Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Xbox acquires Bethesda

sales2099 said:
Barkley said:

"Ignore 3rd parties and imagine Nintendo starts their own GP but only for their 1st party games. Can you see how profitable they would become with 25-50m subscribers even if nobody bought a physical game ever again?" - Yes because 100% of the money would be going to them.

"EA seems  more than happy with theirs at $2.50/month." - EA charges $15/month for EA Play Pro, the sub that gives you access to all there games day one. Same as UPlay+.

You are talking about profit because you say 60m subscribers means they can buy Zenimax every year, they can't because all the money from those 60m subscribers wouldn't end up in there bank account for them to spend. You even mention profit next.

"In regards to profit, 10m subs @$15 ($1.8bn/yr) is equivalent to selling 30m full price, digital, first party games every year ($60/$60)."

In terms of revenue, not profit..... $1.8 billion in gamepass sales does not give them the same money as $1.8 billion in first party software sales

It’s not our place to worry about things like this. MS has big boy accountants and teams that have a road map for GP growth and profit. It’s our job to play video games. 

This is the part that really ecks me when it comes to gamepass and some Sony fans.

Its like they imagine that MS and all them other company's that's building subscription services just woke up one day and said "Hey ya know what would be great.. Making a subscription service thats going to burn money....

They have a lot of highly trained accountants that would of been looking over the numbers and seen how much money is to be made from a subscription service.

Its a long term plan and how people doesnt see subscription services becoming the norm is beyond me.

Just like with Movies, just like with Music, Gaming subscription services will be how most people will play their games as people will go where they see the best bang for their buck.



Around the Network
zero129 said:
sales2099 said:

It’s not our place to worry about things like this. MS has big boy accountants and teams that have a road map for GP growth and profit. It’s our job to play video games. 

This is the part that really ecks me when it comes to gamepass and some Sony fans.

Its like they imagine that MS and all them other company's that's building subscription services just woke up one day and said "Hey ya know what would be great.. Making a subscription service thats going to burn money....

They have a lot of highly trained accountants that would of been looking over the numbers and seen how much money is to be made from a subscription service.

Its a long term plan and how people doesnt see subscription services becoming the norm is beyond me.

Just like with Movies, just like with Music, Gaming subscription services will be how most people will play their games as people will go where they see the best bang for their buck.

What's frightening IS the long term plan. A company which can support money losses for years to break the market until its service is the only one relevant is a problem. And when that's the case, consumers can't "control" the market anymore ; if the suscription is 50 dollars per month with majority pf GAAS, AA, and copy paste/game, there will be no alternative. That's not a market that will invest hundreds of millions in ambitious AAA. And i can barely see how it will be sustainable for traditional publishers (musical artists payment on streaming plateforms are already a joke).

Maybe a pessimistic view of the global picture, but I feel, in a dramatical way of saying things , like observers who see people elect a despot thinking short terms their problems will be solved.



Flouff said:
zero129 said:

This is the part that really ecks me when it comes to gamepass and some Sony fans.

Its like they imagine that MS and all them other company's that's building subscription services just woke up one day and said "Hey ya know what would be great.. Making a subscription service thats going to burn money....

They have a lot of highly trained accountants that would of been looking over the numbers and seen how much money is to be made from a subscription service.

Its a long term plan and how people doesnt see subscription services becoming the norm is beyond me.

Just like with Movies, just like with Music, Gaming subscription services will be how most people will play their games as people will go where they see the best bang for their buck.

What's frightening IS the long term plan. A company which can support money losses for years to break the market until its service is the only one relevant is a problem. And when that's the case, consumers can't "control" the market anymore ; if the suscription is 50 dollars per month with majority pf GAAS, AA, and copy paste/game, there will be no alternative. That's not a market that will invest hundreds of millions in ambitious AAA. And i can barely see how it will be sustainable for traditional publishers (musical artists payment on streaming plateforms are already a joke).

Maybe a pessimistic view of the global picture, but I feel, in a dramatical way of saying things , like observers who see people elect a despot thinking short terms their problems will be solved.

Reminds me of when EA Access was going to be terrible because EA would lock full games behind it and jack the price up and then every other publisher would follow suit. Within years we’ll have to subscribe to eleven different services for a total of hundreds a month just to be able to play games!

Of course, none of that happened. If GamePass becomes as big a success as you’re worried about, it will be because MS offers a value that people won’t be able to resist. This is bad for consumers? And why would an optional subscription service become the only relevant gaming option? You can still buy all GamePass games outside of the service. Most games still aren’t on GamePass and a lot of the bigger titles that come from third party, come months after launch.

Just seems like a whole lot of worry for no good reason.



Barkley said:

Errr....

"KEEP IT ALL ON XBOX, MICROSOFT! I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THESE GAMES ON PLAYSTATION! FORCE ME to buy your console"

Why would you want to be forced to buy more hardware to play games on rather than play them on hardware you already have.

The ideal scenario for consumers is all games on every system. Choose the one you want, get everything. No need to shell out money on hardware you don't need.

LudicrousSpeed said:
Flouff said:

What's frightening IS the long term plan. A company which can support money losses for years to break the market until its service is the only one relevant is a problem. And when that's the case, consumers can't "control" the market anymore ; if the suscription is 50 dollars per month with majority pf GAAS, AA, and copy paste/game, there will be no alternative. That's not a market that will invest hundreds of millions in ambitious AAA. And i can barely see how it will be sustainable for traditional publishers (musical artists payment on streaming plateforms are already a joke).

Maybe a pessimistic view of the global picture, but I feel, in a dramatical way of saying things , like observers who see people elect a despot thinking short terms their problems will be solved.

Reminds me of when EA Access was going to be terrible because EA would lock full games behind it and jack the price up and then every other publisher would follow suit. Within years we’ll have to subscribe to eleven different services for a total of hundreds a month just to be able to play games!

Of course, none of that happened. If GamePass becomes as big a success as you’re worried about, it will be because MS offers a value that people won’t be able to resist. This is bad for consumers? And why would an optional subscription service become the only relevant gaming option? You can still buy all GamePass games outside of the service. Most games still aren’t on GamePass and a lot of the bigger titles that come from third party, come months after launch.

Just seems like a whole lot of worry for no good reason.

If Gamepass ever becomes what they are describing customers will leave the service in a mass exodus and Microsoft will have to change their ways. The goal for Microsoft is to retain and grow the service therefore the fear-mongering happening isn't really the reality of what should happen. Unless Microsoft really grows the service to have a complete monopoly but with competition from Google and Amazon on the subscription front and combine with whatever Nintendo and Sony are offering in the gaming space that is not likely to ever happen. 



Tommy Jean, CPA, CGA

Lure in millions of gamers with great value
Stop making real games, start churning out shovel ware just to have new GP releases
Jack up the price of GamePass
?????
Profit

This is basically what every criticism of GamePass boils down to. And as consumers of course I guess were just gonna stay subscribed to a service that will supposedly only offer rushed A/AA games at a high subscription cost.



Around the Network
Flouff said:
zero129 said:

This is the part that really ecks me when it comes to gamepass and some Sony fans.

Its like they imagine that MS and all them other company's that's building subscription services just woke up one day and said "Hey ya know what would be great.. Making a subscription service thats going to burn money....

They have a lot of highly trained accountants that would of been looking over the numbers and seen how much money is to be made from a subscription service.

Its a long term plan and how people doesnt see subscription services becoming the norm is beyond me.

Just like with Movies, just like with Music, Gaming subscription services will be how most people will play their games as people will go where they see the best bang for their buck.

What's frightening IS the long term plan. A company which can support money losses for years to break the market until its service is the only one relevant is a problem. And when that's the case, consumers can't "control" the market anymore ; if the suscription is 50 dollars per month with majority pf GAAS, AA, and copy paste/game, there will be no alternative. That's not a market that will invest hundreds of millions in ambitious AAA. And i can barely see how it will be sustainable for traditional publishers (musical artists payment on streaming plateforms are already a joke).

Maybe a pessimistic view of the global picture, but I feel, in a dramatical way of saying things , like observers who see people elect a despot thinking short terms their problems will be solved.

You could always move to a mainland Europe country or Japan if you feel you must escape Xbox’s reach :)



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

 

LudicrousSpeed said:
Lure in millions of gamers with great value
Stop making real games, start churning out shovel ware just to have new GP releases
Jack up the price of GamePass
?????
Profit

This is basically what every criticism of GamePass boils down to. And as consumers of course I guess were just gonna stay subscribed to a service that will supposedly only offer rushed A/AA games at a high subscription cost.

Yeah, I have heard this argument so many times and I keep wondering why would this work.  If anything, MS would need to continue to make games that all type of gamers want to play in order to keep their subs.  Its not like there isn't other big guns out there waiting for an opportunity to leap frog in the market, continue their dominance or just flat out beat the competition with better price, games and services.  Way to much fear and not enough real though on the subject.



LudicrousSpeed said:
Flouff said:

What's frightening IS the long term plan. A company which can support money losses for years to break the market until its service is the only one relevant is a problem. And when that's the case, consumers can't "control" the market anymore ; if the suscription is 50 dollars per month with majority pf GAAS, AA, and copy paste/game, there will be no alternative. That's not a market that will invest hundreds of millions in ambitious AAA. And i can barely see how it will be sustainable for traditional publishers (musical artists payment on streaming plateforms are already a joke).

Maybe a pessimistic view of the global picture, but I feel, in a dramatical way of saying things , like observers who see people elect a despot thinking short terms their problems will be solved.

Reminds me of when EA Access was going to be terrible because EA would lock full games behind it and jack the price up and then every other publisher would follow suit. Within years we’ll have to subscribe to eleven different services for a total of hundreds a month just to be able to play games!

Of course, none of that happened. If GamePass becomes as big a success as you’re worried about, it will be because MS offers a value that people won’t be able to resist. This is bad for consumers? And why would an optional subscription service become the only relevant gaming option? You can still buy all GamePass games outside of the service. Most games still aren’t on GamePass and a lot of the bigger titles that come from third party, come months after launch.

Just seems like a whole lot of worry for no good reason.

I don't think you can compare worries on one publisher that can take that much loss if they make an hypothical anti-consumer first move, and a big corporation than can wait to modify the market until it becomes the way wanted, baiting consumers with great offers (by buying lot of publishers) that cost them money but weight no risk for the company as a whole. Amazon did that, now it's big, nearly everyone buys on it. Well at least it's still consumer friendly for its clients, it avoids to pay any tax in the countries where it's available... Well, that's not the discussion here.



sales2099 said:
Flouff said:

What's frightening IS the long term plan. A company which can support money losses for years to break the market until its service is the only one relevant is a problem. And when that's the case, consumers can't "control" the market anymore ; if the suscription is 50 dollars per month with majority pf GAAS, AA, and copy paste/game, there will be no alternative. That's not a market that will invest hundreds of millions in ambitious AAA. And i can barely see how it will be sustainable for traditional publishers (musical artists payment on streaming plateforms are already a joke).

Maybe a pessimistic view of the global picture, but I feel, in a dramatical way of saying things , like observers who see people elect a despot thinking short terms their problems will be solved.

You could always move to a mainland Europe country or Japan if you feel you must escape Xbox’s reach :)

Well, I live in France and it's already hard to avoid GAFAM ! ;)



goopy20 said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Is the pattern a quality library of different genres? What do I win for getting it right?

Wow, lots of great games with loads of replay value across different genres, and these aren't even their big titles. Sounds terrible.

Look, we all have different tastes in games. Personally I love stuff like Wasteland 3, battletoads, Grounded as well a AAA game like TLOU2. Only thing I'm saying is that Sony and MS are going with completely different strategies and it will show in the types of games they'll be focusing on.

Sony is all about story telling and single player blockbusters. If you don't like those sort of games, you're in luck because they wouldn't work with the GP model. MS will be about quantity, smaller scale games and experiences that keep people engaged with GP over a long period of time. Elder Scrolls Online, Tell me Why... perfect games for GP. Doom Eternal, Gear 5.. not so much. 

Did you just call The Elder Scrolls a “smaller scale game/experience”?

Please, don’t comment about XBox from here on out.

At this point, you should be banned from discussing anything MS/XBox altogether.