Slightly off topic, but you look like Phil Spencer's cousin in your avatar.True, PC, Mobile Phones, Consoles, and not what else that comes to mind.
Slightly off topic, but you look like Phil Spencer's cousin in your avatar.True, PC, Mobile Phones, Consoles, and not what else that comes to mind.
personally think it's total revenue; obviously console sales is a cause of that but theoretically you could have no consoles (even hardware afaik) and still make the most revenue like the biggest gaming company in the world; Tencent i think90% of GAF will say this is the most important metric.
Is there any data to show that the Xbox GamePass subscriber growth isn't largely driven by Xbox console owners?
Have they released any data to show the numbers of GP users on PC or mobile via xCloud?
Assuming they haven't, it seems a little premature to conclude that console sales aren't important at all.
Game Pass – the first Netflix-esque subscription service for video games
Yeah, Xbox hardware doesn't make profits, its a loss leader. The profits (probably small) are all coming from the software and services associated to the console and now PC/Mobile.
He sounds like a great guy. I want him inside me.
Look around you. All of those are devices.I think Gamepass is a great service, but Microsoft needs devices, like Netflix. Also needs to sell those consoles.
Dude came on just after the utter debacle called Xbox One. He basically had a WiiU situation on his hands. And now he's turned it around. Although I'd say the article ommitts the involvement of Satya Nadella in this. He was a huge driver in all of this.Still amazes me that Phil's held in such high regard despite the fact that Xbox is still in a worse position than they were a decade ago.
Stable? There hardware has always been stable.Fortunately they have stable hardware now gamers can enjoy the games.
We've gone from sales aren't Microsoft's priority, to sales are a useless metric. Soon it'll be the less sales the better for Microsoft .Great read, I like that Phil + xbox team are striving for innovation and evolving the industry.
At the end GQ mentioned that PS5 has sold more then series consoles, in isolation its a useless metric when judging a platforms success, "Xbox" is not just console now. Starfield is going to have more players and make more money then any PS5 exclusive that exists.
It missed the target the executive wanted on. Its still reached higher numbers.Yes, that's exactly what the link to Axios above says :
"Xbox Game Pass subscriptions miss Microsoft’s target
Subscriber growth for Microsoft’s signature gaming service, Xbox Game Pass, was slower than the company hoped for in the past year, according to a new financial filing."
Reading is hard.
Dude came on just after the utter debacle called Xbox One. He basically had a WiiU situation on his hands. And now he's turned it around. Although I'd say the article ommitts the involvement of Satya Nadella in this. He was a huge driver in all of this.
Whatever the metric you choose, Gamepass isn't setting the world on fire right now.
They just missed their subscribers growth target :
https://www.axios.com/xbox-microsoft-subscription-gaming-d047cf43-e9b4-4a33-bd25-1ab2c0ad9346.html
It doesn't mean it will ultimately fail, but it seems a bit early to claim this guy reinvented gaming.
Skyrim also sold mostly on Steam and I assure you it made a lot of money despite only 70% of it going to Bethesda.We've gone from sales aren't Microsoft's priority, to sales are a useless metric. Soon it'll be the less sales the better for Microsoft .
And now Starfield is going to make more money than exclusives on other platforms, despite the fact that a good chunk of Xbox players will be paying for a cheap GamePass sub to play it, and the vast majority of PC players will play on Steam where 30% of the money goes to Valve .
That is more platform than the other guy. While Sony 1st party is confined to ps5 numbers, X Series games will get steam sales. So in a sense, they make more money.We've gone from sales aren't Microsoft's priority, to sales are a useless metric. Soon it'll be the less sales the better for Microsoft .
And now Starfield is going to make more money than exclusives on other platforms, despite the fact that a good chunk of Xbox players will be paying for a cheap GamePass sub to play it, and the vast majority of PC players will play on Steam where 30% of the money goes to Valve .
Oh no, not the 30%.We've gone from sales aren't Microsoft's priority, to sales are a useless metric. Soon it'll be the less sales the better for Microsoft .
And now Starfield is going to make more money than exclusives on other platforms, despite the fact that a good chunk of Xbox players will be paying for a cheap GamePass sub to play it, and the vast majority of PC players will play on Steam where 30% of the money goes to Valve .
We've gone from sales aren't Microsoft's priority, to sales are a useless metric. Soon it'll be the less sales the better for Microsoft .
And now Starfield is going to make more money than exclusives on other platforms, despite the fact that a good chunk of Xbox players will be paying for a cheap GamePass sub to play it, and the vast majority of PC players will play on Steam where 30% of the money goes to Valve .
W
If gamepass has 20million subs and each paying an average of $10/month
Thats a revenue of $2.4 billion/year that more revenue then the PS4 made from exclusives in its best year.
So the business model does work.
Compare xbox one to xbox series console game list. Its day and night.Still amazes me that Phil's held in such high regard despite the fact that Xbox is still in a worse position than they were a decade ago. He seems like a good guy, and he's done great things for the userbase. However those gains have been made at immense cost in terms of investment, and like all investments their value can only be determined by dividends yielded over time.
Also, any discussion about Cloud gaming that omits Playstation Now despite it approaching its 9th year in operation is clearly pushing a very pro-MS narrative. Has this service been a resounding success? No, but it has accompanied a console business that has consistently been one over the same timespan.
Same deal applies to the tub-thumping over having "the world's most powerful console". Ok, that's a win when taken at face value, but in the real world is it catapulting sales to new heights? Is it providing drastically better performance and user experience on the same titles when compared to Sony's less powerful, likely cheaper to manufacture offering?
Sorry, hang Phil the gongs for his good works when gains are more than hypothetical. When they can brag about P/L as well as cash-flow, when there's evidence of competitive advantage in the marketplace over the direct competition. Because at the end of the day its not all about what you are doing, but what your competitors are doing when you are both vying for the same audience and the same income.
This is a work-in-progress situation, the auguries seem promising but claiming victory is a long way off.
Most people? Wheres your source for this information.That's not exactly the way it works though. Most people paid 1 dollar per month here to turn their Live Gold sub in GP ultimate. There's hardly any surprise they reached around 20 millions subscribers basically giving subs for free. Who would refuse that gift?
The money MS makes from Xbox Live subs, they already had it before, it's like PS+ money.
They definitely aren't making profit on GP right now since most of the GP subs were basically free, which is totally normal in a loss leader strategy like that.
We'll see if the business model is ok in a few years, when people actually pay a lot more.
There are tons of MS studios now, daily costs are huge. Nobody knows if it will work or not. Let's hope so. Competition is good for prices.
People here vastly overestimate how many people use such "tricks". The front load (150+ dollars) or so is too much for many, many people. The great thing about subscription services is that you have to pay only 10-15 dollars at a time. That's how the vast majority of people use them.Most people? Wheres your source for this information.
That $1 XBLG trick can only be done once, once an account has redeemed it you cant do it again and not everyone knows about it.
Game Pass/XCloud is what makes the most sense for the era that we currently live in
Ten years ago I was very anti-streaming future but now that the quality of games has gone down overall I do not really mind it
Modern games are mostly microwavable cash grabs you don't want leftovers and you wont want to save the packaging it came in
"You will own nothing and be happy" - NewWorldOrder™
Not to sound like a console 'combatant' (I have no dog in that fight..I'm mostly a retro gamer at this point) but anything would be better than paying $70 for Super PS4 Pro cinematic games with very little replay value when the hype/shortages die down I'm not quite sure how well that business model will hold up I predict a "monkey see monkey do" moment where the laughable PS Now is revamped into a "PS PASS"
The fk? when did the 1$ trick become just 1$? Are you telling me, people who paid 180$ for xbox live, paid 1$ to get it, And not that 180$ upfront?That's not exactly the way it works though. Most people paid 1 dollar per month here to turn their Live Gold sub in GP ultimate. There's hardly any surprise they reached around 20 millions subscribers basically giving subs for free. Who would refuse that gift? The money MS makes from Xbox Live subs, they already had it before, it's like PS+ money.
They definitely aren't making profit on GP right now since most of the GP subs were basically free, which is totally normal in a loss leader strategy like that.
We'll see if the business model is ok in a few years, when people actually pay more.
There are tons of MS studios now, daily costs are huge. Nobody knows if it will work or not. Let's hope so. Competition is good for prices.
Here's the thing though, games get discounted within a couple months. Earlier this year you could get Demons souls and Returnal for less than $50. I saw ratchet on sale for $40 at bestbuy?
So I think the $70 pertains to early adapters.
The fk? when did the 1$ trick become just 1$? Are you telling me, people who paid 180$ for xbox live, paid 1$ to get it, And not that 180$ upfront?
Please stop spouting nonsense. The business model works. Netflix, hulu, disney+. As long as there are tons of people willing to pay 10$/15$ monthly, The service would be viable.
Reading not one of your strong points I seeIn a business, advertising is everything.
Partially you mean
I regret spending 100$ upfront for gamepass. I could have used that money, since the 15$ a month would mean nothing, due to the paycheck, and I can stop buying 3x meal for 3 weeks, to make up that money.And not everyone would of gone for 3yrs, $180 is a lot of most people to spend on a sub service in one go, i just did it for 1 year, which i regret.
Did you guys forget Phil was on stage with Don Mattrick in 2013 peddling the new Xbox One? He didn't save Xbox, he saved face.Phil Spencer saved Xbox.
obviously he was still part of the team/organization at MS, but didn't have nearly the control/decision making powers as he does post-Mattrick.Did you guys forget Phil was on stage with Don Mattrick in 2013 peddling the new Xbox One? He didn't save Xbox, he saved face.
What?
Both PS Now and EA Access predate gamepass.
What's the author smoking?
I remember the days when innovation and evolving the industry was ALL about making better and more creative games. Now it’s about how many people can play games on devices that people ALREADY play games on…Great read, I like that Phil + xbox team are striving for innovation and evolving the industry.
At the end GQ mentioned that PS5 has sold more then series consoles, in isolation its a useless metric when judging a platforms success, "Xbox" is not just console now. Starfield is going to have more players and make more money then any PS5 exclusive that exists.
30% is a lot to be giving up. More importantly though you're missing the point in your eagerness to respond - the point made is that it would make more money than any PS5 exclusive. Where did I say these games weren't making money..?Skyrim also sold mostly on Steam and I assure you it made a lot of money despite only 70% of it going to Bethesda.
I don't know how people struggle so much with the idea that a strategy that focuses on several platforms (Xbox, PC, Cloud) would put less emphasis on console sales and more on total revenue, compared to a strategy that focuses only on one. It seems so obvious that I always question the abilities of people who don't get it.
Edit: Right now 4 out of 10 Steam top sellers are MS games (Forza, AoE 4, Halo and Elder scrolls anniversary). You think that's not a shitton of money just because Valve takes a cut?
"Sales arent important".Oh no, not the 30%.
Yes you only said you it not the only metric for success (which makes me wonder why things aren't more transparent then).Lol, no never said sales were a useless metric. Pretty pathetic u have resorted to making shit up now. Just because you dont like the reality of the industry.
Yeah, starfield will make more money then any PS5 exclusive that exists. I dont think sony even have a 1st party ps5 exclusive next year.
Oh no, not the 30%.
its also like 20% given the revenue Starfield will take in on Steam. >$50M in revenue drops the 30% to 20%. Oh noooooWhat's weird was the 30% wasn't a problem when considering all the "Money on The Table TM" on PS.
Except people aren’t all paying that obviously. And that revenue is theoretically supposed to support those “23 studios” people love to quote. Sony revenue from exclusives covers JUST the cost of making those games. In conclusion, you have no idea about actual numbers, P&Ls, or “business models.”W
If gamepass has 20million subs and each paying an average of $10/month
Thats a revenue of $2.4 billion/year that more revenue then the PS4 made from exclusives in its best year.
So the business model does work.
What?
Both PS Now and EA Access predate gamepass.
What's the author smoking?
Dude, consoles are still a thing. Microsft is not giving up. They are not investing so much money for games for Gamepass to ignore those buying their consoles. They may not make money, but as you say. It's the subscriptions that make money.MS has proven it DOESNT need to sell those consoles, they dont make profit. they have so much money, this shit is just free moolah for them. Things like office, windows and other services is what gives them money. they can afford to spend on xbox and tyr out new things. they dont need to sell consoles to make money, just their services.
Except people aren’t all paying that obviously. And that revenue is theoretically supposed to support those “23 studios” people love to quote. Sony revenue from exclusives covers JUST the cost of making those games. In conclusion, you have no idea about actual numbers, P&Ls, or “business models.”
I agree, and can be more.Look around you. All of those are devices.
ISlightly off topic, but you look like in your avatar.
Is that a good thing?Slightly off topic, but you look like Phil Spencer's cousin in your avatar.