Really funny how the chart puts NSO on a relatively decent light.

XB could deviate from day 1 with Game Pass, but they'd get roasted, oh so badly. 

You can't say it's doable and sustainable then start to pull back. Everyone would immediately wonder what's next to be pulled? No more day 1 at all? Less games being added? Catalogue reductions? So on and so forth. Going forward is easy. Going backwards is very very difficult. This is why you hear people saying MS and XB are all in, because there's no turning back now.

MS may just simply fund it indefinitely, which they could do if they really want to, which could lead to eventually having enough existing non $1 deal subs, new gamer non $1 subs, along with enough past PS and Nin subscribers, so that Game Pass was the main game in town by a lot. In this case, XB can then start to ease back on the service offerings, while upping the price. That's when they would slowly start to make their money back. Once they've created a (console) gaming service monopoly for the most part. Any other outcome and MS will just be burning extra billions forever.

The scary part is it just might be worth it for MS to keep doing that, depending on what growth PS would have without XB as competition, and what Sony might do with that pathway cleared. Would Sony dare step on MS computing turf in the future like how MS stepped on Sony's gaming turf in the past?

Looking at what MS has been doing from the start of XB, and especially lately, in terms of (immediate) profits only, isn't the way they've been looking at.

MS can pull back however far they want, or need to (just like how they removed the Kinect from XB1 even when they said it's always going to be included). Nothing is ever set in stone with these kinds of business.  Yes, it'll be bad if they do remove Day 1 feature but don't expect MS to keep doing that if it's not bringing in big profits, especially to big AAA games. 

Again, I could be wrong but until we get real sale and profit numbers from Halo Infinite I'm going to assume it didn't meet their expectations. Or maybe they knew they were going to take a loss just to lure people in, but realize that it's not sustainable to have their big games to be on Day 1 GP.  And maybe Sony figured this out as well which is why they never promised that feature.

Two of them are fine all things considered, I can't say much about Game Pass, I have never owned an Xbox console and I currently have no plans to get one. I just wish Sony took a page from MS's book and not lock classic games behind a paywall. No going to happen most likely, but it would be great if they did.

I consider Nintendo's to be the best value, because I don't want to pay for any of these services, but Nintendo's is the cheapest.

Xbox seems to have the best value here. That said, for my needs, Nintendo has the only one I could consider paying for. Why? Because I sometimes have a bit of interest in playing online, but I don't have enough time to play all those games included in the subscriptions, great value or not. With the amount of time I have, they could offer all games that have ever existed and I still wouldn't care, because I don't have enough time to play those games. It makes absolutely no sense to pay for something you still can't enjoy. Nintendo, as bad as the value is, is the only one that has a price that doesn't feel completely unreasonable for how much enjoyment I could get.

Anyway, there are reasons why PC is my main platform. The horrible online multiplayer situation on consoles is one of them.

There is a difference between backpelding on a universally hated feature versus one that is universally praised. Nobody was upset about Kinect when it was unbundled, and Kinect being bundled was a point of why people didn't want the Xbone. On the other hand, people are buying xbox's for Game Pass. 

Nothing is ever certain and if the day ever comes that Xbox stops putting their AAA games on the service day 1, is the day they should cancel the service all together because it's literally the main selling point of the service and why millions of people sub. 

Xbox is well aware they are not going to make a huge profit on Game Pass in the short term. They are playing the long game. Halo Infinite a live service with a 9 year plan supposedly and a F2P multiplayer so profit numbers immediately are not something they are too worried about. 

At the end of the day, Phil said it best and told people not to worry about the logistics and just enjoy the service. This is a trillion dollar company that just bought Activision because of Game Pass. I'm not worried at all. 

^This.

In the future, my guess would be :

-Game Pass continues into next gen, no matter the profit situation.

or

-Game Pass get's cancelled next gen because XB first party can strongly compete with PS first party at $70 ($80?) by then.

I was curious and looked what were the games on PC Gamespass that I don't have yet and I want to play:

- No man's sky
- Star Wars Fallen order
- The Outer Worlds

There are 413 games in the service in my country

I can buy any them on PS4 (some physical, NMS digital) and they would cost me around 600 BRL. Gamepass currently is 45BRL a month. Meaning It would take around 13 months until GP start becoming more expensive than just buying these games which is... bad, really bad

(Interesting, I've counted 17 indies games that I own and I like. I doubt I've spend more than 400 BRL in all them though)

I think my problem with GP is MS itself, I don't like their games, it's unfortunate

You can't buy all 413 games on the ps4 unless you are referring to only those 3 games you mentioned. The thing is, you are only thinking about the games on the service now. Within those 13 months of using the service, way more games will be added and I'm sure there would be stuff that interest you. 

If you don't care about Xbox 1st party games at all, then sure I would say it's not worth it for you.