Leynos said:
Machiavellian said:
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. |
If it undercut sales, then why would any developer put their game on the service day one. That does not make sense to no one. Instead, a developer puts their game on the service day one because they are getting a nice bit of cash from MS including whatever extra revenue situation they have as well. Lets stop trying to guess what developers get from putting their game on GP or even PS+ because no developer is going to short their money it does not make Finacial sense. Also, Blockbuster is the wrong company to use. Use all the streaming music and media companies and what they give content creators for putting their content on their service.
