MMO/GaaS titles are being pushed because of successful and popular games like Destiny, Fortnite, Overwatch ect.
-
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.
DigitallyDownloaded | Game Pass: It's not good for games (and, therefore, consumers)
- Thread starter Buzz
- Start date
MMO/GaaS titles are being pushed because of successful and popular games like Destiny, Fortnite, Overwatch ect.
I haven't had chance to watch the vid yet (I will!) but if Grave of the Fireflies is one of the examples then, yeah, that's just plain wrong. Ghibli don't own the distribution rights to Grave of the Fireflies. They can't cut a deal with Netflix to add it to the service alongside all of the other Ghibli because it's not theirs to distribute. That's why it's not there, not because it's too dark and scary for the Netflix audience.
I love how all these "gamepass is horrible" discussions are so first-world centric. I tried gamepass for a month in India, and it blew me away. As someone who can't afford to buy a lot of games, gamepass is phenomenal. It literally ALLOWS millions of gamers in third world countries to indulge in their hobby. I don't care if the service belongs to Microsoft or Sony or even Epic. As long as it allows me to play games on my tight budget, I'm a fan.
Because Microsoft pays them, that's why they are happy. Same as Netflix.
Why? If anything, GamePass makes the ten hour midrange game "AA" economically feasible again, the current $60-per-game model has squeezed out anything other than the 100-hour-plus AAA title or two person indie title. You're not going to spend £60 for a ten hour title but on GamePass? Sure why not pick it up and spend a weekend playing it?
That Netflix argument is clearly the weakest of his video. I don't know where he lives but Grave of the Fireflies was actually the first Ghibli to make its way on the platform last December.
Now, games are way too big for it to suffer from Gamepass. All the niches are big enough to have enough success on Gamepass and elsewhere, if it's not bad. Almost every genre/niche is growing and the gamepass won't change that. If Gamepass continues to treat them equally and cares enough, to no get rid of some of them because they don't give a shit as it was a quick buck maker for them (like Netflix does a lot, especially with anime), then it's all good for the industry and for us.
Now, games are way too big for it to suffer from Gamepass. All the niches are big enough to have enough success on Gamepass and elsewhere, if it's not bad. Almost every genre/niche is growing and the gamepass won't change that. If Gamepass continues to treat them equally and cares enough, to no get rid of some of them because they don't give a shit as it was a quick buck maker for them (like Netflix does a lot, especially with anime), then it's all good for the industry and for us.
The video feels like a fedora-wearing guy going on about the purity of games as an art form
Snark aside I got to say that I can't agree with his take at all, it feels like an almost artificial concern constantly talking about the "evil" suits
Snark aside I got to say that I can't agree with his take at all, it feels like an almost artificial concern constantly talking about the "evil" suits
What proof is there though that it is worse for videogames? So far there is literally none and the service has been around for a long enough time for that to crystalize. Especially smaller devs are very positive on the service.
They dont pay like the music industry "per play". They pay the devs for going onto the service and then its marketing. The bigger the subscriber base gets the more devs MS can pay properly to get onto the service.
yeah i think its too early to call. Personally I think the biggest issues that could arise is the level of content and if there would be pressure to develop more content for it which could dilute some gaming experiences,
BUT i dont see it as a big issue because i think if most publishers are smart their best play is to double dip and not release day and date on gamepass, but allow their content to be on there in bursts, and after they have exhausted the traditional avenue. I think that model works the way it is. I do however foresee it going up in cost midgen. I think the price sony had way back when for PSNow about 20 a month is prob the true monthly cost that makes these somewhat profitable. I do also see ultimate going up when xcloud gains more ground as well.
But I think its really in line with what it should be, same with PSNow.
OP
OP
It's not concern trolling he even talks about Sony will mostly also have a subscription service and the same issues will arise there. I definitely think there is merit to his arguments as the service matures and more and more people subscribe. I already see people talking about certain games as perfect for game pass. Buying behavior will change and MS will be in a better position to dictate terms with developers. The same thing will happen with other such services.
I got half way through before I had to stop, the guy is clueless.
He makes bold claims, such as the reason Grave of the Fireflys isn't on Netflix is because it'll make people sad! And Netflix doesn't want that! And Game Pass will do the same!
How can anyone take him seriously? A 1 minute google search would show that Grave of the Fireflys is already available to stream on a competing service so this is likely a licensing issue more than anything else.
Devs have come out saying that Game Pass has given them more freedom to experiment and make the games they didn't have the opportunity to make before and others have said being on Game Pass has helped them sell more copies than a normal release.
Can we stop giving people like him views, he's seen how popular Game Pass is with consumers and developers and has decided to take a negative viewpoint to get clicks without even researching the topic.
He makes bold claims, such as the reason Grave of the Fireflys isn't on Netflix is because it'll make people sad! And Netflix doesn't want that! And Game Pass will do the same!
How can anyone take him seriously? A 1 minute google search would show that Grave of the Fireflys is already available to stream on a competing service so this is likely a licensing issue more than anything else.
Devs have come out saying that Game Pass has given them more freedom to experiment and make the games they didn't have the opportunity to make before and others have said being on Game Pass has helped them sell more copies than a normal release.
Can we stop giving people like him views, he's seen how popular Game Pass is with consumers and developers and has decided to take a negative viewpoint to get clicks without even researching the topic.
I didnt realize fable,hellblade, and avowed had been announced as gaas games
They seriously thought this was a problem with the story? 🙄
Because they weren't
Publishers are taking the deal so i don't see how its bad for them, they can say "No" to the offer. We understand that right?
Don't know about Avowed or Hellblade, but, Fable was rumored to have some kind of GaaS elements. It's absolutely going to take over the majority of XGS output.
Basically. And the people saying what if Game Pass shuts down or contracts end...yall know these games can be bought at a discount while on the service, right? Then they are yours. It incentivizes devs to get on there for that reason in the first place. Visibility and hopefully more sales.
So this is just another moron with an agenda. Thanks for saving me the click
He makes a lot of a big jumps here that are hard to predict at this stage. What will ultimately matter is the overall success and influence the service has. Even then, big players like Nintendo have been ignoring industry norms for a very long time and that doesn't look set to change.
Worth remembering that people were making similar claims about the influence of Strava this time last year.
Worth remembering that people were making similar claims about the influence of Strava this time last year.
Last edited:
I mean are you trying to have a discussion about services or trial periods? Trials aren't intended to be, themselves, profitable.
The actual business model behind services is it offers the content for cheaper, but to a wider audience. And it's a consistent revenue stream, whereas game revenue is generally a lump sum (outside of service based games).
It's probably good for indies and smaller or mid-sized games.
We will see in a few years how it will affect AAA games. Will all (most) Microsoft AAA games be service games? Or will they deliver the same amazing single-player expierences like Nintendo and Sony do who charge 60$ for each game?
We will see in a few years how it will affect AAA games. Will all (most) Microsoft AAA games be service games? Or will they deliver the same amazing single-player expierences like Nintendo and Sony do who charge 60$ for each game?
Because MS funds game like Hellblade 2 or Project Mara themself, which fall exactly under those games he says will be affected.
MS themself is a counterpoint to his thinking.
I don't see the change to MMO and GaaS games. These existed before and Microsoft added studios to their team, which usually do SP experiences. Sure, Obsidian made Grounded, but that was in development before.
I think some of you are concern about Gamepass for the wrong reason. If you think GaaS will happen (more often) or these type of games will be pushed by GP, then you haven't paid attention. GaaS happen before Gamepass existed and was growing before Gamepass existed.
Gamepass is the reason Xbox supports smaller and bigger games more than ever. As a developer said some ideas couldn't be pitched to publishers, because the question always was how much it sales. With gamepass that's different as some games need to gain subs, while others are just there to keep them.
You know what, something is changing. AA games are coming back with their creative ideas, while AAA games keep getting made. Furthermore most indies are happy about word of mouth thanks to GP and how their game sell better on all Plattforms.
CONCERN is quite fitting, his concerns go against what devs are describing as their experience.
Then there is the whole thing about the Grave of the fireflies example being plain wrong and his CONCERN about more sub services appearing which is a bit mood considering EA and Ubisoft already have their service running for a good bit
Within two minutes he says that Microsoft are destroying the artform and I just can't take it seriously.
Arguments are confused, comparisons to Spotify are silly as that's pay per play and there are some factually incorrect things said to boost his argument in relation to Netflix (Grave of the Fireflies). Tarring all Netflix acquisitions and productions with the same low effort brush is also very unfair as there have still been a good amount of interesting and challenging films and tv shows to be released there (sometime marketed poorly, but they're still available)
Arguments are confused, comparisons to Spotify are silly as that's pay per play and there are some factually incorrect things said to boost his argument in relation to Netflix (Grave of the Fireflies). Tarring all Netflix acquisitions and productions with the same low effort brush is also very unfair as there have still been a good amount of interesting and challenging films and tv shows to be released there (sometime marketed poorly, but they're still available)
I've used it before on PC, thanks for accusation though. It'd be real nice if we could have conversations on Game Pass without trying to label people as having an agenda.
It implies that the 3rd party developers are either not already trying to make mainstream hits and that they aren't selling the games apart from GamePass. As far as indie devs, we've seen Microsoft support them fully and tons of interesting games that would have struggled financially and being supported by Microsoft and GamePass. The argument creates a fake problem that is neither caused by GamePass and hasn't occurred yet.
Of Netflix? They are famous for cancelling shows after two seasons because that is when viewers peak.
Of GaaS? Xbox's flagship title?
These services need scale to be successful. 1 person pays 50, or 50 people pay 1. MS said it's not a profit driver for them right now, so it likely even at 10M needs more subscribers.
Where's Gampass?
Who's Gamepass?
Why is Gamepass?
Nothing to see here. Why do people keep trying to bring something great down or always constantly look for flaws and cracks to exploit or concern troll? I think the service is amazing and I can't believe that it's available for such a low price that MS continues to subsidize somehow. It has to cost them a bunch of money to get some of these games in the sub.
Who's Gamepass?
Why is Gamepass?
Nothing to see here. Why do people keep trying to bring something great down or always constantly look for flaws and cracks to exploit or concern troll? I think the service is amazing and I can't believe that it's available for such a low price that MS continues to subsidize somehow. It has to cost them a bunch of money to get some of these games in the sub.
Thanks for this, I can't watch the video.
He's right, developers now feel incentived to create more mainstream, shallow works in popular genres in order to survive by meeting platform holder approval and less creative, transgressive or challenging works. That's the reason why games like Call of Duty and others are on Game Pass why more niche experiences like Wasteland, Yakuza, Ruiner, Ashen or Remnant from the Ashes are not on the service.
Wait...
It's a stupid argument. There are plenty of movies, documentary and shows on Netflix that would be considered artistic and innovative. But I guess we have to be concerned since it's consumer friendly.
The video literally has two half naked women beating the shit out of each other, while he's preaching about the artistic integrity of videogames being diluted. Fuck off.
i have game pass... and it absolutely does not stunt developer creativity
Did he say this? Lmao.
Don't forget EA play and Gamepass married.
Damn, his argument is really weak.
He is arguing that Netflix and Spotify content has become too homogeneous because that is how content on those platforms succeed. That is complete drivel. And if you look at Game Pass the content is very diverse. And that is not likely to change. Microsoft will continue to add indies to Game Pass to supplement the AAA content they have on there.
He is arguing that Netflix and Spotify content has become too homogeneous because that is how content on those platforms succeed. That is complete drivel. And if you look at Game Pass the content is very diverse. And that is not likely to change. Microsoft will continue to add indies to Game Pass to supplement the AAA content they have on there.
Xbox is happy.
Developers are happy.
Publishers are happy.
Consumers are happy.
Not watching the video.
Developers are happy.
Publishers are happy.
Consumers are happy.
Not watching the video.
It is one of his big "points"
That and Sub services leaving to poor niche Japanese devs being pushed out of gaming...
Yes you are right. This is what Netflix also does. It will support creative shows that normal TV would not but it will not support them for a lot of seasons since viewer engagement drops like a lot after that.
So you are right. Gamepass would incentivise more frequent content and hence AA games but would discourage AAA games that may take 3-4 years to make. If this is a good or bad thing depends on what you like, but I don't want this future to spread beyond MS first party.
jesus. why are we giving such a poorly researched video the time of day?
I don't get the argument, if they didn't make good games why would anyone sub. I mean if I didn't like a streaming service programs I wouldn't sub to that.
His argument hinges on a lot of assumptions by Microsoft and the consumer. He assumes that Microsoft will only care about total play time of each individual game but I imagine Microsoft is also interested in number of downloads. He also makes a broad assumption that Game Pass users only mindlessly want content regardless of quality. I don't see it. If people only wanted to content for the sake of content, well there's dozens and dozens of free to play games out on the market. Enough so that if you never wanted to spend money on a game again, you don't have to. Yet we still see that traditional games are still doing well.
People want content but they want quality content and content that appeals specifically for them. They're not going to be happy with just anything. Even Netflix invests millions into producing and licensing a variety of shows in different genres in order to maintain subscribers. Some of the most niche shows can only be found on Netflix here in the US.
People want content but they want quality content and content that appeals specifically for them. They're not going to be happy with just anything. Even Netflix invests millions into producing and licensing a variety of shows in different genres in order to maintain subscribers. Some of the most niche shows can only be found on Netflix here in the US.