By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Machiavellian on 21 September 2020
Edit Thread
DonFerrari said:
Machiavellian said:

Do you believe MS pays every developer for every game on gamepass a price upfront as if the game was brand new just released to the store.  That would be like Netflix, HBO and other content providers paying 20 bucks for each user for a movie that streams on their service.  What I am comparing is development time compared to MS own created content.  This is why MS can and does put their first party games on the service day one.  As for the other content that is on Gamepass, you know they have already had their time in the limelight because they do not come to the service day one.  Meaning MS isn't paying a price for those games to appear on the service as if it was brand new or even close. 

The concept is the same, the service pays for itself no matter the type of content.  The more diverse the content the more subs you get and that will also include every type of game not the ones you feel works the best.  All games work the best because they appeal to multiple different gamers.  It appears to me you are looking at the business model through your own purchase habit but you are just one gamer.  From what I have seen from just games in general to Phone games, PC and console there is a huge section of gamers that do not share your view, this is the appeal of GP.  What matters for MS is subs and they need them at a certain scale where the service pays for itself and development of pretty much any game they want to deliver.  This doesn't mean MS will stop selling at retail, why would they, they still get paid no matter what.  They can still get your money and get their constant sub money as well.  

Not sure where you got that I think MS pay full price for devs by the number of users on the base. I do know how Sony do with PS+ and it is more likely similar to how it is done on GP and PSNow. The dev and Sony have an idea of the remaining sales potential of that title that have been out for couple of years and also the potential new sales it could get from being show on PS+ "marketing". From that they remove potential sales lost by offering it for free on that platform. And them negotiate the money exchange to cover that loss and give the dev a little extra cash.

And will you say that a series with 10 seasons and 24 episodes per season won't have more staying power for sub than a single movie of 2h? It is impossible to deny that the model of GP (even more for day one launches) is made to be sustained on GAAS, episodic and Multiplayer games not on single player games that you finish in a week. Because let`s say Sony done the same as MS, even if you have 3 masterpieces on the service per year someone that is just wanting to get the juicy out of it will have the signature for a month or two during the year and be able to play those 3 games for 20 USD instead of 180USD. If you think that doesn`t impact revenue I don`t know what to tell you.

I believe we need to first get some terms correct here.  Gamepass is not a GAAS. You seem to be trapped in this thinking and that is probably why you keep bringing it up and using it as the business model.  Gamepass is a subscription service for games which is the same as PSNow.  The difference is that MS is including MS console and PC games to the service, including cloud play on mobil and probably going to do other devices as well.  The difference between the 2 service is the breath that MS is looking to take gamepass and not lock it to just being a Xbox service.  

Now that we got that part out of the way since I do believe you already know it.  Lets remove the whole GAAS part out since this is not the business model being used for the service.  This is why when you make statements that it will need to use GAAS business model it doesn't make sense and is incorrect.  Yes, someone could pontentially just get the service for a month and play one or 2 games they want then end their sub.  People could do the same thing with Netflix and other subs that do the same thing, the question is why do they continue their sub.  Because if you continue to bring out content, they will continue their sub.  Once you get the sub and quit you only get to do that once.  The next time you do not get the free option as you probably should know.  

You do not understand the business model nor does it seems you comprehend human nature.  If what you state was true, then Netflix, Hulu and all the other subs would have gone out of business a long time ago.