Forums - Sony Discussion - How Sony will respond Game Pass?

Azzanation said:

You are missing the point tho. Subscribers to GamePass don't own the titles, so MS isn't exactly losing a game, you are renting it, and they will be renting their games to a lot of people that aren't normally interested into the games either.

GamePass is free marketing for the games. With the full retail versions, people can pay for it than return it a week later getting a full refund on the game. With GamePass, MS has already made their money. It also promotes their store front which is more profitable than paying for it at retail level.

GamePass also grants discounts to the full digital games as well. So if you enjoy playing Grounded, and wish to purchase the full game, sometimes they take 10% to 20% off the price if you are a member. 

MS's direction with GP is quite simple, instead of having 30% of your audience subscribing to Live, they are aiming to have most if not all members subscribe to GP. Now lets do the maths..

Example: $10 by 1 year is $120, times that by 20m Subscribers = 240m in just 1 year of service and that's only at 20m subs. 240m now times that by 3 years = 720m. That's how they make there money and that's not including digital purchases, there Live members and their retail sales. GamePass is a long term investment not a short term investment. It not only cuts out the middle men in Retail but it is a service that will continue to grow and with 14+ gaming studios placing all their games on the service, its not rocket science that it will be driven well.

I don't think it can be that simple. Someone has to pay the devs if they're losing retail sales (aren't some moving to $70?). They have to pay for the servers/bandwidth. This seems more like getting as many on board and hooked as possible, then jack up the rates. I wouldn't trust it. Rather than get locked into forever payments I still prefer to pay once for a disc and that's that. Physical is the least likely to turn into a scam later on.



Around the Network

I hope neither Sony or Nintendo ever adopt this model as their main strategy. GaaS never has, and never will appeal to me for console gaming.

Give me full fat £50 quality exclusives over the years that I happily own, share, play and replay.. over Nexflix style throwaway model, any day.



sales2099 said:
DPsx7 said:

I was just about to write the same thing. Sony has everything in a good spot right now and I'm sure they'll think of the PS3 launch before trying to get too crazy again. They don't HAVE to copy everything the competition does.

That’s a interesting take. Given all the games we will see tomorrow 1st party, the value proposition of GP is staggering. $120-180 (GPU)  a year for all you can play, never mind the 3rd party offerings and I could in theory save hundreds a year if you and me were to play the same # of games.

To argue against Game Pass is to advocate spending more money with games now being $70 next gen likely. If I play 20 games in 2021 for $180 you would pay $800-1400 to play the same number (assuming many games aren’t full price or smaller titles). Either that or you play less games a year then me to save money.

So it’s hard to understand why you wouldn’t want Sony to emulate what is a very consumer friendly service. Genuinely curious as to what your perspective is. 

I think you lost a little bit the focus on the question.

Is about how sony will respond, not how we wish itd respond. As you can read in comments above, sony doesnt feel treatened by GP, as they continue being successful with their bussines model. On the other hand, of course we would like cheaper games, and to spend less money, but that doesnt mean sony will "give us" this, if its doing pretty well as for now.



                          

"We all make choices, but in the end, our choices make us" - Andrew Ryan, Bioshock.

The real issue is that Microsoft responded to Sony's exclusive lineup and strong hardware sales with Gamepass.



Azzanation said:
Barkley said:

I'm still unconvinced on the business value of gamepass. Sony only has to sell me two 1st party games over a 28 months period and they've made more profit from me than MS has from me getting gamepass.

At the very least the insane firesale Microsoft did must have completely scuppered their profits. I paid £76 for 28 months of Gamepass Ultimate. And remember that not all of that £76 is going to microsoft, it's going to third parties too. Now they're going to add cloud gaming on top of that?

Maybe at full price gamepass is an earner, but their bottom-line must be really hurting for everyone that took the insane offer of upgrading from gold to gamepass ultimate for free.

What should have cost me £307 (at £10.99/month) cost me just £76. Gamepass is directly hurting their profits from individuals like me.

You are missing the point tho. Subscribers to GamePass don't own the titles, so MS isn't exactly losing a game, you are renting it, and they will be renting their games to a lot of people that aren't normally interested into the games either.

GamePass is free marketing for the games. With the full retail versions, people can pay for it than return it a week later getting a full refund on the game. With GamePass, MS has already made their money. It also promotes their store front which is more profitable than paying for it at retail level.

GamePass also grants discounts to the full digital games as well. So if you enjoy playing Grounded, and wish to purchase the full game, sometimes they take 10% to 20% off the price if you are a member. 

MS's direction with GP is quite simple, instead of having 30% of your audience subscribing to Live, they are aiming to have most if not all members subscribe to GP. Now lets do the maths..

Example: $10 by 1 year is $120, times that by 20m Subscribers = 240m in just 1 year of service and that's only at 20m subs. 240m now times that by 3 years = 720m. That's how they make there money and that's not including digital purchases, there Live members and their retail sales. GamePass is a long term investment not a short term investment. It not only cuts out the middle men in Retail but it is a service that will continue to grow and with 14+ gaming studios placing all their games on the service, its not rocket science that it will be driven well.

Actualy it's 2.4B/year at 20M subs





Around the Network

You can never get something like gamepass completely replace gaming without hurting developers profit and diversity/quantity right?



Immersiveunreality said:
You can never get something like gamepass completely replace gaming without hurting developers profit and diversity/quantity right?

Yes and too many people don't understand why.

Gamepass means MS is the gatekeeper. Whereas before you had the market decide on the allocation of revenue now you have MS decide how much each dev gets to be paid, which is far more inefficient and will lead to under and over evaluation.

In addition, SP AAA games will take the backseat as MS would want players to continue to renew their subs, hence games as a service. We already see this with Halo, Forza, and rumoured to be Fable. In fact any game that goes against MS's ambition will be hurt as MS is the curator now, whereas before it was the market.



Nautilus said:
They will keep doing what they were doing before(and improving upon it), and they will still beat MS.

Honestly, I don't understand this MS x Sony. Microsft and Sony biggest competitor was, is and always will be Nintendo.

Tell us more about it, pls. Sony and Microsoft have been selling the same product with the same capabilities and specs so they naturally have to compete for the same audience. They're natural competitors in all basic business sense. How do you think their biggest competitor is Nintendo instead?



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


0D0 said:
Nautilus said:
They will keep doing what they were doing before(and improving upon it), and they will still beat MS.

Honestly, I don't understand this MS x Sony. Microsft and Sony biggest competitor was, is and always will be Nintendo.

Tell us more about it, pls. Sony and Microsoft have been selling the same product with the same capabilities and specs so they naturally have to compete for the same audience. They're natural competitors in all basic business sense. How do you think their biggest competitor is Nintendo instead?

Do I have to? It's pretty obvious...

1 - Nintendo is the oldest player in this game. You never subestimate Nintendo.

2 - On the more tangible reasons, any company that is inside the gaming industry is competing with each other, dierctly and indirectly. And that's especially true for MS, Sony and Nintendo, which are all console manufacturers. MS and Sony are now catching up with Nintendo, entering into the 9th gen, which Nintendo has a "3 year advantage". Not only Nintendo has a bigger library that uses the Switch full capabilities, but it's an extremely strong library of first and third party games.Not only that, but it's biggest gun going into this holiday it's that it's going to be much cheaper than the PS5 and the Series X, potentially being 250 dollars during Black Friday.

When Nintendo was weak(During Wii U), it not only beat Sony in the handheld market, but it came back strong with the Switch. After countless failures, Nintendo never left the console war, while MS seems to be going the Sega route(which would eliminate it as a competitor, as far as Sony is concerned). And the the most important part of the industry, the software, is where Nintendo is easily the strongest of the three, in sales numbers, quality, quantity and variety.

Sony and MS may be similar in the hardware design, but that alone dosen't mean that they are their only direct competitors.They are first and foremost a hardware maker, and thus it makes Nintendo a direct competitor too. Add to that Nintendo strenghts, and they are easily it's strongest foe.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

0D0 said:
Nautilus said:
They will keep doing what they were doing before(and improving upon it), and they will still beat MS.

Honestly, I don't understand this MS x Sony. Microsft and Sony biggest competitor was, is and always will be Nintendo.

Tell us more about it, pls. Sony and Microsoft have been selling the same product with the same capabilities and specs so they naturally have to compete for the same audience. They're natural competitors in all basic business sense. How do you think their biggest competitor is Nintendo instead?

PC and Nintendo gamers have it great but they're always left out of the conversation and many resent that. 



mZuzek loves to pre-order