Support NeoGAF

[Whitecrow]

Who cares honestly. GamePass gives to MS the ilussion of people wanting to play whatever they put out.
In equal conditions, if MS cared about selling consoles and game, they woudlnt be able to catch up to Sony, not even close.

Having people playing their games by almost gifting them makes them happy.

 

[Hezekiah]

you should explain that to Netflix Disney ...Amazon Spotify etc etc etc
the problem is that ppl like you don't accept nor see nor feel nothing that happens around them ... another example is streaming games or just digital releases only ...the average man has trouble accepting any kind of change

I'm taking about gaming. Meanwhile you're in your feelings allowing logic to escape you.

 

[FranXico]

If Microsoft and Sony truly want a part of that revenue all they have to do is make mobile games. There's no need for the service at all.

 

[Hezekiah]

Ooh, I remember Wipeout on the PSP it was so addictive. Perfect choice for a mobile game.

 

[yazenov]

Pumping out AAA games every quarter and giving them away for a few dollars a month isn't sustainable unless you have an enormous subscriber base. This isn't difficult to understand.

You either jack up the price of the service (maybe by having 'tiers' for premium customers), or reduce the number of AAA games and focus on AA games for it.

The problem is that people like you have your head buried the sand and expect to spend the rest of your gaming life living off handouts....

I fear that regular games we are used to now will not be sustainable for such subscription services. Single player games with no MTX will be hard to come by.

The only way I think they will offset the cost of a subscription services is the GAAS model, think DLC and Microtransations ect..

The future doesnt look to bright if all companies adobt this model as MS.

 

[yurinka]

I fear that regular games we are used to now will not be sustainable for such subscription services. Single player games with no MTX will be hard to come by.

The only way I think they will offset the cost of a subscription services is the GAAS model, think DLC and Microtransations ect..

The future doesnt look to bright if all companies adobt this model as MS.

Gamepass has around 20M (PS Plus around 50M, PS Now around 3M) users, only a portion of them will play a specific game and only a portion of the ones who play it will pay for MTX.

Outside a few paid games like FIFA and F2P games, AAA games need way more revenue than that, their main revenue source will continue being for the time being the game sales. We'll see more games going GaaS like Halo or Forza Motorsport but there will be also traditional games, at least during the first years.

Who cares honestly. GamePass gives to MS the ilussion of people wanting to play whatever they put out.
In equal conditions, if MS cared about selling consoles and game, they woudlnt be able to catch up to Sony, not even close.

Having people playing their games by almost gifting them makes them happy.

People who wants to keep getting games from them in the long term should care. During a few years it will be ok for them to don't be profitable because it's a long term investment so it needs patience, but after that the stakeholders may want to stop throwing Billions to it and may want to shut it down or sell it.

 

[Hezekiah]

I fear that regular games we are used to now will not be sustainable for such subscription services. Single player games with no MTX will be hard to come by.

The only way I think they will offset the cost of a subscription services is the GAAS model, think DLC and Microtransations ect..

The future doesnt look to bright if all companies adobt this model as MS.

I think for games like Wasteland, Psychonauts, The Asecnt etc it's well suited, and I would subscribe for a month to play them.

For AAA games I agree microtransactions and DLC become more important. GaaS are really hard to get right so I dont see that working except for Forza, and maybe Halo - although there is a ton of FPS competition released annually.

Ultimately I imagine we'll see tiers, and to play the big budget games, within a few years you'll need to pay significantly more than you do now.

 

[ReBurn]

Pumping out AAA games every quarter and giving them away for a few dollars a month isn't sustainable unless you have an enormous subscriber base. This isn't difficult to understand.

You either jack up the price of the service (maybe by having 'tiers' for premium customers), or reduce the number of AAA games and focus on AA games for it.

The problem is that people like you have your head buried the sand and expect to spend the rest of your gaming life living off handouts....

You're right that scale is the key to success for a subscription service. Microsoft needs a model where they can recoup the cost of developing and releasing that AAA title every quarter you were talking about as well as pay third parties for their content. If they get to a point where all of their 23 million subscribers are all actually paying them between $10 and $16 per month for Game Pass you have a quarterly revenue stream somewhere between $690m and $1.1b. If the internet is telling me the truth and the average AAA budget is between $60m and $80m that seems like enough money to make releasing a first party AAA game every quarter possible, even if they aren't making a profit. Not every AAA game is a $150m 60 hour interactive movie after all.

We know they aren't making full rake off of everyone who is subscribed just yet but with a steady stream of content from all of the heavy hitters they've acquired they could grow the numbers to a sustainable level. It also depends on how they're paying third parties. Have any details released on how deals are structured with them?

 

[Jemm]

The only way I think they will offset the cost of a subscription services is the GAAS model, think DLC and Microtransations ect..

GaaS games aren't really good candidates for Game Pass, really.

If the gamer focuses on a GaaS game and rarely plays other games, then there is no point of him/her subscribing to the Game Pass for that. It's cheaper to just buy the game and play it all/most of the time. Even Halo Infinite MP will be free, since Microsoft doesn't see Game Pass benefitting from it.

Episodic games like Life is Strange etc are a bit better for it, but if there are months between episodes, one game alone isn't going to keep anyone subscribed.

The only way to keep constant subscribers is to keep adding more games to keep people subscribed, which is why they are investing in studios and games.

 

[reksveks]

GaaS games aren't really good candidates for Game Pass, really.

Think you might be talking slightly passed each other.

1) a constant series of gaas isn't helpful to bring in new users, you do need the variety and constant drops that you mention
2) other gaas games within the service or even outside the service but on the platform however might be what makes it a viable business strategy.

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

So a 600% increase?

? They have supposedly 20 million subscribers now....

 

[zaanan]

you should explain that to Netflix Disney ...Amazon Spotify etc etc etc
the problem is that ppl like you don't accept nor see nor feel nothing that happens around them ... another example is streaming games or just digital releases only ...the average man has trouble accepting any kind of change

You just proved his point.

Netflix? still negative cash flow, no net profit.
Disney? day 1 streaming loses money, see Black Widow.
Amazon makes money via their “other business.”
Spotify doesn’t make original content.

 

[ReBurn]

You just proved his point.

Netflix? still negative cash flow, no net profit.
Disney? day 1 streaming loses money, see Black Widow.
Amazon makes money via their “other business.”
Spotify doesn’t make original content.

Spotify does make original content. They have an entire line of original podcasts they fund.

 

[reksveks]

Spotify does make original content. They have an entire line of original podcasts they fund.

More importantly Spotify are trying to monetize the relationship between podcast creators and listeners and taking their cut as the middleman. A bit like what they are doing for minecraft and msfs.

 

[MonarchJT]

You just proved his point.

Netflix? still negative cash flow, no net profit.
Disney? day 1 streaming loses money, see Black Widow.
Amazon makes money via their “other business.”
Spotify doesn’t make original content.

in fact we are all scared that Netflix gonna close don't we ? lol

 

[jigglet]

Every time I see this name I think of Chad Warden.

 

[Hezekiah]

You're right that scale is the key to success for a subscription service. Microsoft needs a model where they can recoup the cost of developing and releasing that AAA title every quarter you were talking about as well as pay third parties for their content. If they get to a point where all of their 23 million subscribers are all actually paying them between $10 and $16 per month for Game Pass you have a quarterly revenue stream somewhere between $690m and $1.1b. If the internet is telling me the truth and the average AAA budget is between $60m and $80m that seems like enough money to make releasing a first party AAA game every quarter possible, even if they aren't making a profit. Not every AAA game is a $150m 60 hour interactive movie after all.

We know they aren't making full rake off of everyone who is subscribed just yet but with a steady stream of content from all of the heavy hitters they've acquired they could grow the numbers to a sustainable level. It also depends on how they're paying third parties. Have any details released on how deals are structured with them?

Shawn Layden said the average budget of a AAA game was $80m to $150m and said it wasn't sustainable as is.

Some of these big XGS games will be a lot more than too - Halo, Fable, Starfield, Perfect Dark will all surely be north of that. In fact Layden predicted that PS5 AAA games will cost on average $200m.

Then you have to consider the marketing budget - apparently that is usually 75% - 100% of the amount spent of development.

That means a massive increase in the subscriber base is needed to end losses with the current pricing structure - the last official figure is 18m.

 

[Allandor]

Shawn Layden said the average budget of a AAA game was $80m to $150m and said it wasn't sustainable as is.

Some of these big XGS games will be a lot more than too - Halo, Fable, Starfield, Perfect Dark will all surely be north of that. In fact Layden predicted that PS5 AAA games will cost on average $200m.

Then you have to consider the marketing budget - apparently that is usually 75% - 100% of the amount spent of development.

That means a massive increase in the subscriber base is needed to end losses with the current pricing structure - the last official figure is 18m.

Do you realize that those games are not only on gamepass? They still get sold a lot. Also since ps360 gen there are also DLCs etc. that are sold separately. Gamepass owners might also want to play those if they like the game. There is much potential there.

That gamepass is currently not profitable should be clear. Those things grow for years until they get profitable. Something like this can only be done by big companies which enough money to finance the first few month/years.

 

[zaanan]

Spotify does make original content. They have an entire line of original podcasts they fund.

Thanks, that changes everything! That line should instead read “Spotify still negative cash flow, no net profit.” Much better, right?

 

[zaanan]

in fact we are all scared that Netflix gonna close don't we ? lol

I think the fact that we *aren’t* all scared that an unprofitable business will shut down *should* disturb you. All these services are bleeding money, so where are the necessary cash injections coming from?

 

[MonarchJT]

I think the fact that we *aren’t* all scared that an unprofitable business will shut down *should* disturb you. All these services are bleeding money, so where are the necessary cash injections coming from?

Maybe maybe if in 24years of Netflix bleeding money they have still 12+k employers (growing) and 200+k thousands users (growing) and still banks and investors trust in them .....we live in a world of bankers idiots and incompetent investors or probably the people. who here pray for the failure of gamepass (but honestly we know what faction of fanboys perpetuate this narrative) as a model have not understood anything of what is happening in the world of media? tell me I'm all ears.

To be clear I don't know how it will end in Microsoft and gamepass .. but on one thing I'm sure Gamepass is without a doubt the most revolutionary service and in favor of gamers of the last 20 or 30 years ... there is very little reason for users to go against this service other than to be partisans or to hate good deals

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

GaaS games aren't really good candidates for Game Pass, really.

If the gamer focuses on a GaaS game and rarely plays other games, then there is no point of him/her subscribing to the Game Pass for that.

This guy gets it.

The part no one seems to be discussing is that the majority of the most popular GAAS games look like they're from 2007.

The industry is finally funneling resources into the next big GAAS games, which means Netflix (and GamePass) need to be concerned about the next Fortnite.

GamePass fails IF/WHEN gamers consolidate around a small handful of titles. A trend that seemingly has been happening under the noses of everyone.

 

[A.Romero]

If something is profitable right now does not necessarily mean it is a failure. Amazon was founded in 1995 and saw it's first profitable year in 2004. We know how that story is going.

Come on guys, it's an strategy to disrupt an industry that has reached critical mass. It could work. It does absolutely no harm to gamers because the service may close and still games will be produced.

I really don't get why the hate. You can be skeptical about the viability long term but there is no angle where Microsoft investing and potentially losing money is a loss to the industry. Even if they fold and close up the entire Xbox division becoming the biggest failure in Microsoft's history, there will still be other companies making games.

It's like hating on Netflix because they are losing money. I mean, most of us don't have any stakes there so who cares?

 

[MonarchJT]

If something is profitable right now does not necessarily mean it is a failure. Amazon was founded in 1995 and saw it's first profitable year in 2004. We know how that story is going.

Come on guys, it's an strategy to disrupt an industry that has reached critical mass. It could work. It does absolutely no harm to gamers because the service may close and still games will be produced.

I really don't get why the hate. You can be skeptical about the viability long term but there is no angle where Microsoft investing and potentially losing money is a loss to the industry. Even if they fold and close up the entire Xbox division becoming the biggest failure in Microsoft's history, there will still be other companies making games.

It's like hating on Netflix because they are losing money. I mean, most of us don't have any stakes there so who cares?

1000 times this ..bravo

 

[Vognerful]

? They have supposedly 20 million subscribers now....

You should compare to beginning of generation (your point was end of generation)

 

[DarkMage619]

If something is profitable right now does not necessarily mean it is a failure. Amazon was founded in 1995 and saw it's first profitable year in 2004. We know how that story is going.

Come on guys, it's an strategy to disrupt an industry that has reached critical mass. It could work. It does absolutely no harm to gamers because the service may close and still games will be produced.

I really don't get why the hate. You can be skeptical about the viability long term but there is no angle where Microsoft investing and potentially losing money is a loss to the industry. Even if they fold and close up the entire Xbox division becoming the biggest failure in Microsoft's history, there will still be other companies making games.

It's like hating on Netflix because they are losing money. I mean, most of us don't have any stakes there so who cares?

It is quite telling the most of the negative commentary about Game pass isn't that most of the games on the service are bad or that it's a bad value for the customer; things I'd imagine gamers would care about. It's about how much money MS is making. So strange so many non MS customers are concerned about how much money MS is making. Those same people have been predicating the failure and collapse of the Xbox brand since 2001. Twenty years later people are still predicting its demise. Game pass still remains an optional service and every game on the service is available outside of the service. It remains a fantastic value for gamers and as a gamer I care about that the most. If Game pass ends I'm pretty sure MS will still make games and if they are good I'll still buy them.

 

[A.Romero]

It is quite telling the most of the negative commentary about Game pass isn't that most of the games on the service are bad or that it's a bad value for the customer; things I'd imagine gamers would care about. It's about how much money MS is making. So strange so many non MS customers are concerned about how much money MS is making. Those same people have been predicating the failure and collapse of the Xbox brand since 2001. Twenty years later people are still predicting its demise. Game pass still remains an optional service and every game on the service is available outside of the service. It remains a fantastic value for gamers and as a gamer I care about that the most. If Game pass ends I'm pretty sure MS will still make games and if they are good I'll still buy them.

Yeah, I don't get it either.

Even if it fails and Microsoft bails out, it's not like gaming will end with them. I mean, we have seen movements in the industry like never before. Huge firms are investing crazy amounts of money. The industry will perdure.

Maybe it will continue changing and maybe it doesn't fit what we, old folks, want it to be but gaming will still exist. I'd argue that without services like GP retrogaming will be near impossible in the future.

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

You should compare to beginning of generation (your point was end of generation)

You don't make any sense. Learn some math.

 

[Hezekiah]

Do you realize that those games are not only on gamepass? They still get sold a lot. Also since ps360 gen there are also DLCs etc. that are sold separately. Gamepass owners might also want to play those if they like the game. There is much potential there.

That gamepass is currently not profitable should be clear. Those things grow for years until they get profitable. Something like this can only be done by big companies which enough money to finance the first few month/years.

I think the point is sales will be significantly down to the presence of GamePass.

And the point about microtransactions and DLC was literally mentioned by myself and others earlier in the day....

 

[Vognerful]

You don't make any sense. Learn some math.

971415185

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Is it EVER going to be profitable!

 

[phil_t98]

But that's not the point. Also music is still available to buy. Once something is available for a subscription fee, it rarely sells well. Will you buy music record or movies if you have a subscription where you can watch it free? All you have to do is to sign up for a month and then watch it and unsubscribe.

that’s the funny thing is virtually all music is available day one via streaming services, not all games and films are available day on on gamepass. I am 100% buying the ultimate edition of forza horizon 5 and will buy halo infinite when they come out

 

[SenjutsuSage]

you should explain that to Netflix Disney ...Amazon Spotify etc etc etc
the problem is that ppl like you don't accept nor see nor feel nothing that happens around them ... another example is streaming games or just digital releases only ...the average man has trouble accepting any kind of change

I remember a time when everybody was all up in arms about having physical discs and not wanting to go the digital route. Look at where we are today. Most people on this very forum are likely buying their games digital. Many here have likely taken advantage of PS+ benefits or at a time tried PS Now.

Also, take this right here for example. Amazon has mostly kept tight lipped about hard data on their streaming service, and even though they finally provided some numbers, we don't entirely know what all those numbers mean. It could literally have been someone who as they say, accidentally watched one minute. He says in the past year, and doesn't tell how many hours "up 70%" compared to 2019 actually means. But the main point is Amazon sees real value, even if it's way less popular than Netflix, in still keeping this thing around, and almost certainly aren't going to be abandoning it anytime soon if ever. Microsoft is even more committed to Xbox Game Pass. Prime has perks like free shipping and other perks, so does Game Pass. Free shipping for Game Pass means discounted prices when buying games. Being an ultimate subscriber means getting EA Access free at no additional charge.

Amazon’s streaming audience is almost as big as Netflix’s

For the first time, Amazon provided some hard data on how many of its Prime subscribers are watching TV shows and movies on the platform.

qz.com

For the first time, Amazon provided some hard data on how many of its Prime subscribers are watching TV shows and movies on the platform. In an earnings release yesterday, CEO Jeff Bezos said 175 million of Prime’s roughly 200 million members “have streamed shows and movies in the past year.” He added that total hours streamed on the service in 2020 were up 70% compared to 2019, but didn’t say exactly how many hours that was.

The eye-popping figure comes with a number of caveats. First, it’s unclear how much content each subscriber is watching. They could be obsessive, daily consumers—or they could have accidentally watched just one minute of one movie several months ago, and Amazon counted that as a viewer. Second, we don’t know what percentage of those 175 million viewers subscribed to Prime specifically to watch series and movies, and what percentage signed up to get free shipping or enjoy the myriad other benefits of a Prime membership.

For Microsoft, Xbox and PC and mobile with cloud gaming are their vectors for allowing people to get in on what game pass offers. It's all about Game Pass for Microsoft.

There's a reason at the end of the 15 million+ viewed Starfield teaser it ends with "Play it Day One With Xbox Game Pass" They didn't say Play it day one with Xbox Series X or S or play it day one with Windows 10 or 11 Gaming PCs. They are saying play it day one with Xbox Game Pass.

Translation: Microsoft prefers you get Game Pass to play Starfield even over buying it the old fashioned way. A release that big and they're telling you "play it with Xbox Game Pass."


Of the 15 million who clearly took interest in this teaser, how many of them are likely to already be Game Pass subscribers? I know I am. I know specific major Xbox gamers in the community I'm aware of are, but not all 15 million who watched this are game pass subscribers. If from now till this game's release 2-5 million of the people who viewed this are willing to get Game Pass to play it, that's a huge win in Microsoft's book. Microsoft doesn't have a problem with people not buying Starfield if they are playing it with Game Pass because this is their strategy, to grow the popularity of Game Pass.


500,000 people buying starfield at $60 = $30 million.
250,000 people paying $10 per month for the year on game pass = that same $30 million.
250,000 people paying $15 per month for the year on game pass ultimate = $45 million.

Last we heard there were 23 million Game Pass Subscribers.

Assuming they all only pay $10 (they don't, many have ultimate) that's $2.76 billion per year from game pass subscribers.
Assuming just 11 million of that 23 million are paying for ultimate that's $3.4 billion per year from game pass subscribers.

It starts to become very, very clear how successful Game Pass already is.

Just last year, in the middle of the pandemic, game pass grew 50% in less than 6 months when it went from 10 million subscribers in April to 15 million come September.

If Microsoft pumps out great games like what's been announced with regularity over the next 8-10 years Game Pass could hit what I personally feel to be the magic number where it will be unstoppable. That magic number for me is 40-45 million subscribers. That's the number that I think Game Pass needs to hit or come close.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Is it EVER going to be profitable!

40-45 million subscribers to me is the number where it will be. Even getting close to that 40 million figure will be a big fucking deal for Game Pass.

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

I remember a time when everybody was all up in arms about having physical discs and not wanting to go the digital route. Look at where we are today. Most people on this very forum are likely buying their games digital. Many here have likely taken advantage of PS+ benefits or at a time tried PS Now.

Also, take this right here for example. Amazon has mostly kept tight lipped about hard data on their streaming service, and even though they finally provided some numbers, we don't entirely know what all those numbers mean. It could literally have been someone who as they say, accidentally watched one minute. He says in the past year, and doesn't tell how many hours "up 70%" compared to 2019 actually means. But the main point is Amazon sees real value, even if it's way less popular than Netflix, in still keeping this thing around, and almost certainly aren't going to be abandoning it anytime soon if ever. Microsoft is even more committed to Xbox Game Pass. Prime has perks like free shipping and other perks, so does Game Pass. Free shipping for Game Pass means discounted prices when buying games. Being an ultimate subscriber means getting EA Access free at no additional charge.

Amazon’s streaming audience is almost as big as Netflix’s

For the first time, Amazon provided some hard data on how many of its Prime subscribers are watching TV shows and movies on the platform.

qz.com

For Microsoft, Xbox and PC and mobile with cloud gaming are their vectors for allowing people to get in on what game pass offers. It's all about Game Pass for Microsoft.

There's a reason at the end of the 15 million+ viewed Starfield teaser it ends with "Play it Day One With Xbox Game Pass" They didn't say Play it day one with Xbox Series X or S or play it day one with Windows 10 or 11 Gaming PCs. They are saying play it day one with Xbox Game Pass.

Translation: Microsoft prefers you get Game Pass to play Starfield even over buying it the old fashioned way. A release that big and they're telling you "play it with Xbox Game Pass."


Of the 15 million who clearly took interest in this teaser, how many of them are likely to already be Game Pass subscribers? I know I am. I know specific major Xbox gamers in the community I'm aware of are, but not all 15 million who watched this are game pass subscribers. If from now till this game's release 2-5 million of the people who viewed this are willing to get Game Pass to play it, that's a huge win in Microsoft's book. Microsoft doesn't have a problem with people not buying Starfield if they are playing it with Game Pass because this is their strategy, to grow the popularity of Game Pass.


500,000 people buying starfield at $60 = $30 million.
250,000 people paying $10 per month for the year on game pass = that same $30 million.
250,000 people paying $15 per month for the year on game pass ultimate = $45 million.

Last we heard there were 23 million Game Pass Subscribers.

Assuming they all only pay $10 (they don't, many have ultimate) that's $2.76 billion per year from game pass subscribers.
Assuming just 11 million of that 23 million are paying for ultimate that's $3.4 billion per year from game pass subscribers.

It starts to become very, very clear how successful Game Pass already is.

Just last year, in the middle of the pandemic, game pass grew 50% in less than 6 months when it went from 10 million subscribers in April to 15 million come September.

If Microsoft pumps out great games like what's been announced with regularity over the next 8-10 years Game Pass could hit what I personally feel to be the magic number where it will be unstoppable. That magic number for me is 40-45 million subscribers. That's the number that I think Game Pass needs to hit or come close.

Talk about setting the goalpost so close! So 1 game can attract 500 subscribers for a whole year all by itself? What kind of metric is that? If Starfield is what anyone wants to play what's keeping them from paying $10 for a month to finish it and then unsubscribe? Totally unrealistic to pretend a single title no matter how good it is, is responsible for winning half a million players. I mean, it's not that it could do it, but that would take years. Years, and have a more comprehensive look at the metrics to determine such a considerable piece of the subscriber base subbed on the strength of that title and those same players stayed subbed for a whole year. And allow me to laugh again at that 45-50 million sub mark....

 

[Duchess]

If Game pass ends I'm pretty sure MS will still make games and if they are good I'll still buy them.

If Game Pass ends, it's actually the end for both Xbox and Microsoft Game Studios. MS will then start flogging off their franchises to try and claw back some losses (like Marvel did in the 1990s).

Halo will go to the Chinese (which is why there's that TV series with the Master Chief knockoff - it's a proof of concept thing).

Gears of War will return to Epic, who will release the Gears of War Cycle (all 5 titles) on Amazon Luna, Stadia, Switch, PS4, and PS5.

Forza will be incorporated into the Grand Turismo series (not that anyone will notice).

RARE will return to Nintendo and start knocking out GOTY contenders on a monthly basis.

And Bethesda will admit they've rinsed Skyrim for as much money as they can, and instead push out Morrowmind Remastered for the next 10 fucking years

 

[MrFunSocks]

Is it EVER going to be profitable!

Game pass by itself will likely never be "profitable", but that's OK because it's no meant to be. It's designed to get people into the ecosystem on a recurring revenue basis, and then also bring in money from the subscribers via dlc, microtransactions, and the 30% cut from them buying games in the ecosystem. It's a loss leader, intentionally.

It's like a console in a way - sold at a loss to make money in software and accessory sales after the sale.

How it has been available for this long and people on here and Twitter still can't get this through their thick heads is amazing.

 

[Sir_Teraflop]

@ Magnific0giganticus
Using your logic, what stops a playstation user buying a game from PS Studios from the bargain bin for 20$ or 10$, second hand of the full 70$/80Eur price instead?

Either way MS takes a cut - Sony does not and get's to advertise it's product (gamepass).

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Game pass by itself will likely never be "profitable", but that's OK because it's no meant to be.

You literally don't know any of this though.

 

[Craig of War]

I don't think it matter to MS if Gamepass is profitable right now or not just look at how much they making from Minecraft alone. They can take any loss from gamepass they are so god damn richer that the advantage they have over Sony and Nintendo that they can keep bleeding money and it won't matter since other parts of their company brings in so much more money.

 

[Moses85]

Who was asking for this?

 

[Sir_Teraflop]

I don't think it matter to MS if Gamepass is profitable right now or not just look at how much they making from Minecraft alone. They can take any loss from gamepass they are so god damn richer that the advantage they have over Sony and Nintendo that they can keep bleeding money and it won't matter since other parts of their company brings in so much more money.

Indeed - even a DLC from the likes of FHZ4 or anything over 20mil players like Sea of Thieves should make more money than AAA Returnal @70$ and 600k sales or so.

 

[Dr Bass]

I think the fact that we *aren’t* all scared that an unprofitable business will shut down *should* disturb you. All these services are bleeding money, so where are the necessary cash injections coming from?

Netflix is a public company. They issue stock if they need to raise capital. But if they never start making a profit, at some point the value of that stock will reflect that.

Game pass by itself will likely never be "profitable", but that's OK because it's no meant to be. It's designed to get people into the ecosystem on a recurring revenue basis, and then also bring in money from the subscribers via dlc, microtransactions, and the 30% cut from them buying games in the ecosystem. It's a loss leader, intentionally.

It's like a console in a way - sold at a loss to make money in software and accessory sales after the sale.

How it has been available for this long and people on here and Twitter still can't get this through their thick heads is amazing.

So the goal of Game Pass is to get people to buy into the ecosystem, and then not buy anything else? So the console is a loss leader, Game Pass is a loss leader, game sales are tanked on Xbox as we've seen in all the recent sales figures across the globe, so where does MS start making up the loss? Yes the rest of the company makes plenty of money. That doesn't mean the execs and shareholders want that to prop up a video game division forever. We've seen plenty of people even on this board extol the virtues of Game Pass at the very same time they say there is no way they will buy a game now since Game Pass has enough to offer, they just don't care to go buy something not on the service. Again, how is that good for the ecosystem?

A lot of the Xbox only crowd trumpets the 23 studios they currently have. The cost of those studios goes on beyond the initial purchase. They now need to pay salaries for the many thousands of new employees they are supporting. We are talking thousands and thousands of employees here. So now you have a service that discourages actually buying games. So no matter how many games you release, theoretically you are not bringing in more revenue unless those new games drive pretty big new subscription numbers.

The fact you call other people looking at the reality of the situation as having "thick heads" is stupid.

 

[Sir_Teraflop]

Netflix is a public company. They issue stock if they need to raise capital. But if they never start making a profit, at some point the value of that stock will reflect that.

Netflix does not have the same revenue streams as game pass does. It does not sell the movie/tv serie itself with a discount, mtx, dlc and hardware and/or accesories. This logic is flawed. The only resemblance is losing money through acquisitions, getting more content etc.

Also Game Pass is at a fixed number "buying" content - that is games, at a fixed rate per month.

I recon the acquisitions are happening to replace 3rd party content with it's own studios like netflix is doing nowdays.

So yes expect more acquisitions.

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

@ Magnific0giganticus
Using your logic, what stops a playstation user buying a game from PS Studios from the bargain bin for 20$ or 10$, second hand of the full 70$/80Eur price instead?

Either way MS takes a cut - Sony does not and get's to advertise it's product (gamepass).

You can see the sales reports from Sony, NPD and the like. We also know what's the split on digital versus physical sales and at what prices you can get the games at any point in time. For instance, it was reported by Sony Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart sold 1.1 million units in its first month. The game launched at $70, it still is $70. That's $77 million in revenue right there for you in the first month and as long as there isn't any sales or permanent discounts you can be sure every single copy accounted for on a future report was sold at $70. And Sony reports other numbers too, total software sales, revenue, PROFIT. Sony reported God Of War 2018 made over 500 million in revenue. Any other questions? Let's wait for MS to report and announce that Game Pass is protitable and SHOW NUMBERS, then we can all stop tallkng shit. But it's laughable to consider the financial return of a specific piece of content in a rental sub service as oversimplified as the guy above put it.

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

Indeed - even a DLC from the likes of FHZ4 or anything over 20mil players like Sea of Thieves should make more money than AAA Returnal @70$ and 600k sales or so.

 

[Sir_Teraflop]

You can see the sales reports from Sony, NPD and the like. We also know what's the split on digital versus physical sales and at what prices you can get the games at any point in time. For instance, it was reported by Sony Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart sold 1.1 million units in its first month. The game launched at $70, it still is $70. That's $77 million in revenue right there for you in the first month and as long as there isn't any sales or permanent discounts you can be sure every single copy accounted for on a future report was sold at $70. And Sony reports other numbers too, total software sales, revenue, PROFIT. Sony reported God Of War 2018 made over 500 million in revenue. Any other questions? Let's wait for MS to report and announce that Game Pass is protitable and SHOW NUMBERS, then we can all stop tallkng shit. But it's laughable to consider the financial return of a specific piece of content in a rental sub service as oversimplified as the guy above put it.

The thirst for next gen is real and in my country R&C was heavily bundled. Digital services like gamepass heavily skew physical sale numbers and in the end do not matter.

It's sony that was forced to raise the price on it's games to 70$ and or add a price to upgrades - and not Microsoft due to game pass.

 

[Kerotan]

I think there will be a pick-up in terms of mobile gaming, but there is a lot to do in terms of infrastructure e.g. improving data speeds and reducing latency. I still think that it will be geared toward AA gaming. I cant see a large proportion of people paying £15 - £20 a month to play a AAA game on a friggin 6-inch phone screen (and carrying around a controller to boot). And what a waste of game production values it would be.

In terms of having 20m - 30m subscribers, you can tell it isn't preferable to having high-selling individual games because if it was, Sony and Nintendo would have gone that route - they have crunched the numbers and know they could easily secure 50m subs if they put first-party on a subscription service day one - but have clearly decided it's simply not worth it.

And the best part is Sony already have a sub service close to 50M users and that's ps plus at €70 a year. Also a much more profitable service.

 

[Magnific0giganticus]

The thirst for next gen is real and in my country R&C was heavily bundled. Digital services like gamepass heavily skew physical sale numbers and in the end do not matter.

It's sony that was forced to raise the price on it's games to 70$ and or add a price to upgrades - and not Microsoft due to game pass.

Yeah, Sony was forced because Xbox was kicking their ass. Gtfo here, lmao

 

[MrFunSocks]

So the goal of Game Pass is to get people to buy into the ecosystem, and then not buy anything else? So the console is a loss leader, Game Pass is a loss leader, game sales are tanked on Xbox as we've seen in all the recent sales figures across the globe, so where does MS start making up the loss? Yes the rest of the company makes plenty of money. That doesn't mean the execs and shareholders want that to prop up a video game division forever. We've seen plenty of people even on this board extol the virtues of Game Pass at the very same time they say there is no way they will buy a game now since Game Pass has enough to offer, they just don't care to go buy something not on the service. Again, how is that good for the ecosystem?

A lot of the Xbox only crowd trumpets the 23 studios they currently have. The cost of those studios goes on beyond the initial purchase. They now need to pay salaries for the many thousands of new employees they are supporting. We are talking thousands and thousands of employees here. So now you have a service that discourages actually buying games. So no matter how many games you release, theoretically you are not bringing in more revenue unless those new games drive pretty big new subscription numbers.

The fact you call other people looking at the reality of the situation as having "thick heads" is stupid.

You mean physical game sales in the UK? lol

Oh goody, another concerned gamer about how the poor ol' Xbox division is going to pay the costs of their new employees lol.

Game Pass doesn't discourage buying games. Stop spreading that FUD. 99% of games don't release on game pass. Do you honestly think that xbox owners have just decided they don't want to play 99% of games that release, they just want to play the 4 games or so a month that get added to game pass? You're either trolling or are just plain dumb.

Xbox make more money from their user base than Sony do from theirs comparatively btw.