• 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.

"Microsoft has tried the first path and it did not work at all. We believe we have a meaningful subscription service." - Jim Ryan

johnjohn

Member
Change being brought by GamePass and MS is not good though. It can be seen from the leaks that MS is aiming to acquire as much as regulators let them, don’t really care or can’t determine quality of their output, are hostile to game ownership and in general are behaving like MS of old before that anti-trust lawsuit.
Game Pass is the best thing that has happened to the games industry in years, especially for consumers. It requires a variety of game sizes and genres, and delivers a ton of high quality content, so not sure where the "they don't care about quality" comes from... They need high quality content to get new subs and keep them subscribed. They've also done nothing to attack game ownership..
 
This is really old but I guess there's nothing like refreshed outrage

Edit: Actually it's just Jim repeating himself 😆 seems like a new interview
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Banned
More into it:

"We will do what we are doing right now, which is to become less reliant on 3rd Party games and 3rd Party royalties, and to make more 1st Party games. If we double our share of 1st Party games, which are more profitable than the 3rd Party royalty stream, it will bring down our reliance on 3rd Party games." "That is the single biggest thing, and one of the main reasons why we are embarking on M&A. I would like to point out that we are also growing our existing studios, increasing capabilities and their ability to output in various areas including live services. I feel like this part deserves a lot more attention than it currently gets. Large M&A gets all the headlines, but there is a lot going on, and growing your studios organically successfully is a smart thing to do."

 

StereoVsn

Member
Game Pass is the best thing that has happened to the games industry in years, especially for consumers. It requires a variety of game sizes and genres, and delivers a ton of high quality content, so not sure where the "they don't care about quality" comes from... They need high quality content to get new subs and keep them subscribed. They've also done nothing to attack game ownership..
This is a lot of generic nonsense. Maybe for some people it’s better but in general Microsoft’s output has been very subpar.

I have had GamePass for a few years and finally cancelled it. Got it on the cheap and it was still generally pointless. I would have been better off just buying a few games here and there on sale. Well, maybe not for the stupid good conversion prices they were running.

MS is attacking game ownership by converting people to sub service and planning to eliminate physical risk media.
 

Drawing Motivation GIF


Can't beat free! Thanks EGS!

94krFRZ.png
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
More into it:

"We will do what we are doing right now, which is to become less reliant on 3rd Party games and 3rd Party royalties, and to make more 1st Party games. If we double our share of 1st Party games, which are more profitable than the 3rd Party royalty stream, it will bring down our reliance on 3rd Party games." "That is the single biggest thing, and one of the main reasons why we are embarking on M&A. I would like to point out that we are also growing our existing studios, increasing capabilities and their ability to output in various areas including live services. I feel like this part deserves a lot more attention than it currently gets. Large M&A gets all the headlines, but there is a lot going on, and growing your studios organically successfully is a smart thing to do."



More mergers and acquisitions.....

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF
 

The Alien

Banned
What didn't work about GamePass?

To say that path was 'tried and it didn't work at all. I'd crazy. With half the install base but 2 twice the subscribers, id say its going well. Id also sau that path is far from 'tried'....I get the vibe it's still early/beginning.

The $80B invested in Bethesda and ABK seems pretty much a guarantee that MS thinks that GamePass is going pretty well.
 

rapid32.5

Member
Xbox’s biggest mistake is putting all their first party titles on Gamepass day 1. They’re leaving a TON of money on the table by putting their biggest titles on it at release.
First party games need to prove their quality, so far games worth GamePass material.
 
I'm confused myself. :messenger_tears_of_joy: :messenger_downcast_sweat: Halp

Get me the link and I'll put it on the OP gladly.

Ok, so apparently this part was actually unredacted before. I guess some people are only picking up on it now because they're going through all of the documents after the leak?

https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-b...s-believe-xbox-game-pass-is-value-destructive

"During his pre-recorded testimony for an evidentiary hearing between the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Microsoft, Jim Ryan claimed publishers do not like Microsoft's video game subscription service because it is "value destructive".

"I talked to all the publishers, and they unanimously do not like Game Pass because it is value destructive," Ryan said during his testimony.

Just before that, Ryan claimed Game Pass is unprofitable for Microsoft. "The Game Pass business model appears to have some challenges, and Microsoft appears to be losing a lot of money on it," Ryan said."
 

Reallink

Member
3 Core cards equal 1 year of Ultimate nowI believe. They changed it recently. Well, and have to wait for the sub to expire.

PS Extra you can catch on yearly 25-30% sales. PS Premium is pointless.

No its 2:1 now, hence why I said 2x Cores is a year of Ultimate. 3x Cores would be 18 months. It used to be 1:1. You can also find Core cards on sale much more often at deeper discounts than Sony's once or twice a year. Matter of fact they're pretty much permanently $40-$50 (or less) somewhere. They're currently $37 on CDkeys, making a year of Ultimate only $75.
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Banned
Ok, so apparently this part was actually unredacted before. I guess some people are only picking up on it now because they're going through all of the documents after the leak?

https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-b...s-believe-xbox-game-pass-is-value-destructive

"During his pre-recorded testimony for an evidentiary hearing between the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Microsoft, Jim Ryan claimed publishers do not like Microsoft's video game subscription service because it is "value destructive".

"I talked to all the publishers, and they unanimously do not like Game Pass because it is value destructive," Ryan said during his testimony.

Just before that, Ryan claimed Game Pass is unprofitable for Microsoft. "The Game Pass business model appears to have some challenges, and Microsoft appears to be losing a lot of money on it," Ryan said."

Added your post to the OP.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
Yea pure 🔥🔥🔥

Meanwhile they are significantly jacking up the prices on their own subs, so even if you don’t care about the games you have to pay more to play online and access your cloud saves.

Talk that shit, Jim!
Thats an entirely different issue. What he said about Game Pass, adn it not being good for the industry is all I care about here. He's right. And the fact thta other devs/pubs behind the scenes are in agreement is nothing but a good thing.

So yes, pure fire.
 
Sony Interactive Entertainment/PlayStation President & CEO Jim Ryan On Gamepass: "I can say with a very high degree of certainty that Microsoft has tried the first path and it did not work at all. That has driven them to make the large acquisition. I talked to all the publishers, and they unanimously do not like Game Pass because it is value destructive, not only on an individual title-basis, but also or an industry level. The recent number of subscribers that Microsoft announced on January was 25 Million. I am sure everyone has their own views on this, but I personally was expecting a larger number given all the money they have spent. We have close to 50 Million PlayStation Plus subscribers. We believe we have a meaningful subscription service."
Wow, that's like double the PS5 install base. Congrats Sony.
 

StereoVsn

Member
What didn't work about GamePass?

To say that path was 'tried and it didn't work at all. I'd crazy. With half the install base but 2 twice the subscribers, id say its going well. Id also sau that path is far from 'tried'....I get the vibe it's still early/beginning.

The $80B invested in Bethesda and ABK seems pretty much a guarantee that MS thinks that GamePass is going pretty well.
$80b investment means that MS has more money then common sense. If they couldn’t rely on literal unlimited funding (while firing developers and engineers all over the company), non of this nonsense would happen.

Of course regulators don’t care.
 

Topher

Gold Member
They have to, but don't expect any large scale ones. Arrowhead with the new Helldivers 2 might be next after Housemarque.

Pretty much going to echo what HeisenbergFX4 HeisenbergFX4 said. Endorse Sony making acquisitions and to me that's an endorsement of acquisitions in general. Can't have it both ways. Just don't like the road the industry is going down.
 
Last edited:

StereoVsn

Member
No its 2:1 now, hence why I said 2x Cores is a year of Ultimate. 3x Cores would be 18 months.
It used to be 2 x Live gold for a year of Ultimate though plus a month basically once the $1 trick got killed. So $120 /year total I think. Might be misremembering.
 

Sleepwalker

Member
I always hate the X is ok but Y is not

Small is ok but large is not

Where is this imaginary line where (and who) deems it no longer ok?

None is ok IMO, the industry would be better should those billions go towards funding new studios, creating new employment and generating new IP. But these acquisitions are hardly ever about dev talent, it's an IP war. The industry is creatively bankrupt.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Look at it this way. Buying small studios that help nurture YOUR OWN FUCKING IP's *sorry* vs buying a mega 3rd party publisher and block other platforms.

You're smart enough to know the difference.

Buying "small studios" is not going to reduce Sony's reliance on third parties. I don't believe for a minute that Sony is limiting themselves in that way.
 

mansoor1980

Gold Member
More into it:

"We will do what we are doing right now, which is to become less reliant on 3rd Party games and 3rd Party royalties, and to make more 1st Party games. If we double our share of 1st Party games, which are more profitable than the 3rd Party royalty stream, it will bring down our reliance on 3rd Party games." "That is the single biggest thing, and one of the main reasons why we are embarking on M&A. I would like to point out that we are also growing our existing studios, increasing capabilities and their ability to output in various areas including live services. I feel like this part deserves a lot more attention than it currently gets. Large M&A gets all the headlines, but there is a lot going on, and growing your studios organically successfully is a smart thing to do."


great news from jimbo , microsoft better be afraid.
 

sankt-Antonio

:^)--?-<
Yes, let's compare Microsoft from those ancient days, especially when the market was different. And yes, let's compare a mobile phone company purchase for 7 Billion vs 80 billion for a game company in the year 2023. Solid apples to oranges comparison. Keep on trucking you are doing good Lil Timmy. 👍
Its not that far off of a comparison. 7 billion for a, at the time, already failed company to have a foot in the mobile space was as outrageous a move as the Blizz / Acti deal.
And they have the assets, studios and IP and can sell these at any time in the future, with only (if any) small loss, depending on how they handle these IP's.
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Banned
Buying "small studios" is not going to reduce Sony's reliance on third parties. I don't believe for a minute that Sony is limiting themselves in that way.

How so? They're already seeing first hand how they can't just pump out new games in a much faster pace without sacrificing quality except Insomniac, despite all their studios are growing larger. Handing their IP's like Helldivers to 3rd party is a sign that their own studios have their hands full and can't do more.
 
Last edited:
Do huh now? PC Gamepass is $10/mo, Console $11/mo, and Ulimate $17. PS+ is $10, $15, and $18. Gamepass' annual sub is also significantly cheaper even at full price, with a year of Ultimate clocking in at only $120 (i.e. 2x $60 Core cards). PS Extra is $135, and premium is a whopping $160. The fuck you smoking to arrive at "significantly cheaper"?
You don't have a damned clue what you are talking about.

GamePass Core on Xbox, which only includes online MP and 25 games, is indeed $9.99 a month.

To actually get the GamePass catalog you need Ultimate, which is $16.99 a month. Ultimate has no yearly discount.

One year of GamePass Ultimate paid monthly is $204. One year of PS+ Premium is $160. Even if you bought four of the 3-Month Ultimate cards every year that is still $180.
 

Roronoa Zoro

Gold Member
They have to, but don't expect any large scale ones. Arrowhead with the new Helldivers 2 might be next after Housemarque.
I hope that if they get a large one they will simply do it Bungie style. Especially with square what would they care if they can profit from the Nintendo fanbase that probably isn't cannibalizing their sales?
 

Roronoa Zoro

Gold Member
Do huh now? PC Gamepass is $10/mo, Console $11/mo, and Ulimate $17. PS+ is $10, $15, and $18. Gamepass' annual sub is also significantly cheaper even at full price, with a year of Ultimate clocking in at only $120 (i.e. 2x $60 Core cards). PS Extra is $135, and premium is a whopping $160. The fuck you smoking to arrive at "significantly cheaper"?
Yearly $160 Premium vs $180 yearly for GPU
 

A2una1

Member
Game Pass is the best thing that has happened to the games industry in years, especially for consumers. It requires a variety of game sizes and genres, and delivers a ton of high quality content, so not sure where the "they don't care about quality" comes from... They need high quality content to get new subs and keep them subscribed. They've also done nothing to
It is a thing of perspektive. For devs in general, I can see it beeing sub optimal to be on game pass, depending on the game. But for the consumer game pass is a very attractive thing and far ahead of what psn is offering. If it will harm the gaming industry in the long run we will have to see...

Microsoft is still needing a over the top game some kind of must-have. Starfield is a very good game, but it isn't good enough for the long lasting wow effect I think. Meanwhile Sony is living by there repuatation of delivering wowing games. But to be honest Sonys games are also "only" very very good, but also not that wowing anymore ( or mabye I'm getting old and not that flashed anymore ;) ).
 

Sanepar

Member
Well if was true why Sega are releasing almost every new game on gamepass? I think some publishers don't like and subscription is value destructive but I think for many subscription sevices are hope.
 

Reallink

Member
You don't have a damned clue what you are talking about.

GamePass Core on Xbox, which only includes online MP and 25 games, is indeed $9.99 a month.

To actually get the GamePass catalog you need Ultimate, which is $16.99 a month. Ultimate has no yearly discount.

One year of GamePass Ultimate paid monthly is $204. One year of PS+ Premium is $160. Even if you bought four of the 3-Month Ultimate cards every year that is still $180.

A base console Gamepass is sold separately without online play, it's $10.99/mo (they hiked it $1 a couple months back). MS sells their annual subs through 12 month Core Cards, it's not a hack or secret, they advertise it on the dashboard evertime you turn on the console. Redeeming an annual Core card gives you 6 months of Ultimate. It works the same way as Sony's annual cards, where you can buy a year of essential, redeem it, then pay extra to upgrade tiers.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
How so? They're already seeing first hand how they can't just pump out new games in a much faster pace without sacrificing quality except Insomniac, despite all their studios are growing larger. Handing their IP's like Helldivers to 3rd party is a sign that their own studios have their hands full and can't do more.

That's all fine, but it doesn't explain how buying small studios reduces Sony's reliance on third parties. To me, this is clearly about less reliance on Call of Duty. Helldivers isn't going to do jack in that regard. Neither will small studios. I'm willing to be that Sony has its eyes on a major acquisition. Either that, or Jimbo is just talking shit.

And if I'm going to point to the reason for Sony's lack of output then I'd say it because of their retooling for all this Gaas nonsense.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
That's all fine, but it doesn't explain how buying small studios reduces Sony's reliance on third parties. To me, this is clearly about less reliance on Call of Duty. Helldivers isn't going to do jack in that regard. Neither will small studios. I'm willing to be that Sony has its eyes on a major acquisition. Either that, or Jimbo is just talking shit.

And if I'm going to point to the reason for Sony's lack of output then I'd say it because of their retooling for all this Gaas nonsense.

It all should pan out in the near future, before 2027.
 

Sanepar

Member
There is no link for the interview?

I mean if they want to go Nintendo road they need more studios. 2 games per year will not work long term if MS keep buying publishers and studios. I would say 8 exclusive games per year like ps2 era then they have a chance.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
He is right and wrong
And I ain't gonna leave anything out, premium v premium, no essential or extra crap
That's a different story and has their own problems

For a business Gamepass simply doesn't work but it is great for customers that are taking advantage of it.
So no one here saying "Gamepass is great" has a valid opinion because that is no up for debate.
You can say all you like, it doesn't change the fact that it's not sustainable long term and will do more damage then good.
With that said
But PS+ is extremely overpriced and severely lacking.
And as long as people keep subscribing it'll be good for business.
But for the customer?
It's a piss poor
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I am sure 3rd party publishers aren't overly happy with Sony trying to reduce their reliance on 3rd party software either.
 

BennyBlanco

aka IMurRIVAL69
Thats an entirely different issue. What he said about Game Pass, adn it not being good for the industry is all I care about here. He's right. And the fact thta other devs/pubs behind the scenes are in agreement is nothing but a good thing.

So yes, pure fire.

This would be a lot more meaningful if they weren’t running a game pass competitor of their own that is shittier. If this were Valve or Nintendo saying this, ok.
 
Top Bottom