Xbox |OT|

[Leynos]

Machiavellian said:

Leynos said:

Because it's worth rewarding the devs directly because SMT deserves it. I'm not rich by any means. But I believe in supporting devs directly for good games rather than an indirect rental.

I am rewarding the devs by playing their game on the service they put their game on.  If they did not want people to play their game on the service they put their game on then they should not support the service.  MS has many different revenue tiers for developers, and they are definitely getting paid.  I purchased my sub for exactly this situation.  I do not play enough games, nor do I care to play a game on release as I have way to much going on between work, family, touching grass and friends.  So, if the model doesn't work for the developer, they should not use it because people like me are not going to purchase their game, but we definitely will give it a go at some point in time if it's on the service we are paying for.  While I am more than happy to give any developer my money for a game I really want to play, as stated, since I never played the series the only way I would be interested is to have a chance to play the game on a service I subscribe to.

Game pass undercuts sales. No no it's an indirect rental.  If rentals counted for games than man Hagane from Blockbuster would have been a break out hit on SNES.