highly anticipating like I normally do, which usually get multiple replays from me. I can't even think of a single game that's coming out this year that I really want to play that I would rather rent than own either. In two or three years though? Maybe, if Game Pass/day one is still a thing at that point.
Legit the point of their name. Your brain often process first and last letters of a word you read and fills in the rest. CCN & CNN look similar when you are dozing off looking at your feed.
Funny, I'm the opposite. I despise myself for buying two years of Gold to turn into Game Pass (I'm on PC only), and I ended up not liking the service. €87 down the drain pretty much. I guess I get some cheap Microsoft games out of it, but Microsoft Store on PC is horrible.