samoilaaa
Member
got any proof ? or you just like to sound like a "fucking genius "
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Striking Distance CEO claims gamepass model is tough to sell single player games in
- Thread starter remember_spinal
- Start date
- Drama Business Game Dev
remember_spinal
Banned
Hitman 3 also isn’t a AAA game
ChorizoPicozo
Member
The proof is in the pudding.
Just look at the current trends. Game Pass is just going to exacerbate them.
timmyp53
Member
samoilaaa
Member
so no proof , thanks
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Again the proof is in the pudding. Just look at the financial reports of these companies. Just look at the most profitable games.
Game Pass is designed to encourage GaaS/MTXs.
Mister Wolf
Member
Expect to see the Callisto Protocol on gamepass a year from its release date.
Leyasu
Banned
It is a service that requires lots of content. It’s not the type of content that matters, it’s the amount.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
No and Yes.
You required a lot of content. The majority is going to be "filler" your 60-70 Metacritic games.
But you still need your quality content. 80+ on meta.
The issue is.
If you are losing/conditioning consumers to NOT buy games. And the industry itself is moving towards a service-based economy.
Well, you need to keep making money one way or the other. (Especially in services like Game Pass).
GaaS/MTXs/incomplete games/ early access games/ are going to be even more prevalent.
Ansphn
Member
EA killed Dead space. This studio is not under EA.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
EA killed Dead Space because it wasn't performing on the market.
If Striking Distance didn't figure out why, then CP too will underperform.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Ansphn
Member
EA had unreasonable expectations for a single player game. Striking distance will make money and be satisfied with the sales.
Skifi28
Member
Making a game is a business and not a hobby, so....
Negotiator101
Member
This ain't doing Sony first party numbers though. Not all games sell super well at launch. You're talking about a small percentage that do huge numbers at release.
Black_Stride
do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Dead Space 3 killed Dead Space.
If you played Dead Space and Dead Space 2, you fully understand why Dead Space 3 killed the series.
StealthGoblin
Banned
… it would make even less if it were on a sub service at launch.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Au contraire...
They took a gamble with Dead Space 3 because Dead Space 2 underperformed.
01011001
Banned
weird, makes you think
Skifi28
Member
Yes and no. It did, but at the same time Dead Space 3 was made the way it was because of pressure from EA to shift the game to mass market appeal and MT. Ultimately it's EA that killed it.
Negotiator101
Member
That's proven not to be the case, they'd have a nice pile of cash from Microsoft and a huge amount of people to play their game which will (if its good) give great word of mouth. A new IP like this would benefit from a GP release IMO.
tmlDan
Member
man, xbox fans on this forum were really hurt by this statement lol
It makes sense, but whether it comes to a service within 6 months or a year depends on how it good it actually is.
I am sure they can make free money by putting it on a service once sales decline from the initial window.
It makes sense, but whether it comes to a service within 6 months or a year depends on how it good it actually is.
I am sure they can make free money by putting it on a service once sales decline from the initial window.
SteelCurtain 59
Member
I wonder how much Sony paid for them to say that, probably part of their contract with Sony for some exclusive content.
SteelCurtain 59
Member
Nobody's "hurt" by this statement, laughing at a dev saying something incorrect isn't being "hurt"
tmlDan
Member
it's not incorrect, looks like you're hurt too.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
As I've been saying forever, the problem is that when you change the sales/monetization model you shift the balance in terms of what makes the most sense as a profitable offering.
So over time, what we get is a gradual transformation of the product into a form that best suits that environment.
So over time, what we get is a gradual transformation of the product into a form that best suits that environment.
MiguelItUp
Member
Yeah, Dead Space 2 was expensive, however it sold more than OG Dead Space. A lot more. But it wasn't enough for EA. Yuuuup. With 3 they wanted to make it appeal to other folks that thought Dead Space was "too scary" so they added co-op, among other things that made Dead Space 3, unlike Dead Space. And then they shuttered Visceral. I'd blame EA before anything else.
Reading it, I didn't think it was "Xbox fans" at all. Nor did I think they hurt by the statement. Just that it's a strange opinion and take compared to other comments made from devs that have made single player experiences.
tmlDan
Member
Please explain how this is a strange opinion, the game doesn't have monetization within since it's single player - what if it is fantastic and sells 5 million copies? thats $250M, is MS or Sony gonna give them that at launch?
SteelCurtain 59
Member
Wow why are you so hurt over my statement?
tmlDan
Member
i don't think you understand what hurt is, im not complaining or butthurt like a lot of posts here.
Nobody is providing any good arguments.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
that's hurtful.
The game has a marketing agreement with PlayStation and also exclusive content on PS5. The background indicates that, when this happens, Sony accompanies the agreement with the prohibition that the game reaches Gamepass in a long time.I give the game six months tops until it comes to Gamepass
In the event that it ends up reaching a subscription service, we will surely see it first on PS + and not on Gamepass.
PS.This statement is simply an excuse. It has a clear objective that is for no other purpose than to convince as many users as possible to buy the game at its launch because it will not reach a subscription service in the short-medium term. It is a strategy against "I will play it when it reaches Gamepass"
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Roughly 200 people were working on the game. Same goes for Callisto.
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
I give the game six months tops until it comes to Gamepass
I don't doubt it will come, but at the same time, they need to maximize profit and establish themselves. I think release on game pass would, in some way, devalue them. They are debuting a new game and it's a new studio.
By devaluing, I mean, it would give off the perception that they aren't AAAA instead of being AAA.
samoilaaa
Member
its not about being positive or negative , for now nobody can really know how will gamepass affect the gaming market in the long run , everyone can only guess , all these devs that talk like they know the future 100% are just trolls
Last edited:
Spitfire098
Member
Or they also approached MS at the same time but instead went with ps marketing agreement as they believe it is more profitable than putting their game day 1 into a service.
I love how it's not even consider an option here that these game devs may not want to put their games into gamepass.
JTCx
Member
01011001
Banned
Last edited:
GHG
Gold Member
So developers that say things that you don't like are just trolls?
Look, independent developers have a business to run, they will have the industry data to be able to assess what it more profitable for them in the long run. If they decide that day one on gamepass doesn't suit their strategy then so be it.
If they believe in their product and its high quality enough then they will sell a truck ton of copies across all platforms and then get the added benefit of being able to negotiate themselves a handsome deal to appear on gamepass at a later date once sales have dropped off.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
The problem when talking about all these services is, yes... atm they look really good, because they feature games made or just finished under a different premise (selling full price at retail). Games take years to make, when studios in the concept phase are already envisioning day1 GP releases, is when quality will take a hard nosedive. That is years away. By around 2025-27 90% of GP games are going to be Netflix level of endless shit.
Last edited:
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
I played that shit recently. While I think it's better than the first time I played it.. it's still shit compared to DS1/2. They even fucked Isaac over in the beginning of the game, too. I felt bad for him.
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
Are you a man living in a box?
tmlDan
Member
fanboy? im talking about both services if you read another response.
Can you give me valid argument why a single player game with no monetization makes sense on a sub service? or are you looking for conflict?
Leyasu
Banned
Yes and no, again any and all types of games are viable.
How do you know in advance that your games are going to be "80+ meta" games?
Also, if the industry is moving towards service games, then aren't single player games already being killed by the industry, as opposed to the delivery/service?
But lastly, prevelance of service games doesn't mean that single player games are not viable or have a place.
I
ChorizoPicozo
Member
A small niche place.
Similar threads
- Locked