• 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.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Game pass developer payment "clarified"

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
8,318
9,078
870
I don't think simply comparing numbers means much. Since games in GamePass are quite varied in terms of genres, unless you like pretty much any kind of video games, it's fair to say that you simply won't be interested in a decent chunk of them.

The point is - and I personally agree - that if I had to spend around the same amount of money to either have:
1) 2 or 3 times as many games, but I didn't choose any of them, a lot will rotate in and out over time, and the second I cancel and stop spending I lose access to everything
2) half or a third of the games, but I chose every single one of them of them and I keep them no matter what

I'd honestly go with option 2 every time.

Even said that, truth is that for a lot of people time is as limited (often more limited) than money, as long as these are the kind of figures we are talking about and we assume gaming is one of your main hobbies. If you are given more games than what you could possibly play in a certain amount of time, the theoretical "value" of the package is irrelevant to you, because you won't be able to access a good portion of it either way.

The only scenario where the package model works better (for the publisher) than the traditional sale is one where the user spends less than what the nominal value of the package is, but still ends up spending more than what the practical value for them is. To put it simpler: if I can play 15 games a year and I'm buying my games individually, the number of games I'll buy in a year will be around 15 or a bit higher. If you offer me a package with 40 games in it for the price of 25 games, it will look like a great offer since the nominal value is so much higher than the price tag, but in the end I'm going to pay for 25 games and still play 15. That's also how and why people end up with titanic backlogs btw, because they see value in the individual purchase but fail to realize they are paying for stuff they won't be using.
My existing backlog screams stay away from subscriptions to me. I'm happy for the people who enjoy the subscription plans, but I can't see myself ever buying in. Not nearly enough time (for me) to make it a great deal, and I don't want to be at risk of buying a 3rd party game that I really like after it leaves.

Honestly, I'm starting to feel like all the great value comments are like when you catch yourself singing an ad jingle. Maybe that will change once big next gen games start getting included. But what is the subscription cost of waiting for those going to be? One year, two, three, or more?
 

Alandring

Neo Member
Aug 20, 2020
33
38
180
Tell it to the years of writers calling Hulu, Netflix, Disney+, and even music streaming "loss leader".
Netflix was profitable every year since 2004. Spotify loose a huge amount of money every year.

Spotify is an amazing service for consumers. But the music industry earn less money now than before Spotify and Spotify isn't profitable. So even if I really enjoy it, I don't think it was good for the music industry.

There is two questions about Game Pass :
  1. Is it profitable and, if it isn't, will it be profitable in the future?
  2. Is it good for video game developers?
For Netflix, the answer to those questions is "yes". For Spotify, it's "no". And for Xbox Game Pass? I don't know. I'm not sure anyone can say that he knows for sure, but if you ask me to guess, I would say yes.
 

draliko

Member
Aug 15, 2015
301
346
405
My existing backlog screams stay away from subscriptions to me. I'm happy for the people who enjoy the subscription plans, but I can't see myself ever buying in. Not nearly enough time (for me) to make it a great deal, and I don't want to be at risk of buying a 3rd party game that I really like after it leaves.

Honestly, I'm starting to feel like all the great value comments are like when you catch yourself singing an ad jingle. Maybe that will change once big next gen games start getting included. But what is the subscription cost of waiting for those going to be? One year, two, three, or more?
Except I have value in the service now, doom, destiny, dragon quest, gears, forza, ori, indies, all of the ea stuff (until the deal jedi fallen order was the shit, now that it's on gamepass it's not worth playing anymore), everything that comes from now on will be more value, but the games are already there, luckily for us
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaGwaphics

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,050
10,478
2,095
They said the same thing about streaming services when comes to music and movies and look where we're at with Netflix and Spotify. It's not their fault some refuse to adapt to the times.

Apologies if people spend money for quality TV’s and demand better than the bitrate these services pass... they are not horrible, but Netflix 4K is toe to toe with upscaled 1080p Blu-Ray (wins some, loses some)... let alone 4K UHD Blu-Ray...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Redlancet

Redlancet

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
1,487
2,760
525
I am pretty positive that a trillion dollar company who has billions to spend in studios purchases has far more experience than any of us here and know what the fuck they are doing.
looking and economical disasters on multimillion companys in the past its why i laught hard at this argument...HEY BOYS THEY HAVE MONEY THEY CANT FAIL OR MAKE MISTAKES DUH,it doenst work that way mate,nobody its free of shitting the bed
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eternal21

pasterpl

Member
Feb 8, 2020
1,626
2,962
425
Yea I just don't see how its sustainable. AAA titles cost almost as much as big budget films. It's like if Marvel spent $200m on a movie and then it debuted on Netflix. How can a third party profit there?

games that are being released on game pass, can also be purchased via traditional channels, ms first party games also release on pc via steam in addition to gamepass pc. Based on information shared by some devs, gp release means for revenues from dlc‘s etc. There are no game pass exclusives as far as I know (game pass exclusive = game that can be played only via game pass subscription)
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuantumZebra

QuantumZebra

Member
Dec 5, 2013
9,643
2,167
950
Atlanta, GA
games that are being released on game pass, can also be purchased via traditional channels, ms first party games also release on pc via steam in addition to gamepass pc. Based on information shared by some devs, gp release means for revenues from dlc‘s etc. There are no game pass exclusives as far as I know (game pass exclusive = game that can be played only via game pass subscription)

Yea it makes sense. I just don't see developers being ok with their product being essentially a free bundle in a streaming service when it's $60 elsewhere.

I guess it's similar to a blu-ray being $25 but also being available on Disney+.... but even the movies get theatrical release periods...
 

Tmack

Member
Sep 23, 2020
258
374
265
Why do you think so? The same fears as with Netflix destroying the Hollywood blockbuster model?

You can`t scale game production like you do with tv/movie content.

Netflix have hundreds of producers all over the globe producing shit with the hope of being the next La Casa de Papel or Stranger Things...

While indie games could be great, they never break the barrier or becoming a mainstream fenomenum like happens with tv series/movies.

From a product stand point a low budget movie/series may feels and look like a hundred million dollar hollywood blockbuster. In games the story isnt everything, you need to invest a lot in code/gameplay/etc and you can`t scale that like netflix scale their production like a ford T model aseembly line.


Simple put, if anyone think that gamepass can become a netflix for games, forget it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: user friendly
Aug 28, 2019
5,588
10,601
530
My existing backlog screams stay away from subscriptions to me. I'm happy for the people who enjoy the subscription plans, but I can't see myself ever buying in. Not nearly enough time (for me) to make it a great deal, and I don't want to be at risk of buying a 3rd party game that I really like after it leaves.

Honestly, I'm starting to feel like all the great value comments are like when you catch yourself singing an ad jingle. Maybe that will change once big next gen games start getting included. But what is the subscription cost of waiting for those going to be? One year, two, three, or more?
Yeah it doesn't really work for me particularly well either.. but I have a whole bunch of online friends who definitely using Gamepass all the time. They play through several games a month... so it's not just some ad jingle people like repeating.. but I do think people who like downloading a lot of different games on a whim aren't the norm.

I think if Gamepass and subs like it have a problem in their design it's that they are only appealing to hardcore gamers who already were spending a ton of money, and are just.. saving money. Gamepass needs to attract people who WEREN'T throwing $120 a year at the hobby already for it to truly make sense financially IMO.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: NickFire

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
3,383
4,728
700
Australia
looking and economical disasters on multimillion companys in the past its why i laught hard at this argument...HEY BOYS THEY HAVE MONEY THEY CANT FAIL OR MAKE MISTAKES DUH,it doenst work that way mate,nobody its free of shitting the bed
"Multi-million company"? Friend, you need to understand Microsoft's size. They're a trillion dollar company. They've made bad business decisions that have cost hundreds of billions of dollars and just shrugged their shoulders like it was nothing. They have an unfathomable amount of money. But what's really important about Microsoft isn't how rich they are - it's how long they've been as rich as they are. They've been in the list of wealthiest companies in the world for nearly fourty years. You don't go four decades at the top on luck. You do it because you consistently employ smart people who can look at a prospect and say "this has a good return on investment", and have those people be right a hell of a lot more than they are wrong. Is Gamepass a guaranteed success? Not at all. But, is there anything about Gamepass that makes me think it'll fail? Nope.
Microsoft's flexibility in their deals, as outlined in the OP, is one of the reasons I believe they'll succeed with Gamepass. They're at 15 million subscribers before next-gen launched. They've already confirmed their current model is fully sustainable, and they haven't even started releasing their newest acquisitions on to the service. Stadia was DOA. EA Play never gained traction. Their closest competitor in this same space has around 2 million subscribers. Microsoft is on to something here; the disruption is already being felt. That's a good sign that they're not going to fail.
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Sep 26, 2019
2,537
3,102
395
Not gonna end well for big studios.

MS is just gonna throw its infinite money at it otherwise it wouldnt work work well for developers
 

Greeno

Member
Jun 14, 2020
298
413
270
*for 3 months, until the titles are cycled off Game Pass

And for a company like Microsoft -- which has fully embraced GaaS model -- you ain't gonna see all the content offered by the game within those first few months. But hey, at least you have the privilege of paying a subscription to play it and then paying again "at a discount" to keep it.

Most of the games mentioned are on the service for life (any first party game will stay on the service). The only games on GamePass that are there for 3 months are the really big games like RDR2.
 

draliko

Member
Aug 15, 2015
301
346
405
If you all so concerned for ms you should start a gofundme campaign, they could use some help it seems...
 

Chukhopops

Member
Mar 5, 2020
362
763
415
I don't think simply comparing numbers means much. Since games in GamePass are quite varied in terms of genres, unless you like pretty much any kind of video games, it's fair to say that you simply won't be interested in a decent chunk of them.

The point is - and I personally agree - that if I had to spend around the same amount of money to either have:
1) 2 or 3 times as many games, but I didn't choose any of them, a lot will rotate in and out over time, and the second I cancel and stop spending I lose access to everything
2) half or a third of the games, but I chose every single one of them of them and I keep them no matter what

I'd honestly go with option 2 every time.

Even said that, truth is that for a lot of people time is as limited (often more limited than) money, as long as these are the kind of figures we are talking about and we assume gaming is one of your main hobbies. If you are given more games than what you could possibly play in a certain amount of time, the theoretical "value" of the package is irrelevant to you, because you won't be able to access a good portion of it either way.

The only scenario where the package model works better (for the publisher) than the traditional sale is one where the user spends less than what the nominal value of the package is, but still ends up spending more than what the practical value for them is. To put it simpler: if I can play 15 games a year and I'm buying my games individually, the number of games I'll buy in a year will be around 15 or a bit higher. If you offer me a package with 40 games in it for the price of 25 games, it will look like a great offer since the nominal value is so much higher than the price tag, but in the end I'm going to pay for 25 games and still play 15. That's also how and why people end up with titanic backlogs btw, because they see value in the individual purchase but fail to realize they are paying for stuff they won't be using.
I was responding to a comment about how much you can buy with the amount you'd pay in the subscription, so in that context comparing the value of buying 100 games versus the value of what you get in the catalog is relevant in my opinion.

Of course, the value each person will get out of GP will be different, based on how much they play, what type of games they enjoy, do they enjoy indie games, etc. It's the same for Netflix or Spotify or Pornhub or any other subscription service in the world. But from a discussion perspective it's a dead end.

The only metric that matters from a subscriber point of vue is if you "pay off" the sub, if you get enough games you play out of it to cover for €155.88 every year. I know I did by just looking at the games I played on the service this year, but others won't.
 

Redlancet

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
1,487
2,760
525
"Multi-million company"? Friend, you need to understand Microsoft's size. They're a trillion dollar company. They've made bad business decisions that have cost hundreds of billions of dollars and just shrugged their shoulders like it was nothing. They have an unfathomable amount of money

no matter how microsoft fans use that argument its not true,this dont work that way,nobody wants to lose or give free money,even apple XD
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: [Sigma]

onesvenus

Member
Aug 26, 2004
973
1,175
1,575
While indie games could be great, they never break the barrier or becoming a mainstream fenomenum like happens with tv series/movies.
Do Rocket League, Fall Guys and Among Us ring a bell to you? Because those are just two examples of indie games becoming mainstream
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chukhopops

ZehDon

Member
Jun 13, 2013
3,383
4,728
700
Australia
no matter how microsoft fanboys use that argument its not true,this dont work that way,nobody wants to lose or give free money,even apple XD
So, you trimmed out the entirety of my post where I described how and why I expect Gamepass to be successful, ignored literally every point I made, regurgitated your nonsense with your fingers in your ears, threw in a "fanboy" attack for good measure, and think you've made something resembling a point? You're everything that's wrong with this forum. Good day.
 

Hitchyhero

Member
Oct 23, 2020
290
755
440
Link!!!!!!!!!! I need to take names check this thread out.

I really wish I could find it but I didn't even comment on it. Its was a thread dedicated to a rumour of PS doing a game type pass service.

Perhaps someone else can link the thread. I saw it around last week.
 

Redlancet

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
1,487
2,760
525
So, you trimmed out the entirety of my post where I described how and why I expect Gamepass to be successful, ignored literally every point I made, regurgitated your nonsense with your fingers in your ears, threw in a "fanboy" attack for good measure, and think you've made something resembling a point? You're everything that's wrong with this forum. Good day.
nah i trimmed the thing because youse the same old argument with a wall of text,"WE GOT A LOT OF MONEY WE CANT FAIL",sorry mate but this line of thinking its whats made people like you everthing wrong with microsoft fans,have good day and you too sir
 
Oct 4, 2013
4,131
1,763
875
USA or Japan
www.thunderboltgames.com
GamePass is amazing, but I have concerns that if this is their big play and differentiator in the market, what happens if it just doesn't work? What if the subs don't keep growing after the 1$ deals go away? Microsoft are not shy about shifting their position if something isn't panning out as planned (see Mixer).
 

Jigga

Member
Nov 14, 2017
86
65
230
Having your game attached to MS lessens your product. It’s like putting Gucci at Target. It’s just gonna hurt the brand (Titanfall &Tomb Raider)
 

silentstorm

Member
Nov 17, 2018
277
224
260
Hopefully when the big games that aren't playable on PS5 and Switch finally come out, people will stick with it, it does give a lot of games for objectively little money and free games each month alongside discounts that are exclusive to Ultimate users, people without a lot of money should still stick with it, but that's how i see it, i have been wrong before.
 

Wizz-Art

Member
Aug 20, 2012
621
872
675
Oh nice, a Xbox thread with positive news about how devs are getting paid for their hard work to be on Game Pass. Didn't leave disappointed after reading all the MS/Xbox/Game Pass is doomed posts by the usual suspects.
 
Dec 29, 2018
3,538
10,217
745
nah i trimmed the thing because youse the same old argument with a wall of text,"WE GOT A LOT OF MONEY WE CANT FAIL",sorry mate but this line of thinking its whats made people like you everthing wrong with microsoft fans,have good day and you too sir
Yep. I see that argument made time and time again on this forum that Xbox has an unlimited cash supply and can do whatever they want and they'll still have more money than God.
It's as if businesses don't mind losing truckloads of money.

Oh nice, a Xbox thread with positive news about how devs are getting paid for their hard work to be on Game Pass. Didn't leave disappointed after reading all the MS/Xbox/Game Pass is doomed posts by the usual suspects.
There have always been those that question the long term viability of gamepass. Nothing wrong with that.
The service is far from doomed though because Xbox is getting people to sign up left and right.
 
Last edited:

Wizz-Art

Member
Aug 20, 2012
621
872
675
Yep. I see that argument made time and time again on this forum that Xbox has an unlimited cash supply and can do whatever they want and they'll still have more money than God.
It's as if businesses don't mind losing truckloads of money.


There have always been those that question the long term viability of gamepass. Nothing wrong with that.
The service is far from doomed though because Xbox is getting people to sign up left and right.

If it was any other non trillion dollar company, I would understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawking Radiation

silentstorm

Member
Nov 17, 2018
277
224
260
Just want to point out that i have met people who got Xboxes or started paying attention to it precisely because of Game Pass, and it's also on Android and PC, not just Xbox.

MS is going for three whole markets, mobile gamers, PC gamers and console gamers with this service, and one account works for all of those platforms, i can download and play games on my tablet/smartphone, PC and Xbox with no issue, just saying.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
6,712
7,941
735
Xbox Game Pass has over 15 million users, up by 5 million since April - Business Insider. The word "Insider". A leading-edge research firm focused on digital transformation

let's say half of them actually pay the full 15 buck price that's 105 million a month.

a rough cost of development for AAA games lies somewhere between $60-80 million as per most game developers.

Let's say a developer sells 20% of there game on xbox platform and 20% on PC and 60% towards playstation so that equals towards 28 million.

U can basically bribe 3 full fletched AAA titles a month and still make cash and get a reason for people to join your service on top of it which grows the medium also.

Then not to forget all the smaller games that only go for like a mil at best u just shoehorn in there as much as u want.

Let's not forget, free marketing from gamepass as being on the top of the chart for that month with other games is probably the best advertisement u can get as a new game company so there's that.

Also not sure if dlc count with gamepass so it could mean people will later on still buy the game after all or simple buy extra stuff like skins or whatever through there own shops that they got.

I don't see how this isn't a good investment by microsoft or sustainable. they have completely control over what's on there and what's not. And its probably a big seller for there xbox console to get content to play for almost nothing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DaGwaphics
Dec 29, 2018
3,538
10,217
745
If it was any other non trillion dollar company, I would understand.
Look, the service is doing great. That is simply a fact. Anyone who disagrees with that is flirting with the title of moron.
Sooner rather than later Sony will have a competing service to GamePass and in that sense we as gamers win.
I considered a Series S for gamepass but thank god i held off because already the thing drops down to sub HD resolutions on some games when i thought it would be a 1440p box.
 
Dec 29, 2018
3,538
10,217
745
Just want to point out that i have met people who got Xboxes or started paying attention to it precisely because of Game Pass, and it's also on Android and PC, not just Xbox.

MS is going for three whole markets, mobile gamers, PC gamers and console gamers with this service, and one account works for all of those platforms, i can download and play games on my tablet/smartphone, PC and Xbox with no issue, just saying.
Yes. At first I thought, hey they're spreading themselves waay too thin trying to get into each of those markets from the get go but It does seem like they're in this for the long haul. While it may seem like its not taking off much, it could change in the coming years.
I just hope they continue to sell the hardware and don't 100% to a another software services division of MS.

EDIT: FCK, double post
 
Last edited:

Wizz-Art

Member
Aug 20, 2012
621
872
675
Look, the service is doing great. That is simply a fact. Anyone who disagrees with that is flirting with the title of moron.
Sooner rather than later Sony will have a competing service to GamePass and in that sense we as gamers win.
I considered a Series S for gamepass but thank god i held off because already the thing drops down to sub HD resolutions on some games when i thought it would be a 1440p box.

True, and then (when Sony steps in the arena with their Game Pass) the questions will be waranted as they simply have to make profit from their PS division because it's their moneymaker. Not a dig or anything, just cold hard facts. I just grow tired of those FUD type of post and what MS has done in the past. Game Pass is simply amazing and I try to figure out why a couple of people are so pushing against it here on Neogaf because I don't see anyone in real life seeing Game Pass as something potentially negative. It's weird.

For once and for all;

Microsoft simply ARE a trillion dollar company and a very succesful one at that under the visionary leadership of Satya Nadella, I know that Xbox as a sub-division is very save as he himself mentioned Xbox explicitly as one of the corner stones of the new (under his leadership) Microsoft. Game Pass falls under the Xbox division and is doing really good, so can we stop the doom and gloom posts untill there's any doom and gloom news?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawking Radiation
Dec 29, 2018
3,538
10,217
745
True, and then (when Sony steps in the arena with their Game Pass) the questions will be waranted as they simply have to make profit from their PS division because it's their moneymaker. Not a dig or anything, just cold hard facts. I just grow tired of those FUD type of post and what MS has done in the past. Game Pass is simply amazing and I try to figure out why a couple of people are so pushing against it here on Neogaf because I don't see anyone in real life seeing Game Pass as something potentially negative. It's weird.

For once and for all;

Microsoft simply ARE a trillion dollar company and a very succesful one at that under the visionary leadership of Satya Nadella, I know that Xbox as a sub-division is very save as he himself mentioned Xbox explicitly as one of the corner stones of the new (under his leadership) Microsoft. Game Pass falls under the Xbox division and is doing really good, so can we stop the doom and gloom posts untill there's any doom and gloom news?
Can't argue with the facts mate. The service is growing fast.
Try to ignore those who say otherwise. I mean fuck, i'm not the biggest xbox fan around (in fact I favour PS) but I can agree that Xbox is doing something right with GamePass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wizz-Art

Moonjt9

Member
Oct 2, 2019
207
515
295

"The more they play your game, the more money we pay you" - GAAS
"The less they play your game, the less we pay you" - KICK

This is some hard proof of actual concern that many people have about gamepass. I think a lot of gamers would be worried about the quality of games dropping because they have to do things to maximize playtime like that. Not good imo.
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
3,209
1,965
1,250
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
Netflix was profitable every year since 2004. Spotify loose a huge amount of money every year.

Spotify is an amazing service for consumers. But the music industry earn less money now than before Spotify and Spotify isn't profitable. So even if I really enjoy it, I don't think it was good for the music industry.

There is two questions about Game Pass :
  1. Is it profitable and, if it isn't, will it be profitable in the future?
  2. Is it good for video game developers?
For Netflix, the answer to those questions is "yes". For Spotify, it's "no". And for Xbox Game Pass? I don't know. I'm not sure anyone can say that he knows for sure, but if you ask me to guess, I would say yes.

If I understand correctly nobody knows if Netflix is going to be profitable in the long run. Their calculations to cover the costs of their productions are done prorating over 3 - 4 years which is the amount of time they expect the content to be of interest for the viewer and produce/keep subscribers.

Yes, they show as if they are making a profit but they are burning cash like crazy.

Hopefully the model will work because both Netflix and Microsoft produce quality content and offer options to consumers but it's still a bet. More so in the case of Microsoft.

That said, taking this kind of risk is something only a company like Microsoft could do. If they make it work it will be great for everyone. If they don't it's not a big issue as they can take the hit and try something else.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
785
986
305
it will change in due time.
Well they won't absorb those types of losses forever. Massive development budgets for many of those first-party titles, plus payments to third-parties means some price hikes are inevitable.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
785
986
305
I don't understand how people think the Gamepass model is terrible. A game on Gamepass isn't exclusive to that service model. They are increasing their earning channels, something every business tries to do.

MS is earning at least 150 Mil per month at the moment (most customers does not know about the $1 multi-year upgrade for GamePass) (I'm assuming maybe 5million of those 15million+ has taken advantage of the upgrade live then pay $1.00)
That's 1.8 Billion per year +/- a few million
All games on GamePass are still sold in the traditional model through B&M stores and Digital sales (which also bring money in the dev & MS pocket)
.... for comparison

Spiderman (Sonys highest selling game) sold 13million, which is $780 millions of dollars (assuming everyone bought it at $60 (I got it for $10))
This means sony would need 3 games to sell 13 million copies each to make the same amount as GamePass annually.


There are variables though, as the cost to make the game, distributions costs (Gamepass doesn't have that), marketing cost, and server maintenance cost

Essentially, the MS method in the long term is a sustainable model, as long as most games are first-party, if they have a bunch of expensive 3P AAA titles on there it will eat available profit, and benefits the developer and user more than anything while hurting MS profits...

Also, people complaining about not having to spend $60 for 1P games have a weird logic to me, when was saving money a bad thing, or is it because MS did it so it's bad...

Sidenote- Playstation's OWN CEO has commented on trying to compete with GamePass, so clearly, its a model that he likes, especially since he's tried down talking it multiple times
Well we now know God of War has sold 20m copies. The 13m Spiderman figure was after 10 months on the market aswell.

But also this ignores the Spiderman Limited Edition which I believe sold for £80, plus the DLC which currently sells for £6.49 each, or £15.99 for all chapters.

That puts into perspective the $1.8bn figure because how many people are not buying games outright due to them being available on GamePass? For most games I don't buy the idea that it increases sales. That money needs to be spread across a hell of a lot of first and third-party studios. You won't see Sony or Nintendo putting their games on a £8 subscription service as they sell too well and it's a bit of a desperation move by a Microsoft struggling to compete.

If you like the selection on GamePass and play a ton of games then it makes sense to make the most of it, but it's not sustainable in its form and price. Microsoft staying silent on the financials says it all.
 
Last edited:

ReBurn

Member
Dec 6, 2008
12,167
2,657
1,240
SC USA
Yea I just don't see how its sustainable. AAA titles cost almost as much as big budget films. It's like if Marvel spent $200m on a movie and then it debuted on Netflix. How can a third party profit there?
I mean, it's currently doing $150 million per month in revenue. The cost to develop AAA games probably tops out at what? $100 million on the high end? At least according to Jim Ryan. The only day 1 AAA games on Game Pass will be their own and it's not like they're releasing one of those every month. If they released 6 games per year that averaged $50 million to 75 million each that's a $300M - $450M investment to fuel $1.8B+ in revenue. They pay the indies and smaller shops to have their games on the service but we don't how much. Certainly not AAA money. But you can do a lot of million dollar or (most likely much ) less deals with $1.5B to $1.8B.

Third party games won't release there without a money hat. They'll come later after their newness is gone and sales slow. Publishers will put them up for a couple of months in the hope that people will try them and like them enough to buy them for the 20% off to keep playing when they leave the service. But if not at least they made whatever they made considering making something on an old game is better than making nothing from it.

Microsoft's gamble is that the more top franchises they buy and put on the service the more subscribers they get the more revenue flows in, the more third party games move through...it becomes a cycle. And we can't forget that people are still going to pay $60-$70 outright for many of these games. Some people are going to want to own the next Fallout or Elder Scrolls or whatever instead of renting it. Especially if they buy DLC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaGwaphics

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
2,814
3,926
480
Well we now know God of War has sold 20m copies. The 13m Spiderman figure was after 10 months on the market aswell.

But also this ignores the Spiderman Limited Edition which I believe sold for £80, plus the DLC which currently sells for £6.49 each, or £15.99 for all chapters.

That puts into perspective the $1.8bn figure because how many people are not buying games outright due to them being available on GamePass? For most games I don't buy the idea that it increases sales. That money needs to be spread across a hell of a lot of first and third-party studios. You won't see Sony or Nintendo putting their games on a £8 subscription service as they sell too well and it's a bit of a desperation move by a Microsoft struggling to compete.

If you like the selection on GamePass and play a ton of games then it makes sense to make the most of it, but it's not sustainable in its form and price. Microsoft staying silent on the financials says it all.

How many copies of GoW and SM went for $20 (or less at retail)? Plus, there's the issue of the retailer cut and all that. It's very difficult to compare.
 

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
785
986
305
I mean, it's currently doing $150 million per month in revenue. The cost to develop AAA games probably tops out at what? $100 million on the high end? At least according to Jim Ryan. The only day 1 AAA games on Game Pass will be their own and it's not like they're releasing one of those every month. If they released 6 games per year that averaged $50 million to 75 million each that's a $300M - $450M investment to fuel $1.8B+ in revenue. They pay the indies and smaller shops to have their games on the service but we don't how much. Certainly not AAA money. But you can do a lot of million dollar or (most likely much ) less deals with $1.5B to $1.8B.

Third party games won't release there without a money hat. They'll come later after their newness is gone and sales slow. Publishers will put them up for a couple of months in the hope that people will try them and like them enough to buy them for the 20% off to keep playing when they leave the service. But if not at least they made whatever they made considering making something on an old game is better than making nothing from it.

Microsoft's gamble is that the more top franchises they buy and put on the service the more subscribers they get the more revenue flows in, the more third party games move through...it becomes a cycle. And we can't forget that people are still going to pay $60-$70 outright for many of these games. Some people are going to want to own the next Fallout or Elder Scrolls or whatever instead of renting it. Especially if they buy DLC.
There's no way AAA games nowadays cost $100m on the high-end. Epic said Gears of War 4 would have cost $100m and that's an old game now. Halo, Starfield, next Gears will cost a lot more than that.
 
Last edited:

Hezekiah

Member
Jul 16, 2020
785
986
305
How many copies of GoW and SM went for $20 (or less at retail)? Plus, there's the issue of the retailer cut and all that. It's very difficult to compare.
Each batch is sold for a set price to the retailer, so any discounts from there come out of their end.