| shikamaru317 said: Without knowing the exact costs associated with Gamepass or Gears E-Day development, it is impossible for any of us, industry analyst or layman, to ever know if it's doing well enough to be considered a success. We would need:
It's nowhere near as cut and dry to determine a games success on a subscription model than it is on a purely sales model, because there are so many factors. |
Tom Henderson says he has heard insiders claim "upwards of 400m dollars" for it's development.
Does it really matter if it is 300m or 380m?
While we don't have a break down, of the gamepass user base that played it... or how much they are subscribed for... we do roughly know it is ~1.7m users out of a pool of say 20m ish total gamepass users. We know that around ~17% of those (1.7m) played less than 1 hour, and roughly ~54% played less than 5 hours total (of gears E-day). Alot of gamepass users install something, play it abit, and uninstall aftewards. Xbox avg playtime is alot lower than Steam users that bought the game.
I think I remember reading that how gamepass deals with the money it hands out, is based on users and playtime, for each title.
So a game that has a wildly large pool of gamepass players, playing it for along time, will get the biggest cut of the pie.
So yes, we won't ever have 100% down to the last cent, accuracy....
If sales/dlc(early access) make up ~$37m revenue (before some steam cuts, and taxes ect).... we do know that is a far ways off from "upwards of 400m dollars".
We also know, that most games, from sales, make like ~30-70% of their total revenue from like the first week of sales.
So lets say down the line, gears E-Day makes ~100m total from sales.
The question becomes will Gamepass cover the remaining 200-300m in costs?
I think this game ends up losing money.
Which again, is not that rare. Look at playstation (and all its live service attempts).... I don't even think Wolverine will make back it's costs either.







