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

.

sales2099 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

MO, so it makes sense for Rare to have spend a bunch of time making new content for it. The extra stuff in SOT is basically just single player content with the added ability to be able to play with friends. Gears 5? No. Making maps and skins, and game modes is trivial compared to making single player content.

Right. I assumed that somebody would only want all the multiplayer skins that currently appear in Gears 5. There's more buyable stuff than that in Gears 5 though. And they keep adding more skins and MTX all the time. I actually don't know how much it would cost to get all the stuff in Gears 5. That $100+ dollars was a lowball estimate. Even if most people were to only buy three skins a year it would still be a ripoff.

The one and done rhetoric is laughable. That's youtube level console warz rhetoric. Single player games offer unique experiences, and value your time. These games that you say you've played forever, are games you've played forever, because they are designed to waste the player's time. They incorporate Artificial Game Lengtheners. They are intentionally designed to get you compelled to play, whether you are having a good time or not.

Anybody can spend forever playing Monopoly with friends. That doesn't mean that a 10 hour single player board game isn't as valuable. To be honest something like that would be far more valuable than Monopoly. I have absolutely no wish to play monopoly. But if there was a 10 hour long board game that was single player, and was like a DnD campaign where you were both the dungeonmaster, and the player? I'd be all like "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY" meme with that.

Gears 5 has added considerable number of maps since launch, all free. Instead of paying $10 for map packs (an outdated practice due to fracturing the player base), the MTX make up for it. 

It’s all about doing it right. Content is free, optional cosmetics are payable, but in many cases grindable. 

It’s completely subjective in regards to a game you play for 80 hours via MP vs a campaign only game. I get that. But the core argument here is that you believe developers who keep games alive for years after launch don’t deserve compensation. You can argue what they put out on a case by case basis, but work it still is. 

Plus you must include the Game Pass model in what MS does. It’s night and day with Sony, who is still doing old traditions. More and more Xbox games are being played, but not necessarily bought. So you therefore can’t hold Xbox to the same standard. 

Map packs should be free. They would get compensation by selling extra copies of the game, or hitting such a large pool of Gamepass subs that they can fund all their games easily. Imagine Gamepass hitting 100,000 subs at $15 a month. Sure, Gamepass isn't profitable right now. It's probably not going to be profitable for 5-10 years. But once they finally do (if they ever) get 100,000,000 subs, the amount of money rolling in is going to dwarf individual game development costs. Think of it this way. If I make a movie with a budget of $100,000,000, then I need to sell 7 million box office tickets at $15 a pop to make my money back. But what if I have 100,000,000 people subbed to my streaming channel? Well then I just need to let a single month of that $10 to $15 a month subscription service roll in and I've made my money back x10-15. A single month of subs would fund my hypothetical movie, and ten to fifteen movies like it.

This is the power of spreading out your costs among a ton of customers.

I will hold Xbox to the same standard, because they are still putting their games for sale at retail. The moment they pull all their games from Steam/XBoxStore/Epic/WindowsStore, I'll change the standard I hold them to.

To get a full and complete 1st party Xbox game you need to spend well over $100 in MTX. On top of that the gameplay is mediocre at best, because they've put a whole bunch of grinding into the game just to entice you to spend money on MTX. Sure, they're offering their 1st party games for free on Gamepass, but over the long term most people are going to spend far more on MTX, than they would have spent on a single purchase.


You admitted GP needs to be much higher in subs to crank out a solid profit. Yet you give us your armchair economics lesson when they have to find revenue because they nullify the upfront costs. You don’t need a degree in business to know there has to be a give and take. 

Holding Xbox to the same standard as Sony, which does not nullify the upfront cost, is a fatal part of your argument. You have to take that into account or else your just talking emotions over facts of the matter. GP subs are a significant part of Xbox first party engagement. 

And again, to assume someone would want or need all the mtx in Gears or Sea of Thieves is ridiculous. And you assuming the gameplay is mediocre at best? Lol who are you to say that. I better see this same energy when GT7 has post launch DLC and LOU2 multiplayer hits (I heard the first was particularly bad with mtx). 

If we gotta get real here, like really real, is that you think MS is gouging us. Yet we save more money then you and play more. Go figure. 



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.