The gaming subscription service thread (Game Pass, PS+ etc)

[Thread Owner]

On 19/01/2022 at 01:52, Ry said:

 

Now for the consumer, Xbox is the way to go. The frankly amazing deal that is gamepass just got even better and you can get it for free via rewards or dirt cheap by conversion tactics. 

 

For now, and I'll enjoy it while it lasts. But Microsoft are spending money to acquire customers and the price will increase significantly once it leaves this phase.

 

Gamepass is also a disruption attempt at the current model for gaming. Nintendo in particular are potentially vulnerable though the amount of exclusive content might save them. And I don't think it is anywhere near as easy to replicate as Netflix. If Microsoft wind up with an effective monopoly, they'll abuse it. 

[MattyP]

This is really gearing up to be the Netflix vs Prime of gaming isn't it?!  (MS vs Sony). 

 

I can see whenever Sony get their sub service overalled and released we'll be getting "timed exclusives" on the services etc from the smaller studios. Battle of who can secure which titles. In the end it will be a battle of games and services as the hardware will be largely irrelevant as it will just become the "VHS player" for the games services - a host to play them on. They are largely that now... pretty much PCs with different controllers.

 

It will be a shame of course because (as I mentioned elsewhere) quite like the differences eg Dual Sense of the PS5 and having experiences tailored to using it or Nintendo's hardware designs etc. However in terms of business getting your content out there to biggest market is where the money will be. Like the way format wars ultimately go in the end there will be a drift to the more popular format.

 

The other thing is what if MS put GamePass on Playstation? Sony ditch PS Now and roll with GamePass?  That might be interesting... 

[TehStu]

2 minutes ago, kensei said:

If Microsoft wind up with an effective monopoly, they'll abuse it. 

Yes, as any company would. "Do no evil" Google are busy union busting and have effectively turned Chromium into IE6, bullying internet standards to suit. You don't owe anyone allegiance, and the second you do is when they assume you'll spend money on them. There are tomes of examples.

[Gabe]

10 minutes ago, kensei said:

 

For now, and I'll enjoy it while it lasts. But Microsoft are spending money to acquire customers and the price will increase significantly once it leaves this phase.

This is a weird comment given that Sony have already raised the price in the here-and-now - yet a hypothetical increase in the cost of GP at some indeterminate point in the future is the bad thing?

 

 

[strider]

8 minutes ago, Stanley said:

Yeah, but then there’s also the risk on gaming becoming even more homogenised. 

Well quite, but I'm a dreamer.

 

 

[kensei]

1 hour ago, Gabe said:

This is a weird comment given that Sony have already raised the price in the here-and-now - yet a hypothetical increase in the cost of GP at some indeterminate point in the future is the bad thing?

 

 

 

So a fair point, but it the increase is essentially inflation from 2013, and competition from Xbox is likely to keep the price down in practice. 

 

And it's not just the price increase, if anyone gets a monopoly they'll do a ton of anti consumer stuff. They do it when they are way ahead in a generation and feel secure - we've seen it from all three console makers at various points.

 

Gamepass doesn't exist if Microsoft doesn't get soundly beaten by Sony last gen. If anyone gets into a true monopoly position, there's no more Gamepasses in the future.

 

It's a longer term but the general concern about all the consolidation is a legitimate worry I think.

[layten]

4 minutes ago, kensei said:

Gamepass doesn't exist if Microsoft doesn't get soundly beaten by Sony last gen. If anyone gets into a true monopoly position, there's no more Gamepasses in the future.

I don't know about that. Microsoft were all in already on subscription models on such corporate lightweights as WIndows and Office, and lets be honest, they pretty much have an iron grip on that market.

[Stanley]

5 minutes ago, layten said:

I don't know about that. Microsoft were all in already on subscription models on such corporate lightweights as WIndows and Office, and lets be honest, they pretty much have an iron grip on that market.

They were first on console too let’s not forget, PlayStation was free to play online right up until PS4. 

 

[Flub]

8 minutes ago, layten said:

I don't know about that. Microsoft were all in already on subscription models on such corporate lightweights as WIndows and Office, and lets be honest, they pretty much have an iron grip on that market.

 

It's reasonably priced as well. I pay £5.99 a month for the entire suite on all platforms and that also gives me a gig of onedrive storage. 

[Giddas]

4 minutes ago, Flub said:

 

It's reasonably priced as well. I pay £5.99 a month for the entire suite on all platforms and that also gives me a gig of onedrive storage. 

they make their money on that side with corporates, Which of course they don’t for XGP. I’ll be amazed if the gold loophole at least isn’t closed.

[RubberJohnny]

I think it's a bit early to claim to insist these services are monopolistic and bad for the consumer, we've literally seen massive competition with everyone and their gran launching one, for one thing, which is literally the opposite of the premise, and the result is it's the best value for the consumer we've ever had, I think.

 

If anyone was asked if they'd like to stop paying £10 a month for Disney+ or Game Pass for hundreds of things and go back to buying TV series by the season on DVD for £20 a pop (more, inflation adjusted) well this place is full of nostalgic saddos so you'd probably get a few say yes, but the truth is no one would and they'd just go back to rarring stuff instead.

[Clipper]

10 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

well this place is full of nostalgic saddos so you'd probably get a few say yes, but the truth is no one would and they'd just go back to rarring stuff instead.

balanced out by the toxic aggressive saddos I guess.

[Stanley]

5 minutes ago, RubberJohnny said:

I think it's a bit early to claim to insist these services are monopolistic and bad for the consumer, we've literally seen massive competition with everyone and their gran launching one and the result is it's the best value for the consumer we've ever had, I think.

 

If anyone was asked if they'd like to stop paying £10 a month for Disney+ or Game Pass for hundreds of things and go back to buying TV series by the season on DVD for £20 a pop (more, inflation adjusted) well this place is full of nostalgic saddos so you'd probably get a few say yes, but the truth is no one would and they'd just go back to rarring stuff instead.

Tbh I don’t actually like to think about how much I spend each year on all these services combined (I basically have everything, bar Stadia, obviously) including all the major TV/movie streaming ones too.
 

But what I do know is that quite regularly the game or movie I want is not on any these services and I end up paying for them separately anyway. In all honestly I’m probably spending way more than I ever did back in the day. 

[kensei]

The problem with subscription services is bundling. You have to pay for everything to get the few things you want. Netflix was a great deal when it started but now to replicate that variety you have to sub to 3 or 4 services at three times the cost.

 

It's closer to a cable subscription than buying DVDs. 

[RubberJohnny]

52 minutes ago, kensei said:

The problem with subscription services is bundling. You have to pay for everything to get the few things you want. Netflix was a great deal when it started but now to replicate that variety you have to sub to 3 or 4 services at three times the cost.

 

It's closer to a cable subscription than buying DVDs. 

 

Is this really an issue though when, as mentioned, the cost of the service per month is less or equal than the cost of a single item? I mean just taking Game Pass alone, we had Forza and Halo in the last two months, which you could enjoy for £20 through the subscription rather than £120 without.

 

Are you really looking at that and moaning that because of all these other games included that you don't care about it's too high a price? It'd be better and more consumer friendly if they charged more?

[CarloOos]

How would making Gamepass less attractive/affordable in the future actually make Microsoft money?

 

Netflix launched at £5.99 (HD, SDR), entirely third party content. It’s now £13.99 (4k HDR, with cheaper tiered pricing) and almost entirely Netflix content. They’re now footing the bill for all the programming and it’s still less than a single Bluray. Gamepass will continue to remain cheaper than buying games no matter what, it’s how the entire model works. 

[Purin]

I think I'm too old for Gamepass. I was paralysed by the choice. This is the future though, the thought of buying a game will probably almost disappear and be completely alien to young kids now

 

In the last few months I've started collecting actual physical movies, music, and games though, like the old codger that I am. 

[CrichStand]

5 minutes ago, Strafe said:

There are an awful lot of blizzard fans out there. Probably less than 12-18 months ago but still a lot.

 

The general consensus is that it’s a decent deal.

Either way, I think it’s now pretty clear what direction Microsoft are heading in. Stack them high, sell them low. Quantity over quality. Loads of games targeted at a more casual audience, on a Netflix style subscription service. Their flagship games haven’t got anywhere near the quality of the competition so far. I think that will be the level they stay at going forwards. That might fly with a lot of people but it’s not going to fly with me. I want the best of the best. Brand new games that push things forward. Hardcore gamers games. Stuff like Returnal. Look at Sony’s recent acquisitions.....

 

Bluepoint AAA quality.

Housemarque AAA quality.

Sucker Punch AAA quality.

 

The difference in strategy is pretty obvious. Sony are cherry picking the best of the best to stand alongside their other studios that are already deemed to be some of the best in the industry.  Microsoft are seemingly throwing bags of money at any old shite and hoping something sticks. 
 

The big question is.......when are Microsoft actually going to start releasing any of these games?!?!? Crash Bandicoot for Christmas 2024???
 

3 minutes ago, CheekyLee said:

Microsoft have tried, and failed, to make "better "(read: more successful) games than those. This is entirely why they have bought them instead.

 

But they haven’t bought AAA quality, they’ve bought a load of old ip that’s dead in the water and a couple of games that are big with the more “casual” player.......for $68 billion. Also, are folk going to be playing CoD to infinity and Beyond? I doubt it. Someone will make a brand new ip and everyone will eventually jump ship. Last CoD I played was Modern Warfare on 360. 
 

 

[Gabe]

56 minutes ago, CrichStand said:

I’m starting to think Microsoft are absolutely fucking clueless and are just resorting to throwing money at any old shit so they can have a list of titles to reel off for Gamepass. Has it not occurred to anyone at Microsoft that they could have just made some brand new IP better than Call of Duty and Crash Bandicoot for a fraction of the price

If that was the case, how come nobody else, anywhere, has? DICE have been trying for years with Battlefield (and failing), but nobody else has really gone big-budget military FPS, well, ever, now that I think about it. And CoD used to be known for being a solid 60fps boombastic experience, and it really does sit on its own. Again, the difference between Battlefield's attempts to create a Hollywood blockbuster are a world away from CoD (whether you like either game or not). Plus the multiplayer has been an event in itself for years now too. There's clearly a big audience for the games, whether you think they are quality or not.

 

It's a silly amount of money, of that there's no question, and perhaps down the line the folly of the deal will become apparent - but that's MS's problem now.

[Giddas]

The really popular games are popular because they are on all platforms though (minecraft, fifa, cod, fortnite, etc)?

 

[Alex W.]

Just now, Giddas said:

The really popular games are popular because they are on all platforms though (minecraft, fifa, cod, fortnite, etc)?

 

Minecraft was already a global phenomenon while it was still a janky Java app on PCs. Being multiplatform is good for building a cultural touchstone of a game/series but it’s not essential, and once it is at that stage, people will go where it is available.

[metallicfrodo]

9 minutes ago, Giddas said:

The really popular games are popular because they are on all platforms though (minecraft, fifa, cod, fortnite, etc)?

 

 

The really really popular ones seem to be on mobile or PC only, if you are looking at player count.

 

Not sure how reliable this is 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_video_games_by_player_count

 

But a lot of that list isn't on console.

[Giddas]

1 minute ago, Alex W. said:

Minecraft was already a global phenomenon while it was still a janky Java app on PCs. Being multiplatform is good for building a cultural touchstone of a game/series but it’s not essential, and once it is at that stage, people will go where it is available.

 

Don't agree, the trend is for the mega-games to expand into and be available across other platforms, phone, tablet, cloud, other consoles, but would be interested of examples going the other way.

 

[Giddas]

6 minutes ago, metallicfrodo said:

 

The really really popular ones seem to be on mobile or PC only, if you are looking at player count.

 

Not sure how reliable this is 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_video_games_by_player_count

 

But a lot of that list isn't on console.

 

And a lot is free-to-play of course

[Alex W.]

3 minutes ago, Giddas said:

 

Don't agree, the trend is for the mega-games to expand into and be available across other platforms, phone, tablet, cloud, other consoles, but would be interested of examples going the other way.

 

That’s definitely the trend and I don’t think there are any good counterexamples in gaming; you’re not wrong that mega franchises spread like weeds across every available platform, but I’m less convinced that it’s inherently necessary for success. The movie streaming industry is going through a splintering process where those with enough pull (eg Disney) are moving their content back in to their own platform, and people are following. That makes me think that Microsoft could pull people over to their platform after a move to exclusivity, if the barrier to entry was low enough (e.g. streaming).

[dfq23]

MS not making any AAA games that push systems?

 

How about a simulator that allows you to fly between any two places in the entire world with near photorealistic graphics,  realtime weather and flight patterns and VR support?

And get it to run on even the Series S!

 

And give it away for free!

 

It's no more niche than Returnal to the average gamer and was by a studio that had previously made "Garfield a Tale of Two Kitties"

[Giddas]

2 minutes ago, dfq23 said:

MS not making any AAA games that push systems?

 

How about a simulator that allows you to fly between any two places in the entire world with near photorealistic graphics,  realtime weather and flight patterns and VR support?

And get it to run on even the Series S!

 

And give it away for free!

 

It's no more niche than Returnal to the average gamer

 

that took me longer to install than I did playing it 😄

[Giddas]

8 minutes ago, Alex W. said:

That’s definitely the trend and I don’t think there are any good counterexamples in gaming; you’re not wrong that mega franchises spread like weeds across every available platform, but I’m less convinced that it’s inherently necessary for success. The movie streaming industry is going through a splintering process where those with enough pull (eg Disney) are moving their content back in to their own platform, and people are following. That makes me think that Microsoft could pull people over to their platform after a move to exclusivity, if the barrier to entry was low enough (e.g. streaming).

 

Yes streaming is the interesting factor here, I find it annoying and can't imagine many would pay for XGP to primarily stream, but I'm sure it'll become more popular.

[TehStu]

9 minutes ago, Giddas said:

 

that took me longer to install than I did playing it 😄

But they made it. You're not required to like it, of course.

[rgraves]

If I had to guess, I'd say CrichStand is typing up his posts between editing one of those reaction videos......