By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Changes in corporate direction (biggest threat) or poor performance (which would be measured by low user engagement on the service) could put any of these studios at risk. Then again these studios obviously measured these risks against the risks of staying independent and decided to be bought so.

If Microsoft sees these studios as contributing to the whole platform/ecosystems vs. on their own (similar to Sony's model of first party software development) then these studios are much safer. Creating software for a service like this has the benefit of averaging winners and losers for the platform holder and also has the added benefit of turning that into a steady revenue stream.

I am still curious about how gamepass numbers might work out. Imagining a few years in Microsoft is hoping for something like this-

Revenue of $10 game pass per mo x12 months= $120 a year x5 mil subscribers= 600 million a year x5 years= 3 billion + microtransactions and expansions

Cost of developing 30 games (6 a year for 5 years) at 20 mill each (A-AA size stuff)= 600 million over 5 years= 125 million a year
Of course this is grossly oversimplified and the costs we don't know (the most important figures) are how much they pay publishers to make it worth their while. I think it's easy to see how they can fund their own games this way, but not sure how they can afford to attract new content from publishers. Will be interesting to see how it plays out..