Firstly PlayStation now exists and already does everything xcloud and game pass do.
"Everything" is factually false.
- PSNow does not offer day one first party titles (i.e., we know Starfield, Halo, Forza Horizon, Hellblade 2, Avowed, Elder Scrolls 6, Doom Next etc. are all day one on Game Pass)
- PSNow doesn't have anywhere even
near as much new/recent releases on the service, nor does it have other subs tied into it (i.e., Crysis Remastered, which is now on Game Pass, or Battlefield 2042/Madden 2022/Fifa 2022 which will eventually come when it goes onto EA Play)
- PSNow doesn't get day one third party titles (i.e., Hades, Back 4 Blood, Dragon Quest XI S, Stalker 2 Football Manager 2022, Outriders, to say a few. This is especially true with dozens upon dozens of indie titles on a regular basis).
- PSNow doesn't offer monthly perks that rotate in and out (free Disney+, 6 months Spotify Premium/Discord Nitro, in game downloadable items/cosmetics aka Apex Legends, Warframe, PSO2, etc.) You can also buy any game or it's DLC on Game Pass for 10-20% off (so I never understood people complaining that they like to "own" their games as some sort of detriment to a subscription).
Cost of game production going up, while streaming revenue models remaining low value.
eg Spotify - artists barely make pennies per 100 streams they make their money off touring and live gigs.
Movies and music take less money to make than games. But it can work out for very popular bands because streaming is only one revenue source. They can also lean into licencing their songs for us in movies, adverts etc.
Big single player games cost £150m+ to develop streaming will not recover that.
For a streaming platform to work you need 1 big game releasing every 2 weeks to keep people subscribed.
New movies and shows can be produced in 6 months, game dev takes 3 to 5 years
Only way it could work is if the subscription fee was like £40 a month and that money is then redistributed among devs. But do they just pay the devs a certain amount upfrong? Or per hours played? Contracts can get messy.
So much of this is straight up armchair analysis and fearmongering that I don't even know where to begin. Comparing video games and Game Pass to music licensing and Spotify is as disingenious as it gets.
Thirdly - there will be a decline in quality if first party went day and date streaming.
Think of the quality of Netflix exclusive movies in the early days.
You could clearly tell the difference between blockbusters that had been made for cinema and then went to streaming platforms after the cinema run and the "Netflix exclusives". They were a joke.
And this is straight up FUD and pure fearmongering. There
hasn't been a decline in quality thus far since games starting launching day one on Game Pass; if anything, as the years go by, the contrary. Are you seriously comparing this to movies that go straight to streaming/dvd/bluray?
I guarantee game pass is running at a loss, and the first party budgets and types of games they sell have been designed for streaming service such as GAAS model games.
The majority of games currently in dev over at Xbox are not GaaS, and Phil Spencer literally talked about GaaS not being needed for Game Pass and how it's not what they're aiming for. Additionally, the overwhelmingly vast majority of games currently on Game Pass are
not GaaS model games.
I can't tell if you're speaking from ignorance at this point or straight up dishing out FUD to paint some sort of narrative.
The only single player games I can think of at Microsoft are games already in development at recently (last 2 years) purchased studios. What happens 5 or 10 years down the line? If Ms shareholders decide the streaming platform can no longer be subsidised and must stand on its own, but doesn't have the subscriber base to sustain multiple high budget single player games releasing several times a year?
Ah, the good ol' "but what about 5 years from now?" and "is it sustainable?" balled into one. The actual CEO of Microsoft, for the first time ever, talked about how commited they are to Xbox and Game Pass and how they will be investing into more acquisitions for Game Pass. The increase in active subscribers are continuing to skyrocket each month. Yet you think in 5+ years, shareholders will decide it might not be sustainable enough? I don't even think what you're saying would make sense in the Ballmer era, given the positivity and growth of the service, and what we have now is an absolute farcry from that period.
Except if you can stream a 100 brand new games, and it is functionally the same experience, why would any one buy new games, if the subscription is cheaper than buying 2 games a year?
That can be lost sales right there. Lost sales can equal lost revenue for devs, which equals lower budgets in the future. Or the same budget spread across several smaller games to mitigate risk.
Sony can fund first parties, but then what about third parties? Do they get paid upfront? Is Sony going to pay 20 devs a week to get their game on streaming upfront? And then nobody plays it? Or is like Spotify where devs get pennies per play etc? That's a huge risk for both sides. That needs mitigated by putting ones eggs in multiple baskets.
And now we're at the "poor devs, losing revenue from lost sales."
Sigh
Multiple developers have went on record talking about how they
gain sales from Game Pass (due to exposure, etc.), and how their games launching on the service are very successful. And yes, they are paid upfront, which mitigates the "risk" for them. As far as first parties, all we have heard practically nonstop from their studios is how creative they're allowed to be thanks to their games coming to Game Pass and not having to worry about following industry trends to be a mega seller. Game Pass literally removes all "risk" for them right there.
Do you know that there is a waiting line for developers to get their games on Game Pass, and devs have openly talked about hoping their game makes the cut? Those poor devs, they must not know what they're getting themselves into! /s
The amount of money Game Pass is looking to be making on an annual basis is going to be insane (if their growth continues to be the same and doesn't plateau, but there's nothing indicating it will considering we havent even seen the big guns yet and they start dropping holiday this year). What do I care if they're going to be paying devs upfront for more games to feed the beast and continue to grow the service? In the end devs win, they win and ultimately, I win.
So not Scaremongering. no, its valid analysis. Your idea is based on hope and and based on xbox. Their portfolio of games is different. And xbox can operate on a loss for decades if they want. Growth and profit is not the same thing.
Things can change in the future and ps now is already there, ready for the transition Once every market has the broadband infrastructure to make it viable worldwide.
And they could choose to only put multiplayer games out at the same time on PS Now any time.
None of what you argue is valid analysis except talking about countries with bad internet infrastructure, but even then you fail to coalesce your entire point. I'm not sure you're the one to tell him that
his idea is based on hope.
