By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Zippy6 on 06 February 2024
Ryuu96 said:

They always told us ABK Game Pass would take a while and in fairness they straight up gave us the reason, Bethesda actually prepared months before closure to be added into Game Pass (and even after closure, it took a few months to add the rest) while ABK did basically zero work on it beforehand because they were doubting the deal would go through, Lol.

The only way I can buy this is if they are intent on basically putting everything on in one go, for whatever reason. It launching on PC+Console at the same time and that they are porting certain battle.net titles to the Xbox Store also, and again want it all done and released at the exact same time. Because if they wanted to put Activision's Xbox console titles on gamepass they could have it done in a week. Adding games to the subscription in the backend of the store is not going to be a several months long process.



Around the Network
Ryuu96 on 06 February 2024
Zippy6 said:
G2ThaUNiT said:

A big part of ABK games not being added to GP had to do with the state of whether or not the deal was actually going to pass. Wasn't much points in doing much work porting if it was all going to be for not. With Bethesda, there was little to no pushback, so that was being worked on to be ready for when the deal closed. MS was definitely caught off guard to the level of backlash they got with purchasing ABK. 

Looking at Ryuu's post of the DF's poll, removing day 1 first party games from GP will be a huge deal breaker for most!

There is nothing to port, at least for gamepass console. The games are on Xbox already, adding them to gamepass will be a simple process and I don't buy the line that it isn't. It doesn't take 4 months to add games to gamepass. It will be a fairly simple process in the backend to change which titles are included with the subscription.

There is definitely some reason Activision titles aren't on their yet, and I don't believe it has anything to do with them questioning if the deal would go through or not. What that reason is I cannot speculate and it doesn't mean that they aren't going to come to gamepass, but there is some reason we do not know about.

They could want to align it with Game Pass PC and want all the shit ported to Windows Store Tbf. And even though Bethesda came days after launch, another large batch didn't come until June. Worst case scenario Imo is COD isn't Game Pass on launch or day one is restricted to Game Pass Ultimate only.

I'm just throwing out suggestions here but there could even be employee bonuses tied to sales which they have to work out now, how they will now translate to Game Pass without pissing off employees if their bonuses come at risk. Alongside usual business calculations.



Ryuu96 on 06 February 2024
Zippy6 said:
Ryuu96 said:

They always told us ABK Game Pass would take a while and in fairness they straight up gave us the reason, Bethesda actually prepared months before closure to be added into Game Pass (and even after closure, it took a few months to add the rest) while ABK did basically zero work on it beforehand because they were doubting the deal would go through, Lol.

The only way I can buy this is if they are intent on basically putting everything on in one go, for whatever reason. It launching on PC+Console at the same time and that they are porting certain battle.net titles to the Xbox Store also, and again want it all done and released at the exact same time. Because if they wanted to put Activision's Xbox console titles on gamepass they could have it done in a week. Adding games to the subscription in the backend of the store is not going to be a several months long process.

I think this is likely it.

Lot of Bethesda titles were also on Game Pass in the past (before acquisition) whereas practically no ABK titles have came to Game Pass, Lol.

Notice how most the Bethesda titles were Windows PC as well, aside from New Vegas and Elder Scrolls Online.

Weirdly even today, Elder Scrolls Online isn't on PC Game Pass, Lol.

They added 10 more a month later.



Machiavellian on 06 February 2024
Zippy6 said:
Ryuu96 said:

They always told us ABK Game Pass would take a while and in fairness they straight up gave us the reason, Bethesda actually prepared months before closure to be added into Game Pass (and even after closure, it took a few months to add the rest) while ABK did basically zero work on it beforehand because they were doubting the deal would go through, Lol.

The only way I can buy this is if they are intent on basically putting everything on in one go, for whatever reason. It launching on PC+Console at the same time and that they are porting certain battle.net titles to the Xbox Store also, and again want it all done and released at the exact same time. Because if they wanted to put Activision's Xbox console titles on gamepass they could have it done in a week. Adding games to the subscription in the backend of the store is not going to be a several months long process.

Why would they peice meal it.  That would be a waste of resources, time and effort.  They are are not going to do a few at a time and some will be on PC only some will be on console and some will be on both.  Still you keep assuming it only takes weeks to accomplish a task you have no real understanding on what it takes to accomplish.  Just because you believe something is easy does not mean it is.  As a developer most people who have no clue about development work believe simple stuff is easy because it appear simple but a lot of time depending on how the code is structured it could be really complex to accomplish.



shikamaru317 on 06 February 2024

Yeah, these AAA budget increases aren't sustainable for sure, the bubble is heading for a pop soon, I've even seen developers saying it. We've gone from the average AAA costing maybe $80m in combined marketing and development costs a decade ago, to the average AAA now costing probably $150m, and the upper end now over $300m, with Sony now having set aside $385m for the upcoming Spider-Man 3 according to the Insomniac leak, and GTA 6 likely in excess of that. Gamers seem resistant to paying more for games, and many now skip games at full price and wait for discounts, and refuse to buy microtransactions in protest of increasing prices.

AAA devs need to learn to shrink scale somewhat, just look at Alan Wake 2, they made that game for 80m euros in combined development and marketing budgets, and it is 3rd place in GOTY rankings for last year and seems to have sold pretty well. AAA devs need to shrink scale somewhat, and get the average AAA budget back down to maybe $100m and hold there for awhile.

Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 06 February 2024

Around the Network
Ryuu96 on 06 February 2024
Machiavellian said:
the-pi-guy said:

Some of this feels a little alarmist.

The market is pretty different from what it was 15 years ago. Mudslinging competitors between the 3 companies is unusual today. PC is still in the game. Who's to say that a $600+ PS6 wouldn't prompt someone else to try to undercut Sony?

This is also heavily assuming that MS becomes a non-factor, which it seems they still have hardware plans, it just probably isn't going to be their primary driver anymore. (And frankly it hasn't felt like their primary goal in the past few years.)

The issue of $80 games is more complicated. Sony wasn't the first one to make games $70. Take Two was. And a lot of companies have jumped on that train. Even Nintendo has made a $70 game, despite not being directly in competition.

The issue is industry wide. The consumer base isn't particularly growing on consoles. In order to make bigger more competitive games, you have to spend more money, you have to figure out how to get more money out of consumers. A big reason why live service games are so popular right now. A lot of these games from Ubisoft, Sony, Take Two, Microsoft, Activision are costing in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Some of them are massive successes making a few times that. A lot of them aren't. $80 games would reduce some of the risk. It'll unfortunately probably happen regardless of anything else. Just like $70 has happened, despite MS trying to be a hold out.

The unfortunate reality is that there is no free lunch. Something has to give somewhere at all times. Either the industry has to slow down on their infinite growth or consumers have to start paying more.  

I agree with this take, spending money on the same level as a huge budget film as we have seen with Spiderman 2 cannot be sustained.  A miss which can happen can be devastating and a few misses would be catastrophic.  You only have to look at Suicide Squad to see that a miss which this game is going to be will probably have a big ripple effect for the studio.  I am sure that game cost a lot of money and while reviews seem to be average at best, average reviews do not sell big budget games. 

The cost of producing games is getting really expensive but its gamers expectations that is setting this margin especially in the console space.  I believe gamers on the PC are way more receptive to average if not even so so graphical games where they sell really good but on the console, you basically have to hit all the high points in order to get decent sales and even then might not break even.

Another case in point is Square.  After really snubbing the Xbox for a while, they are not putting in support.  Sales of the last Final Fantasy game did not hit the numbers they wanted and you know with a game like that it cost a pretty penny to make.  This really might be why MS strategy has changed because the numbers for just console isn't pulling in the weight compared to the investment.

It's actually insane how videogames are becoming more expensive than films.

Next gen it won't be uncommon to see $300m+ game budgets...

It's just ridiculous.



G2ThaUNiT on 06 February 2024
Zippy6 said:
G2ThaUNiT said:

A big part of ABK games not being added to GP had to do with the state of whether or not the deal was actually going to pass. Wasn't much points in doing much work porting if it was all going to be for not. With Bethesda, there was little to no pushback, so that was being worked on to be ready for when the deal closed. MS was definitely caught off guard to the level of backlash they got with purchasing ABK. 

Looking at Ryuu's post of the DF's poll, removing day 1 first party games from GP will be a huge deal breaker for most!

There is nothing to port, at least for gamepass console. The games are on Xbox already, adding them to gamepass will be a simple process and I don't buy the line that it isn't. It doesn't take 4 months to add games to gamepass. It will be a fairly simple process in the backend to change which titles are included with the subscription.

There is definitely some reason Activision titles aren't on their yet, and I don't believe it has anything to do with them questioning if the deal would go through or not. What that reason is I cannot speculate and it doesn't mean that they aren't going to come to gamepass, but there is some reason we do not know about.

You could definitely be right, but there's also the consideration of PC and Cloud. Not just console. Which ABK was not on the Windows Store whatsoever and Kotick infamously did not like cloud streaming. And all Xbox first party games have to be on all 3 platforms, including adding features such as touch controls. Plus they also have to figure out how to handle Battle.net and the games on the service. And overall, ABK just has a lot more games in their portfolio than Bethesda by quite a bit lol. 

But yeah, after 4 months now, it's certainly starting to feel suspicious that the only mention we've had is "later." 



KiigelHeart on 06 February 2024
Ryuu96 said:

I don't think there will be GP for long, at least not with day 1 releases. It won't survive without solid Xbox console base and there won't be a condole base without exclusives.



Zippy6 on 06 February 2024
Machiavellian said:
Zippy6 said:

Adding games to the subscription in the backend of the store is not going to be a several months long process.

 Still you keep assuming it only takes weeks to accomplish a task you have no real understanding on what it takes to accomplish.  Just because you believe something is easy does not mean it is.  As a developer most people who have no clue about development work believe simple stuff is easy because it appear simple but a lot of time depending on how the code is structured it could be really complex to accomplish.

I am not an expert on the matter but not completely unknowledgeable either. I have managed titles on steam so have some idea on the processes behind digital distribution. I have not worked with the Xbox platform but adding a title that is currently available to purchase on Xbox to be included in their subscription should not be a long convoluted process. If it is their platform is incompetent. They have been adding multiple titles to it every month for years, if it was a painfully difficult process someone should have simplified it by now, because it certainly doesn't need to be.

But yes the reason is much more likely to be the process of getting the games ready on PC rather than console.

Last edited by Zippy6 - on 06 February 2024

Ryuu96 on 06 February 2024
shikamaru317 said:

Yeah, these AAA budget increases aren't sustainable for sure, the bubble is heading for a pop soon, I've even seen developers saying it. We've gone from the average AAA costing maybe $80m in combined marketing and development costs a decade ago, to the average AAA now costing probably $150m, and the upper end now over $300m, with Sony now having set aside $385m for the upcoming Spider-Man 3 according to the Insomniac leak.

I've mostly seen developers say it Tbf...It sometimes feels like developers are begging the industry to listen that this shit ain't sustainable but managers aren't listening. I don't know how anyone can look at $300m budgets which are rapidly increasing as being sustainable in the long term, especially when AAAs take 5-6 years to create nowadays. You spend $200-$300m on a game, developing it over 6 years, with hundreds of employees, it flops, there goes that studio and hundreds of employees. It's madness.