Why are you allowed to post?

Because my post is an obvious joke   while the rest on the other hand

I'm thinking the budgets are lower while the target audience (world wide streaming) is bigger or more diverse. So shows can't focus on local issues since they have to pander to a world wide audience, while still having that smaller budget of a smaller audience. I don't see streaming producing Fawlty towers kind of stuff.

Creative media very much depends on the target audience. It's the same with games. The wider the target audience the more generic the games get. TV has always used local issues for content. I wonder if the original star trek can still be made in today's environment.

Streaming targets more of a global audience, while at the same time fragmenting the target audience by locking stuff to different streaming services. Anyway that's my theory why TV is starting to feel so generic nowadays. Watching foreign channels in the old days was like getting an insight in a different culture. Nowadays watching foreign content on Netflix it's the same content with a different skin.

Maybe clarify which Halo it is then, since you know there's more than 1. Either way, it was a test flight that could only be played specific times of the day, still not a valid comparison. Btw, your numbers aren't even correct, again.. 

Look at that, Halo Infinite has a higher view count than Fortnite. 

Halo Infinite will beat Halo 5's viewership peak without question. Now will is reach the most popular F2P games, maybe, but probably not. I just find it funny how Halo Infinite has to reach the most popular F2P BR games to be relevant when it doesn't even have a BR mode lol. If Halo Infinite does reach those peak numbers similar to those games, I'll let you about it. 

After reading your reply, I see where the problem is in your thinking.  Lets be clear about something first, GP is a game service that allow gamers to play games on a subscription basis.  Most of your points do not make any sense because you are comparing the service to F2P games or talking about console hardware and other things.  You seem to be trapped in the old console war or Sony vs MS which is clouding your viewpoint as you filter everything based on that world view.  

It does not seem like you are paying attention as to the aim of GP.  The Xbox hardware is just one piece of hardware that can use the service.  You do know that there is a PC side to GP.  Also with the new browser extension MS now have the ability to stream games onto any hardware that can run a browser.  That includes Android and Apple hardware.  The reasons why your points make absolutely no sense is because you are looking at GP today and totally ignoring the future plans for the service.  MS has even stated their next step is a dongle for GP and it would not be a stretch if GP can be run as an app on smart TVs soon.

The fact that you seem to tie GP as only being delivered based on MS console shows you have no clue the aim of the service.  This is the reason I am not comparing Sony vs MS or Playstation vs Xbox because GP is not part of any of those things.  Its a game service which MS is looking to put on any device that can play games.

Lol, gamers prefer ownership over renting, just like in the past, people enjoyed ownership of music, TV shows and movies over renting and streaming but look at those industries today.  The new gamers today, do not care about what you care about.  Also, why do you have this impression that you cannot purchase a game just because its on GP.  Nothing stops you from owning a game if anything, GP lets you try before you buy.

TO your last point, so what.  Unless you have a crystal ball, you really have no clue on the growth of GP, or where it will be 5 to 10 years from now.  So that point is worthless.

Oh look more pie in the sky fantasies. Do you have any numbers to suggest that GP on PC or mobile has been some notable success? Just another data point MS is too afraid to diverge.

Did you even read my post:

• Music, TV, movies can be streamed. Games cannot without physical constraints. Trying to say the transition is like gaming just shows you don't know the industry.
• Oh really, guess new gamers that last year have bought 500M games from PSN and Nintendo and probably 100M from PC clients really don't care about owning games.
• To spell it out even further: game ownership is far more important to gamers than music/TV, because games are tied to hardware with no guarantee of future hardware or licenses allowing for physical or digital versions. In addition, games are timeless packages of entertainment that can last hundreds of hours, unlike any other medium, so for many owning a game that they would still like to play decades later is more important than renting.

LMAO, yes I too would like to pay $120 so I can try games before spending $60+ per game, when I can just go on youtube to check the game, impressions and reviews for free 🤡

User banned from the thread - Bristow9091

Okay, so everything is beginning to fall in place now:

https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/29/21242004/xbox-game-pass-10-million-subscribers-microsoft-q3-2020-earnings

https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/21/21449219/xbox-game-pass-15-million-subscribers-microsoft-growth

https://www.vgchartz.com/article/451129/xbox-game-pass-subscriber-grew-37-last-fiscal-year-missing-microsofts-target/

It was below 23 million last quarter, but they didn't share because they were worried it would look like they were losing subs after that number started circulating but before Jez corrected it.

— Grubb (@JeffGrubb) September 30, 2021

From the first couple of links, it's fair to estimate Game Pass subs by the end of June 2020 to be around 13 million. With that figure in mind, a 37% Game Pass growth by July 2020 would translate to 17.81 million, which means the figure since January (18 million) was virtually stagnant (may have even declined just like Playstation Plus). This is finally starting to make sense. The rumored/hinted/whatever 23 and 30 million figures always sounded outlandish all things considered unless we assumed they were cumulative, and because of that, Phil and co are now having trouble giving us an update coz the actual numbers will sound underwhelming by comparison.

Are they afraid of investor fraud?
If they let the 30 million rumor stand when it is actually 18 - does that "inflate" their value and mislead shareholders?

Otherwise it feels like they could just kinda lie and be like "yeah 30, sure" and just wait until it actually hits 30.

Latest MS report also paints a very sad picture. My guess is that the 30m number that was individual that at least tried it. Like the $1 deals and free 3 month trials. 

I think the number you paint might be a cut off of some required paid amount a year to be considered a concurrent sub. My guess is that it's still not a full year paid. The ones paying a full year comcurrnetly is a very small part of the 18m. 

I sure thse 2 games just exude quality and has to be why they dint even chart upon release and where mentioned for the wekend they launched. Now youre gona tell me ori is also AAA hundred million dev cost franchise. 

To be fair, if you are satisfied with those types of games then for you gamepass might actually be worth it. I myself wont bother with a game that can be played on my phone and thus think paying $120 a year for that level of quality is not worth it. 

TIL a 166% increase in hardware revenue and a 2% growth in services (versus lockdown 2020, where most companies are seeing services drop YoY) are “sad” numbers. And that 2% would have been even higher had there not been so many delays across the industry.

missing their internal goals for GamePass is not a good look on the surface, but not a big deal in reality. It was missed by like 10% and Halo got delayed.