• 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.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Vinc

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,387
The fact that they BUY more games is interesting, but I wonder if that will last. MS said GP was increasing their retail sales of first party titles a few months back too, but then we have Gears 5 that was heavily cannibalized by GP. My personal expectation is that subscription services will lead to more reluctance to purchasing games outside of subscriptions in the long run, especially as more of these competing subscriptions come up.

To give a personal example, when I first got Netflix it felt like an embarrassment of riches. It was great! I threw on movies all the time, tried things I never would have tried otherwise, and even purchased / rented more movies than before, just from the excitement of it all. After that novelty wore off, my habits normalized to roughly what they were before, or I probably watched a few more movies than usual still due to ease of access, but I certainly stopped purchasing more movies. Then, as the amount of content grew on the service, I became more selective about what I do watch. And as other services started becoming available, and I started subscribing to Amazon Prime and HBO, I tend to find it harder to justify spending money to purchase movies anymore, unless it's a REALLY special one to me.

I'm just really curious to see how this whole thing develops. I feel like the games industry tends to move faster than the film or TV industry, as consumer habits seem to change faster too. I don't think Game Pass will have a relative monopoly on this kind of service for very long, and I expect current customer habits to change over time. It'll be interesting to see what happens. I think it'll undeniably be successful, I just don't think the current metrics of success will be as valid in the longer term.
 

Kyougar

Cute Animal Whisperer
Member
Nov 3, 2017
9,360
You're making assumptions. I'm not saying they're wrong, but it's helping some indie developers right now.

Yeah, right now. But what about the future? Microsoft CAN'T pay out developers like they are doing right now forever. Unless you want to pay 100 bucks a month for gamepass.
 

Titanpaul

Member
Jan 2, 2019
5,008
Yeah, right now. But what about the future? Microsoft CAN'T pay out developers like they are doing right now forever. Unless you want to pay 100 bucks a month for gamepass.

We don't know that. They may or may not. I understand your concern and can definitely see them messing this up - but its also possible that with more subscribers leads to more cash flow. They could also keep the catalogue tight to reduce costs.
 

Zach

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,712
I was barely playing games for a while, just kinda coasting until next-gen. And then for whatever reason I tried out Game Pass on the cheap and have played a million games outta nowhere. And I even ended up buying Mutant Year Zero.

It's a neat service.
 

Pheace

Member
Aug 23, 2018
1,339
This is like an MMO imo where you have that feeling of 'I'm paying for it so I should be getting the most out of it'.
 

Goldenroad

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Nov 2, 2017
9,475
I believe it. I imagine Netflix has done the same for the amount of TV and movies people watch, and not just on Netflix. It's like I watched one season of Great British Bake Off on Netflix (season 7 or 8...whichever the first one they posted was), and then went and sought out every other season of Bake Off, including Canadian and....Australian???...I watch too much Bake Off...is there an Australian one that I watched or am I dreaming that?

Anyway, it's not hard to believe that someone is going to play Dishonored 2 on Game Pass then go seek out DOTO, or other similar games not on Game Pass, for example.
 

Fisty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,230
You're making assumptions. I'm not saying they're wrong, but it's helping some indie developers right now.

And just like the Epic money hats, it will get to the point where MS have a big enough pool of content and userbase (sunk cost) where they dont need to subsidize games on their platform to retain users. That well will dry up for indie devs, and it will be back to using GP for exposure or hoping for MTX revenue.

Just like every other service that offers supercheap/free indie games, they are devalued by the perception that indies are too risky to pay for because they are most likely either coming to the service later or probably not very good.
 

DevilMayGuy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,579
Texas

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,950
The discourse about Game Pass is a great litmus test to see who understands where gaming is going and who is still mired in the past, stuck on arguing about unit sales and NPD numbers.

The devaluation of games, that's for sure.

Let me get this part out of the way; Game Pass is fucking awesome. As a consumer it's crazy good.
But I can still sit back and see where things are headed. Game sales are starting to not matter, because a developer can just sell exclusivity to Epic, and then sell it to a Sony/Microsoft/Twitch to throw on their subscription service.
Once subscription models take over videogames, I can't help but wonder what happens next? Are small indie developers offered less money, because they're less desirable then big name games and popular indie titles?
As of now I think this is a big win for consumers, but I do wonder what the future looks like? I believe individual sales are going to take a big hit as subscription models take a bigger hold on the market.
 

Proven

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
5,841
The very first comment of this IGN piece says it all :



That's what GP is : it's just grabbing consumers from everywhere, keep them in the xbox ecosystem and just let them spend their money as they used to. MS knows that consumer spendings on gaming are rising, they are positionning themselves for the future, they just need people to be addicted to GP with a constant flow of games added and well curated. Then consumers will do as they always used : spend money to buy more game. It's not a 0 sum game. It might not be winning money now, but I'm sure they have all the data needed to forecast the breakeven point where there will be enough GP suscribers to start to have more profit than simply selling full priced games.

Just imagine this : you take GP just for gears 5 for 1 or 2$, discover MK10 that you never thought buying because that's not your kind of game, like it and buy some DLC, or like it enough then buy MK11 outside of GP or MK 12 when it will launch. Is that an uncommon situation ? multiply this by the endless combinations of games, genres, DLC, games leaving the service that people will buy to keep,... and you can see that there are many possibilities for MS to recoup the loss of a full priced Gears 5. Then it's a netflix situation : the more subscribers => the more revenue => the more content => the more subscribers=>... They just need to start the engine and that's why they almost give it to everyone for 1$ (and once sucessful will do like netflix and increase the price, people will cry about it but that's too late and competition is already too late)

I bought dead rising 1 because I played dead rising 2 on gamepass and wanted to replay the first.
 

CyberDyne

Alt Account
Banned
Sep 6, 2019
31
It's staggering how bad things are for you folks. Even your mobile data infrastructure is bad; I come to New York and Boston a few times a year for work, and it's just perplexing how slow your 4G networks are. I'm in centre of Manchester (the UK one, not NH) right now, and a mobile data speed test shows I'm getting 25mb/s down. I did the same test a few times in New York in September, and I was lucky to get more than 500kb/s. Boston wasn't much better.

We could be entering a strange scenario, where despite creating so much of the world's technology and technology-centric services in-country, US companies are going to be forced to start prioritising European and Asian markets.

Not sure where you are getting that speed or why, but having been in Manhattan for years continuously, I just have not had speeds those issues since LTE was introduced. Something else to consider....

Population of Manchester, just above 500k spread out over 45 square miles. Population of Manhattan, just over 1.6mm (not accounting for the millions of people who commute to work there every day) crammed into 23 square miles. Not difficult to see there are scaling challenges there.
 

Fatoy

Member
Mar 13, 2019
7,229
Not sure where you are getting that speed or why, but having been in Manhattan for years continuously, I just have not had speeds those issues since LTE was introduced. Something else to consider....

Population of Manchester, just above 500k spread out over 45 square miles. Population of Manhattan, just over 1.6mm (not accounting for the millions of people who commute to work there every day) crammed into 23 square miles. Not difficult to see there are scaling challenges there.
My experience is totally anecdotal, so it's good to see it's not necessarily reflective of everyone's. Manchester and Boston have similar populations, though, and 4G speed wasn't exactly blazing there either.
 
Sep 19, 2019
2,282
Hamburg- Germany
Sorry, it did not sound like a normal question, but I am also under the weather. Before reading the OP anew, I was thinking that just because people are playing more genres on a subscription service (which can be head for 1 dollar a month) does not automatically lead to more purchases in said genres. I am also playing more genres now thanks to GP, but I don't go and buy more games in said genres.

All fine and good to know you are enjoying it as well.
 

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,950
Deep discounting of newly released games doesn't devalue games?

Not nearly as much as a subscription service offering hundreds of recent games and new releases for a few bucks.

It's like a smorgasbord where you just install, try, delete, repeat. I feel it's like that with anything where you're inundated with far more then you can possibly consume. You just go through it and toss aside anything that doesn't grab you after a couple minutes.

Once again, this is awesome for us and I'm not complaining at all. But I can admit this is completely devaluing games. Who the heck wants to drop $60 on one game these days when you can have months of hundreds of games?
 
Last edited:

iareharSon

Member
Oct 30, 2017
8,942
I can definitely see a phenomenon where Game Pass improves sales of third party games not on the service, given that one way may feel that they have more disposable income not having to purchase X, Y, and Z games that are on the service.
 

Skade

Member
Oct 28, 2017
8,869
Seems normal. It's the people who want to play a lot of different games that see an interest in game passes. The others probably don't.

I play, at best, two different games by month, because of a lack of time. A gamepass is of no use for me.
 

CrypticSlayer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
647
The fact that they BUY more games is interesting, but I wonder if that will last. MS said GP was increasing their retail sales of first party titles a few months back too, but then we have Gears 5 that was heavily cannibalized by GP. My personal expectation is that subscription services will lead to more reluctance to purchasing games outside of subscriptions in the long run, especially as more of these competing subscriptions come up.

To give a personal example, when I first got Netflix it felt like an embarrassment of riches. It was great! I threw on movies all the time, tried things I never would have tried otherwise, and even purchased / rented more movies than before, just from the excitement of it all. After that novelty wore off, my habits normalized to roughly what they were before, or I probably watched a few more movies than usual still due to ease of access, but I certainly stopped purchasing more movies. Then, as the amount of content grew on the service, I became more selective about what I do watch. And as other services started becoming available, and I started subscribing to Amazon Prime and HBO, I tend to find it harder to justify spending money to purchase movies anymore, unless it's a REALLY special one to me.

I'm just really curious to see how this whole thing develops. I feel like the games industry tends to move faster than the film or TV industry, as consumer habits seem to change faster too. I don't think Game Pass will have a relative monopoly on this kind of service for very long, and I expect current customer habits to change over time. It'll be interesting to see what happens. I think it'll undeniably be successful, I just don't think the current metrics of success will be as valid in the longer term.
With all these streaming services in the TV/movie space plenty of people still go to the theatres to watch movies. I feel like that will apply to games as well. As long as a game doesn't debut on game pass or is on the service after 3 months. I think Publishers and Xbox will have to figure out a balancing act on when to put the game on a subscription and if it's about a year or more there is still incentive to buy a game.

I'm curious about the same question. The question about conditioning your audience to not buy games. I look at gamepass and it offers different experiences primarily to the big AAA games, I'd imagine MS wants a lot of people on gamepass and still buying big AAA games. The group that ends up fighting to get attention would be indies on the service. The service is a great value for consumers, I'm subbed till the end of 2021 thanks to these great deals. The other thing is unpredictability, you're not guaranteed a certain game hits the service or when it will.
 
May 25, 2019
6,028
London
The devaluation of games, that's for sure.

Let me get this part out of the way; Game Pass is fucking awesome. As a consumer it's crazy good.
But I can still sit back and see where things are headed. Game sales are starting to not matter, because a developer can just sell exclusivity to Epic, and then sell it to a Sony/Microsoft/Twitch to throw on their subscription service.
Once subscription models take over videogames, I can't help but wonder what happens next? Are small indie developers offered less money, because they're less desirable then big name games and popular indie titles?
As of now I think this is a big win for consumers, but I do wonder what the future looks like? I believe individual sales are going to take a big hit as subscription models take a bigger hold on the market.

Games are already devalued. Control and Borderlands 3 are $34 this week. They'll be $25-$30 on Black Friday. Numerous stores and platforms give indie games away for free, knowing that nobody will play them but just click through the store checkout process to own them on yet another platform.
 

Fisty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,230
Games are already devalued. Control and Borderlands 3 are $34 this week. They'll be $25-$30 on Black Friday. Numerous stores and platforms give indie games away for free, knowing that nobody will play them but just click through the store checkout process to own them on yet another platform.

Yeah but Control dropping to 50% in two months is nowhere near the ballpark of hundreds of games (some day 1) for $10-15 a month. There is a vast ocean of difference between the value propositions there for devs and consumers.
 

Lobster Roll

signature-less, now and forever
Member
Sep 24, 2019
34,383
Yup, scooped Dead Cells through Game Pass and would have otherwise never tried it out. It's your classic "look decent I guess" when you watch somebody else play but an incredibly fun experience when you've got the controller in your hands. Looking forward to grabbing Outer Worlds as well - another title I've been on the fence about.
 
May 25, 2019
6,028
London
Yeah but Control dropping to 50% in two months is nowhere near the ballpark of hundreds of games (some day 1) for $10-15 a month. There is a vast ocean of difference between the value propositions there for devs and consumers.

What has happened is that developers and publishers are fenced in by the $60 upper bound on pricing of games. Sure, they can entice some percentage to buy into special editions at $70-$100 but that's not the bulk of consumers. Instead, they're looking for guaranteed payouts on individual platforms to give their game more attention and time in the zeitgeist in return for temporary exclusivity.

Game Pass (and to a lesser extent, Epic exclusivity deals) is a symptom, not the root cause of the issue. The real issue here is that developing games in the 4K era costs significantly more than it ever has before, yet the sales price cannot change. Control took an Epic exclusivity deal so they themselves were aware of the potential sales challenges they faced. It will be interesting to eventually see financial projections between selling your game traditionally vs. offering it on Game Pass day and date, where it will stay for at least six months.
 

tiebreaker

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,153
Who doesn't love free games?? It's 40%engagement increase including outside Game Pass, for Game Pass subscribers.

The part of people buying more games outside of Game Pass is interesting though.
 

Fisty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,230
What has happened is that developers and publishers are fenced in by the $60 upper bound on pricing of games. Sure, they can entice some percentage to buy into special editions at $70-$100 but that's not the bulk of consumers. Instead, they're looking for guaranteed payouts on individual platforms to give their game more attention and time in the zeitgeist in return for temporary exclusivity.

Game Pass (and to a lesser extent, Epic exclusivity deals) is a symptom, not the root cause of the issue. The real issue here is that developing games in the 4K era costs significantly more than it ever has before, yet the sales price cannot change. Control took an Epic exclusivity deal so they themselves were aware of the potential sales challenges they faced. It will be interesting to eventually see financial projections between selling your game traditionally vs. offering it on Game Pass day and date, where it will stay for at least six months.

Control took Epic exclusivity because they projected the game wouldnt light up the charts, same reason some of the leadership at Remedy sold some of their stock right before launch, and they were correct.

No one is throwing games on subscription services because games are expensive to make and they cant charge enough in the traditional model. They are doing it because it offers word of mouth and "advertising" (and a flat payout from the platform holder) at the expense of that early revenue from what would likely be your biggest spenders. Do you see Capcom putting MH World and DMC5 on PSNow? Absolutely not, because people are still throwing cash at those games on PS4 and Sony isnt willing to pay out a huge amount required to offset the lost profits.
 

Vinc

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,387
With all these streaming services in the TV/movie space plenty of people still go to the theatres to watch movies. I feel like that will apply to games as well. As long as a game doesn't debut on game pass or is on the service after 3 months. I think Publishers and Xbox will have to figure out a balancing act on when to put the game on a subscription and if it's about a year or more there is still incentive to buy a game.

I'm curious about the same question. The question about conditioning your audience to not buy games. I look at gamepass and it offers different experiences primarily to the big AAA games, I'd imagine MS wants a lot of people on gamepass and still buying big AAA games. The group that ends up fighting to get attention would be indies on the service. The service is a great value for consumers, I'm subbed till the end of 2021 thanks to these great deals. The other thing is unpredictability, you're not guaranteed a certain game hits the service or when it will.

While I totally see the point you're trying to make, it's really worth noting that a movie ticket tends to cost about as much as a month of Netflix, whereas a full priced game is about five to six times as much as a Game Pass subscription. And the movie ticket generally gives you a very different experience to the home one, whereas games would be the very same regardless of the way you choose to consume it.

And even the movie theater example is a bit flawed, because what we're seeing is that there is a clear trend towards fewer and fewer movies making it into theaters. The ones that do are those big bombastic movies that really benefit from being seen as a group on a larger screen, while movies that a lot of people don't think are really benefiting from the theater experience are now being sent straight to streaming platforms.

I have a lot of questions and reservations about what this transition to the subscription model will do to gaming. And I'm not sure these statements Microsoft is making about how the model is not disruptive to the traditional model are accurate at all, as evidenced by Gears 5's performance, and the transition the film and TV industry is going through... It's interesting to hear them talk about how Game Pass only improves the situation for retail games, but it's in their best interest to say that right now, and we have other evidence that points to a completely different prospective reality.
 

statham

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,449
FloRida

15285.jpg
 

Akita One

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,628
The discourse about Game Pass is a great litmus test to see who understands where gaming is going and who is still mired in the past, stuck on arguing about unit sales and NPD numbers.
For every person like you, there are likely dozens who do not. Services like Netflix and Gamepass make a killing from people who either sign up for a month and forget to unsubscribe or people who keep the subscription because these services are at a price point that is easy to forget. Heck, I originally signed up for Netflix for Stranger Things and three years later I still have the service despite only watching a handful of content, most of it Netflix Original content.


Another actual example of this happening


All great posts...and people who are still like "but we still don't know if it's sustainable" are being almost willfully ignorant.

It's been explained here before. Literally 100% of the devs and publishers asked for comment on GamePass have said all good things. Microsoft has said it's doing great. EVERYONE ELSE IS LYING based on some Resetera anecdotal edgelord crap that doesn't understand why every entertainment vendor out there is moving to some version of a subscription model?

Please find one person with any gaming business qualifications, or that works in the industry in any way, that is saying GamePass is bad or isn't sustainable. You think Disney starting Disney+ is going to really hurt their bottom line because people will buy less Blu-rays? It makes zero sense! All because Microsoft is...**GASP**...offering free trials and discounted rate for new subscribers? Yeah, no other service out there is doing those things...oh wait...100% of them are.

Getting $1-$10 dollars at least once from 100 people, who are also being exposed to your ecosystem and possibly advertising the games in it, is better than getting 20 people to pay $60 ONCE, with very little engagement or word of mouth after the initial launch weeks of a product. It's about how much money can we get from everyone over a given amount of time. Are people really asking about MAUs and such? That's so outdated.
 
Last edited:

CrypticSlayer

Member
Oct 27, 2017
647
While I totally see the point you're trying to make, it's really worth noting that a movie ticket tends to cost about as much as a month of Netflix, whereas a full priced game is about five to six times as much as a Game Pass subscription. And the movie ticket generally gives you a very different experience to the home one, whereas games would be the very same regardless of the way you choose to consume it.

And even the movie theater example is a bit flawed, because what we're seeing is that there is a clear trend towards fewer and fewer movies making it into theaters. The ones that do are those big bombastic movies that really benefit from being seen as a group on a larger screen, while movies that a lot of people don't think are really benefiting from the theater experience are now being sent straight to streaming platforms.

I have a lot of questions and reservations about what this transition to the subscription model will do to gaming. And I'm not sure these statements Microsoft is making about how the model is not disruptive to the traditional model are accurate at all, as evidenced by Gears 5's performance, and the transition the film and TV industry is going through... It's interesting to hear them talk about how Game Pass only improves the situation for retail games, but it's in their best interest to say that right now, and we have other evidence that points to a completely different prospective reality.
Good points. I would also say AAA gaming has become more consolidated as well. Most companies chase the big bucks and the under performers are getting cut. I actually do agree with you my concern is finding a way to preserve the value of the bigger games which is why a suggestion is to wait a certain amount of time to put it on the service. Over the course of that time games get price drops. Here's a personal example I love the Metro series but game prices are expensive in Canada. I decide to wait on the price drop once it does, it went into game pass.

If it was 6 months after release or more I would've bought and played it. If the business for MS is game pass how would their partners feel about cannibalization. They have to consider their concerns since so much revenue comes from them, It's better for gaming to have all sorts of content. I was just thinking about if it's possible to preserve the value of those games. The games that have it worse are indies having to compete for attention, making it harder to sell without the use of a sub service.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2017
2,206
I would play way more genres and games if I had game pass too. The only reason why my play habits have changed is because I can't be buying 5 games a month. I buy the few a year that stand out to me beyond the others and the risk of trying new things your unsure about is to costly as is without a service like this.

Such a weird correlation that subscribers go out to the store and buy more games. Would like to understand the motivation behind this. The only thing I can think of is that the person tried a new type of game on game pass and then went to buy something similar that isn't on game pass.
 
Oct 30, 2017
2,206
Good points. I would also say AAA gaming has become more consolidated as well. Most companies chase the big bucks and the under performers are getting cut. I actually do agree with you. My concern is finding a way to preserve the value of the bigger games which is why a suggestion is to wait a certain amount of time to put it on the service. Over the course of that time games get price drops. Here's a personal example I love the Metro series but game prices are expensive in Canada. I decide to wait on the price drop once it does, it went into game pass.

If it was 6 months after release or more I would've bought and played it. If the business for MS is game pass how would their partners feel about cannibalization. They have to consider their concerns since so much revenue comes from them, It's better for gaming to have all sorts of content. I was just thinking about if it's possible to preserve the value of those games. The games that have it worse are indies having to compete for attention making it harder to sell without the use of a sub service.

I think it will work itself out in the next few years. Whatever is viable isn't going to stick around. I know Microsoft's focus is keeping players engaged, however I'm not entirely sure how that translates into profit for them at the moment. They've been practically giving away their services for some time now.

You will only ever see first party games day 1 on their service, while everyone else still sells traditionally because your right, Its probably less money for third parties costly produced games unless Microsoft drops a big bag of cash in front of them. Which would bring up the question, how much money does Micrsoft want to keep draining on producing things and buying exclusive releases for their day 1 service if they start doing that.

I guess we will see what Sony does in the next few years.

With that being said if this is profitable than it will become the new standard for releasing games.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 7148

Oct 25, 2017
6,827
My almost 5 year old son has taken an interest in video games lately and Game Pass has been a godsend for this. I can pull up the Family Friendly category and just let him pick something new to play from there and I don't have to risk buying games that he doesn't like or finds too difficult to play.

We've been playing Lego City Undercover together and we're on the second-to-last chapter and close to beating it. It'll be the first game he has beaten.

So yeah, BIG fan of Game Pass here.
 

Kyougar

Cute Animal Whisperer
Member
Nov 3, 2017
9,360
Which developers? I've only read of praise and satisfaction about Game Pass from developers, so far. The only concern I've found was here, by some Era posters.

You mean the 0.00000001% of developers who got a golden ticket. The rest are scraping along. No shit, developers on Gamepass are calling it a success. They are getting paid a premium to buff up Gamepass and incentivize customers to try it out.
This ticket will not be so generous in the future, it is unsustainable for Microsoft to pay developers a premium and let customers subscribe for a dollar. Some of us have the future of the industry in mind and don't get overly excited by short term success.



So, yourself?
 

TheGhost

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,137
Long Island
I've been playing a gamepass I would never have purchased because it's not in my wheel house.

I think it's called Abszu, or Absolve or something

Basically you're this blue alien scuba diving creature? And you swim underwater in some real beautiful scenery. I'm not sure if it's even a game or just a relaxation app. But it's great.
 

Proven

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
5,841
You mean the 0.00000001% of developers who got a golden ticket. The rest are scraping along. No shit, developers on Gamepass are calling it a success. They are getting paid a premium to buff up Gamepass and incentivize customers to try it out.
This ticket will not be so generous in the future, it is unsustainable for Microsoft to pay developers a premium and let customers subscribe for a dollar. Some of us have the future of the industry in mind and don't get overly excited by short term success.




So, yourself?

So you're saying that the developers who are saying gamepass is helping them sell their games are actually being paid off and therefore lying about this, and instead promoting the virtues of game pass when in reality they aren't there?