I think you got it all wrong. If your Microsoft and about to release Halo 6 in November 2019. Would you want to make $60 and have the game sell to 5 million customers (sales 300million) or would you rather have 10-20 million customers subscribed to a $9.99/month gamepass (Sales 100-200 Million a month) ???

300 millions in one time sales VS. 100-200 Million a month in sales. Even if there a drop off after major release they will make a killing. 

I don't think they are gonna go this route. Would be better to still have mainline Halo and have an episodic side games.

I accept that for Telltale Games but a lot of the time, I lose interest before the next chapter releases or I forget what the hell is going on, only to fall back in love with a game and then get left with a cliffhanger, again. Hopefully they don't pull this with a AAA game.

It ruined Hitman for me.

Well lets do some math and make some arguments why this could be a good idea...

This year it includes enough content to justify a year of Gamepass. I assume it will get Sea of Theives, State of Decay 2, Crackdown 3, Ori and the Will of the Wisps, maybe another Forza, and maybe other surprises.

Its worth noting MS and other companies don't actually get $60 when they sell a game in retail. The return is probably closer to $30 based on estimates we hear. While Gamepass is money coming directly to them, and someone subscribing for a year is a lot more money from the consumer directly.

Not everybody is going to subscribe to Gamepass given they won't actually own the game and many still want physical copies.

The only announced MS games I'm excited enough to buy at launch is Crackdown 3. But if I can play all of their releases with Gamepass, then that's a very appealing reason to subscribe and stay subscribed.

I think this is an awesome idea, it will encourage a lot of avid gamers to subscribe, and that will increase 1st party revenue.

Given this is 1st party content I find that highly unlikely, it would even encourage people to unsubscribe.

I looked up what games have been removed from the service since it launched, all I see is a couple 3rd party games.

Maybe MS will invest less of the Gamepass revenue getting major 3rd party content, because their new 1st party games will push more subscriptions.

Meanwhile Gold subscriptions can still give out major 3rd party games.

Seem to me you were trying to flame on Microsoft... their exclusive games are so rarely good?

It's one think to say that Microsoft Studios releases are the best game available on any consoles but to say that their game aren't good is simply trying to get a rise out of people. 

They've had excellent release this Gen - Halo 5, Halo Wars 2, Gears 4, Ori, Quantum Break, Dead Rising 3, Sunset Overdrive, Halo Master Chief collection & Forza Series.

Then there was the good release Super lucky Tales, Rare Replay, Scream ride, Zoo Tycoon, Recore, D4, Ryse: Son of romes.

I bet there a few lackluster game like lococycle and any of the Kinects games that weren't so good but that hardly worth mentioning. 

This. Good thinking. The best way to think when you see something that’s too good to be true is to use your most educated guess based on trends (not holding it as the answer) and rather as measure of a caution. 

That's not really how these services work. I mean, look at XBL and PS+. They offer $60 year long subscriptions, but they still offer $25 three month sub options, and $10 a month options. If Sony or MS has a big month in "free" games offered on their online service, they don't temporarily suspend one month subscriptions. What you call "cheapskates", businesses see as fringe customers. Someone might subscribe for a month to check it out because hey, it's only $10. They might also buy microtransactions or DLC for one of the games included in the service. But that doesn't mean that person would subscribe for $60 for a year. That requires a higher up front investment. You'd be surprised at how many people pay $10 a month on a renewing subscription for XBL/PSN when they could buy a year long sub and save money.

It's the same logic Walmart uses when they allow anyone to return anything even without a receipt, for store credit. They know when these people go spend that credit they'll also spend their own money on other stuff. On paper a $10 sub even say, three months out of the year is already half of what a $60 subscriber pays and if someone is subscribing for particular games, they're gonna spend some money on DLC.

No more than gaming is "riddled" with microtransactions already. At least in this case you don't have to plop down $60 per title to be fed microtransactions.

That last part of your post is strange because between Sony and Microsoft, with games like The Show, Uncharted's multiplayer, Last of Us multiplayer, GT Sport, etc etc, talk late last year about exploring more in the microtransaction area, and shifting from hardware to the MAU stat MS loves.. even Nintendo now is joining with paid online and are more prominently using DLC.. not to mention Amiibo. I mean, it doesn't matter what console you have, this is the future of the industry. These are businesses who exist to make money for shareholders and this is what makes money.

edit, I still think that this is such a goddamn amazing deal for gamers, that something must not be communicated yet. Similar to the Gamestop game swapping program they announced and then killed before it even started. My guess is the games will be neutered somehow. For example State of Decay is in the Game Pass program right now, but it's not the Year One Survival Edition. You get the base game, but the DLC is not included, even though AFAIK there was never a version of SoD on Xbone that DIDN'T include the DLC.