Well in America Xbox largest market there was a $1 deal for up to 3 years.
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Game Pass is not profitable yet - Tom Warren
- Thread starter Rolla
- Start date
MDSLKTR
Member
Wow people still spread that misinformation. There was never such a thing ever. The deal is still on and it's 1$ to convert existing gold subs into GP subs.
Exactly if you had gold, you can upgrade to gamepass for $1. Whats the objection?
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Not the person who commented, but I think the objection is that you need $1 on top of $180 to use that deal. Not everyone is an Xbox Live Gold subscriber for 3 years.
I think that's a fair point. It's $181, not $1 -- unless you already have gold stacked up for 3 years.
Silent Viper
Banned
And Yes Tom Warren knows everything. Expert of Financial dealings
Hence $1 deal as I originally said.
Dr Bass
Member
That’s a 1 dollar deal …
if you’ve already paid up for Live, you could convert it for … 1 dollar.
It’s taking advantage of money already paid and the additional capital required is … again …
1 dollar.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Hence $1 deal as I originally said.
I think it's a matter of technicality that we are stuck in now, but ...
How I think is that "you can get Gamepass for 3 years for $181". You may have paid 33%, 67%, or 99% of that amount some time ago that you can now utilize, but the total amount necessary to activate that deal is $181 -- so you'll have to pay the remaining balance.
I don't think many would have 3 years stacked up if they had no reason to convert to Gamepass.
Last edited:
John Wick
Member
It's not $180 for 3 years. Unless your real lazy or stupid or both you can get gold for $30-35. If your tech savvy then $23 from Xbox Brazil. $69 in total + $3 for GPU.
John Wick
Member
You don't need to be a Michael Pachter to know MS are losing money on GP. The fact they hide the numbers tells the story. It's that obvious.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
You may or may not get deals for everything under the sun. I'm mentioning list price -- which is what the majority of gamers will get it at.
PS+ is $60 (although you can technically get it for as low as $30). But it's the list price that matters when comparing products and for the majority of people (not us, who are hardcore gamers, and spend hours on gaming forums)
Hitchyhero
Banned
The guy is making out that the majority of people stack 3 years worth of XBL by default, excludes that cost and only includes the cost of $1/£1.
Ive never know anyone to have 3 years worth of XBL/PSN at a time, unless they are purposely going for this deal, so it's disingenuous to not include the cost of it. Who coincidently has EXACTLY 3 years worth of XBL and converts it at that exact time, unknowing that they just maximised on savings.
So here's me, new to Xbox since the the 360. I came to the XSX with no owned games and no membership of anything. I bought 3 years worth of XBL to convert to Gamepass.... And the dude is saying it cost me a total of $1.
The only people who say "you spent $1 for 3 years" are Sony diehard fanboys who are trying to downplay the service and its popularity. The service is obviously not going to turn a profit atm (like every other subscription service in the world, they are in subscriber aquisition mode, offering good deals). Those deals will go at some point. I myself think the sub is worth the full price atm. We will see what gamepass is like in the future.
Last edited:
Malcolm9
Member
It's a concern if MS decide to hoover up more publishers/developers to feed their Gamepass strategy.
Last edited:
Tschumi
Member
My final word on this.. i own every game for ps3 and ps4 , and vita, i could ever want. I barely ever play any of them.
Having access to every game, for a pretty nominal fee, games which i wouldn't even actually OWN, Would pretty much kill my already gimped chances of latching on to and finishing great titles.
Having access to every game, for a pretty nominal fee, games which i wouldn't even actually OWN, Would pretty much kill my already gimped chances of latching on to and finishing great titles.
NikuNashi
Member
I doubt it will ever be profitable in its current state. Either they miraculously take all of Sony's consumers to boost their numbers or they reduce the amount of games or the level of games they offer or they start to screw the devs on the production costs to squeeze everything down. Either way it's got no longevity other than a landfill for MS money.
chorizosausage#3774
Member
Nintendo have the right idea as a business, don’t devalue your product.
These publishers have been destroying their own ability to sell games.
Papacheeks
Banned
I would argue Sony is in the same boat as Nintendo.
Their games are quality and for the most part all first party sell very well. Thing is SOny does more deals than Nintendo and is willing to do sales on their games since they release more than Nintendo with their exclusive third/second party deals. SO they have more traffic coming to their store on a daily basis, so their whole strat isn't centered around releasing one big title like pokemon for the year like NIntendo is.
Same idea, different execution.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Exactly my point. At the end of the day, it costs you $540 for 3 years (if you subscribe for $15 per month with no deals) or $181 for 3 years (if you go through the XBLG upgrade route). You may have paid some of that amount previously, but that doesn't change the total cost.
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
This paints a clear picture and a game streaming service won't even reach 165 million subscribers any time soon, if ever
Last edited:
MrFunSocks
Banned
Music streaming and a game subscription service are not the same thing. There are a few dozen developers/publishers involved with game pass, not tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) like on spotify. The deals are also different, developers are often paid up front on game pass. Spotify also doesn't sell DLC/microtransactions as add ons to their songs.
Last edited:
TBiddy
Member
What is this "clear picture", you think the Spotify numbers show?
Oh wow. You know what? I don't fucking care!
I'm using the GP, i have game "for free" dudes, i really don't care, I'm not a Microsoft shareholder lol.
That service is a beast, best deal in gaming, will be profitable because yes ffs, it will have like 50 million subscribers in a couple of years, i mean there is a fucking good reason if Microsoft is still investing in the GP, there is a reason if I'm writing on a gaming forum and I'm not in Phil Spencer role, I know nothing after all, I'm paying the service I'm not managing it.
Relax and enjoy the gamepass ; )
I'm using the GP, i have game "for free" dudes, i really don't care, I'm not a Microsoft shareholder lol.
That service is a beast, best deal in gaming, will be profitable because yes ffs, it will have like 50 million subscribers in a couple of years, i mean there is a fucking good reason if Microsoft is still investing in the GP, there is a reason if I'm writing on a gaming forum and I'm not in Phil Spencer role, I know nothing after all, I'm paying the service I'm not managing it.
Relax and enjoy the gamepass ; )
Last edited:
Bernd Lauert
Banned
It's an interesting cope indeed, since Spotify is by far the #1 audio streaming platform in the world, yet somehow they're implying that Spotify is somehow failing?
ParaSeoul
Member
And when we have the next video game crash,we'll know who to blame.
martino
Member
it's almost as if they are 1000+x times less entities to pay for the 1000+x time less content hmmmm
Last edited:
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
"Overall, the company made a net loss of €20 million, compared to a net loss of €356 million it made in the same quarter the previous year."
And this is with 165 million subs
Last edited:
cHaOs667
Member
Depending on your POV, it is. As long as you're not one of the top musicians, that is backed by one of the bigger music studios, you can't make a living from earnings on Spotify.It's an interesting cope indeed, since Spotify is by far the #1 audio streaming platform in the world, yet somehow they're implying that Spotify is somehow failing?
They pay around 0.04 USD per 10 Streams... You can do the maths by yourself how many streams you need to have, if you are in a band of four people, if you want to make a living per month.
TBiddy
Member
Do you think that Spotify and Game Pass are even remotely comparable, outside the fact that they are streaming subscriptions?
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
No, it's even worse for gaming services
Way less subscribers and gaming being way more expensive = Even harder to turn a profit
This was already known. Most subscribers have got great deals at the start. Microsoft is hoping they will stick when they start charging usual bill and their studio start producing games. Right now they aren't making any profit but I don't think they are making any huge losses as well. They will make loss once their big hitters start dropping in few years and then MS will hope they can charge more
Still won't stop people from subscribing for few months and play all the title and then move on.
Still won't stop people from subscribing for few months and play all the title and then move on.
Last edited:
owandeseis
Member
Now imagine that streaming company has also 10 games on the Steam's top 100 biggest profit games of 2020, being probably the publisher with most games there.
Last edited:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Its pretty insane how despite Spotify having more subscribers and the worst revenue split with artists/content creators its still making losses every quarter.
TBiddy
Member
There's also way less recipients of the revenue created = even easier to turn a profit
See, it's easy to make baseless claims. At least provide some decent math, if you want to have a debate.
Bulletbrain
Member
Think the little fact that YoY net profit improved EUR336m is also quite important when analysis this statement.
Denton
Member
Sooner, the better.
You do know for Game company it's even bigger risk?
TBiddy
Member
I don't think anyone outside the board rooms are capable of making that judgment.
GHG
Member
Musicians and their publishers have always made the bulk of their money from events/tours and licensing deals.
Hope Phil is working out hard to get in shape for the XO22 world tour events. Gonna need those sell out crowds more than ever.
SaucyJack
Member
There’s only one recipient of revenue created in both cases. Spotify and Microsoft. Are you confusing that with providers of content?
The equation for streaming services is fairly straightforward. Profit/Loss = Revenue - cost of content - cost of running the service
It would hardly be stunning news that cost of content > revenue for Gamepass right now. It would be more surprising if it wasnt.
Last edited:
TBiddy
Member
Hilarious as always.
I'm not confusing anything no, and I'm certainly not arguing that Gamepass is a money maker, but using Spotify as a proof is, well, useless, to be frank, since they can't be compared.
GHG
Member
The overall strategy for these subscription services is simple - it's a war of attrition to see who can survive the longest and then once a particular subscription provider believes they have command of the market they can control the prices on both sides of the equation.
TBiddy
Member
Haha. I totally forgot about that!
"It's very hard to launch a $120M game on a subscription service charging $9.99 a month," he claimed. "You pencil it out, you're going to have to have 500 million subscribers before you start to recoup your investment.
Banjo64
cumsessed
My mistake, 500 million users paying $12 a month is actually $6 billion dollars a month
TBiddy
Member
My mistake, 500 million users paying $12 a month is actually $6 billion dollars a month
But of course, everyone is only paying 1$!