TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
One Piece only being below Forspoken two slots is encouraging (or Forspoken was a big disappointment, I don't know which it is).
It really has been more fun than I expected, and has so much more thought and new dialogue in it that it doesn't feel like a cheap cash grab using the name. If you go exploring on the map instead of to the objective the crew says it's because Zoro is lost but he's in denial about it, Sanji can't fight women enemies, characters have elementals based on their existing moveset, the story ties into existing arcs and places (Skypiea and The Five Elders). The only downside is the game should have allowed more costumes from various arcs or even some new designs. You have just pre-timeskip and post-timeskip, and Usopp had a Sogeking costume for a preorder bonus.
I've taken a swing at a bunch of titles as a result of them being on Gamepass, other times I've replayed things that came to gamepass and then bought them afterwards for future playthroughs w/ the gamepass discount.
In no world was I ever going to pay for Pupperazzi but GP got me to play it for a few hours at least.
Similarly, despite the popularity I'd never have played Vampire Survivors - but I did, and then bought the DLC for it. I'll probably pop for the game too as a result.
+1
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
So I'm confused should we not want gamepass to exist because we should always pay full price for games?
I think it's just another of many signs that it's untenable as is and what it looks like further down the line should be a concern.
All the current frustrations around tv sub services are exactly what I hope gaming doesn't become.
Once it gets there we can't put that genie back in the lamp.
Yeah, imagine paying $15 a month for each of four gamepass-like services instead of $60 a month every time a new game comes out.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm but yes, paying the same and losing out would be a pretty bad value proposition for me. And that is assuming it just somehow stops there and doesn't continue on and become just straight up more as has happened in the TV world.
I am absolutely not saying this would be worse for everyone. Obviously this set up is great for some people no matter the cost. But just that this exact cycle has already happened in the TV world and more and more people have started to see the cracks.
But that it is a very real and understandable concern. And should the future go that way there will be plenty of folks that supported it to get there that are unhappy with the result.
Would you have played any of them if the base cost of the individual title was less?
No. There's a fleet of strange games that I gave a try that I would not have at say, $5 to $10. Unpacking, The Artful Escape, Untitled Goose Game, etc. I didn't end up liking all of these, but I'm also not left with regrets about giving them a fair shot, either.
Part of the issue is that my "I'll try it for a small fee" quality requirement is INCREDIBLY higher than my "I will try it for no additional cost since I'm already on the service," willingness. My library is great and rents out DVDs and games, so I have the same policy there. Why wouldn't I give Cyberpunk a shot for the cost of... borrowing the game from the library, for free? Gamepass is that but for WAY more titles. When I didn't have it... well, I played 200+ hours of Destiny 2, and yes I DO have regrets on that score.
+1
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Honestly hope Motive sell enough Dead Space 2 to get a full remake of 2 or a sequel developed themselves.
Would you have played any of them if the base cost of the individual title was less?
Probably not. I already own like 600+ games. I don't need any more lol... Especially on ones that aren't on my radar.
Why not play some of those 600 games rather than subscribe to Game Pass?
If I may presume, I think (among other things) urahonky is using it as a demo system (that happens to involve no further charge to play the full game). I know I do. I'd have to check, but since the Xbox 360, my library lists +1000 discreet titles (a few apps and programs, but overwhelmingly games) in Xbox Live, including more than a hundred physical releases that were tracked per installation (and are still in the online library). I still buy games; Game Pass is a luxury option, not my immediate avenue. But for trying something on a whim, it's kind of unrivaled since the death of the demo scene.
No, I understand this. But I have a different thought in mind.
Game Pass encourages Race To The Bottom.
Game Pass is a service that you pay a subscription fee for. Whatever that cost is, it means that all games on the service are, functionally, free. You're not paying anything extra, and you may not even consider the fee you pay to be any kind of significant loss. If you play one game a month it's 'already paid for itself' and so on. Which is fine.
But, in the case above with urahonky (if he does, in fact, have 600 games and is not exaggerating for effect [and even if he is and the number is smaller, say 100]) there is a host of games that real money was directly spent on. Games that were already on the radar. Games that had some kind of specific and personal value. And now games that are worth significantly less because 'free' games are available to play. These free games that weren't paid any attention to, that had no kind of personal value, have become more valuable by dint of not costing a single extra penny.
For me, Game Pass cannot provide any real value simply because my Dead Hamster Internet makes acquiring the games have a higher cost in addition to the subscription fee. If I'm going to have to spend 10, 20, 30 or more hours to download something, then why not spend that time downloading a game I have already paid money for? But I acknowledge I am an outlier. That most everyone else takes minutes to maybe a couple of hours to get a GP game and can start playing practically immediately. When I had Netflix long ago, I was able to use it to access things I wouldn't have watched otherwise and many of them became favourites. Or at least I enjoyed them. So I get the kind of 'rental' aspect that GP provides. (I find I also may not subscribe to GP even with better internet access due to how I value achievements and such. So 'renting' Xbox games incurs another cost to myself that likely isn't a factor for others.)
But, when I compare GP to RTTB, the most common response is going to be 'I wouldn't have played it if it wasn't free.'
No. There's a fleet of strange games that I gave a try that I would not have at say, $5 to $10. [...]
Part of the issue is that my "I'll try it for a small fee" quality requirement is INCREDIBLY higher than my "I will try it for no additional cost since I'm already on the service," willingness.
And nothing against shoebox here, but this is entirely what is happening. If a game is too expensive at $5-10, when were is the floor? Some pubs/devs will see less sales via GP in the long run, but where do they price their game otherwise if there are people who wouldn't even bother for the price of a sandwich? So on to Game Pass they go, which gains them recognition to a wider audience. But then, what is the translation to future sales on a new title? Do they drop it on Game Pass again or hope that people will remember them and be willing to spend money directly?
For myself, because Game Pass has an extra hidden cost, I must be more careful, more discerning where I spend my money. Pay more attention to what is available and then decide if it would be worth actually paying for. Even at a sale price.
And none of this is to say that everyone, or even anyone, should agree with me. It's all a matter of personal value. But, every month Games with Gold provides to games for free (beyond paying for Gold). How much do people value those? How much has your thinking been altered simply by placing a higher value on all these 'free' games?
Rise didn't have an expansion but it came to HD consoles when it came to Gamepass, so if you wanted to play on series s/x or ps5 this was your first chance to do so.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
gamepass is good for games that you would like to play but dont really care to own. like i played through starbound recently, but probably wouldnt buy it because i already have terraria. i played through no mans sky a while back but never really wanted to buy it. its also how i played hades because i generally bounce off rogue like grinding games. i did try dyson sphere program on game pass but then bought it on steam because its awesome. it just seems kind of like a way to demo stuff im on the fence about. but then also has star wars legos and minecraft i can screw around with with my kid without having to actually pay anything extra. though i guess i did buy minecraft like 20 years ago lol.
I think it's more that developers should be aware that taking a Game Pass deal means more upfront cash but less sales over the life of the game
I'm curious how they calculate that. Because I've played a lot on Game Pass that I would not have purchased otherwise.
Looking back for an indeterminate amount of time I would have bought (eventually) Gears Tactics and Deathloop. Other games I would have waited for a steep sale or PS+ (like High on Life). And others that I've liked I wouldn't have known existed without Game Pass (Raji, The Legend of Tianding).
So I guess I'm not a typical player. All Game Pass is going for me is exposing me to games I wouldn't play otherwise and not really affecting my purchasing.
What I will say is that playing a thing on Game Pass makes me a ton less likely to buy DLC for it. Like I enjoyed Nobody Saves the World (and that's another that I probably would have bought), but I'm sure as hell not throwing down $5 for a new level that I can't ever play again once it leave Game Pass.
Hm, buying DLC for Gamepass stuff feels weird. I bought it for Vampire Survivors. No regrets, new map was fun. Let's say Starfield launches, and we all get the base game for free. Will I buy the DLC? Oh fuuuuuuuck yeah right into my veins baby. Should I ever leave Gamepass, I'd just buy the base game.
Now, I played Outer Worlds and while it was fairly fun to start, I petered out and ending the game was more of a "I wanna free up some disc space, let's bang this bitch out and move onto something else!" so yeah, no DLC purchase there.
Played Children of Morta on gamepass, bought DLC and full game once it left.
With first party game pass games they actually offer like collectors edition stuff without the base game. Like Redfall did that and I thought that was awesome. For 25 bucks I get the collectors edition stuff, but because its going to be a gamepass for life game don't have to pay for the base.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I regularly buy DLC and expansions for GamePass games, losing access when the game leaves doesn't bother me because I don't normally replay games and in the rare case where I do want to replay something I just buy it then.
Yeah, I bought Hades the day it left from Gamepass and The Messenger to wrap it up at my own pace. I'll most likely buy Dicey Dungeons and Vampire Survivors if they ever fall off. A lot of other ones I got my fill of while they were on there, though.
So I'm confused should we not want gamepass to exist because we should always pay full price for games?
I think it's just another of many signs that it's untenable as is and what it looks like further down the line should be a concern.
All the current frustrations around tv sub services are exactly what I hope gaming doesn't become.
Once it gets there we can't put that genie back in the lamp.
Yeah, imagine paying $15 a month for each of four gamepass-like services instead of $60 a month every time a new game comes out.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm but yes, paying the same and losing out would be a pretty bad value proposition for me. And that is assuming it just somehow stops there and doesn't continue on and become just straight up more as has happened in the TV world.
I am absolutely not saying this would be worse for everyone. Obviously this set up is great for some people no matter the cost. But just that this exact cycle has already happened in the TV world and more and more people have started to see the cracks.
But that it is a very real and understandable concern. And should the future go that way there will be plenty of folks that supported it to get there that are unhappy with the result.
I'm saying that games are a lot more expensive than broadcast TV, and you need a bundle of gamepass services to begin approximating the same cost as a la carte purchases. The same argument mostly works with TV streaming, as long as you can kill your cable subscription, you're still better off with a bunch of different services.
The higher cost of games is part of why we haven't seen a proliferation of successful services. Gamepass feels like its on the borderline as is. PS+ rarely does day-one, and the day-one tier for EA is kind of high.
If you're more concerned with the hassle of managing multiple services rather than the total cost, well we can see how that is going on PC, with publishers largely retreating to Steam now. EA Play exists inside of steam. Gamepass PC struggles to gain traction while Microsoft first-party puts up great sales within Steam.
On consoles the manufacturer controls the ecosystem, they can and already do integrate EA Play into their stores, I'm sure they would insist on a similar for others. As long as you are downloading games (rather than streaming them) its going to be something that is difficult to encapsulate into a single app that sits within a larger store, so the store will have to get involved and unify the experience across the various publishers.
0
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
So I'm confused should we not want gamepass to exist because we should always pay full price for games?
I think it's just another of many signs that it's untenable as is and what it looks like further down the line should be a concern.
All the current frustrations around tv sub services are exactly what I hope gaming doesn't become.
Once it gets there we can't put that genie back in the lamp.
Yeah, imagine paying $15 a month for each of four gamepass-like services instead of $60 a month every time a new game comes out.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm but yes, paying the same and losing out would be a pretty bad value proposition for me. And that is assuming it just somehow stops there and doesn't continue on and become just straight up more as has happened in the TV world.
I am absolutely not saying this would be worse for everyone. Obviously this set up is great for some people no matter the cost. But just that this exact cycle has already happened in the TV world and more and more people have started to see the cracks.
But that it is a very real and understandable concern. And should the future go that way there will be plenty of folks that supported it to get there that are unhappy with the result.
I'm saying that games are a lot more expensive than broadcast TV, and you need a bundle of gamepass services to begin approximating the same cost as a la carte purchases. The same argument mostly works with TV streaming, as long as you can kill your cable subscription, you're still better off with a bunch of different services.
The higher cost of games is part of why we haven't seen a proliferation of successful services. Gamepass feels like its on the borderline as is. PS+ rarely does day-one, and the day-one tier for EA is kind of high.
If you're more concerned with the hassle of managing multiple services rather than the total cost, well we can see how that is going on PC, with publishers largely retreating to Steam now. EA Play exists inside of steam. Gamepass PC struggles to gain traction while Microsoft first-party puts up great sales within Steam.
On consoles the manufacturer controls the ecosystem, they can and already do integrate EA Play into their stores, I'm sure they would insist on a similar for others. As long as you are downloading games (rather than streaming them) its going to be something that is difficult to encapsulate into a single app that sits within a larger store, so the store will have to get involved and unify the experience across the various publishers.
Ahh i see. But thats kinda the thing with the pricing. We are at the point where there are enough different services out there with prices high enough that it being a deal isn't even much of a thing. You can totally spend $100 a month on sub services.
With first party game pass games they actually offer like collectors edition stuff without the base game. Like Redfall did that and I thought that was awesome. For 25 bucks I get the collectors edition stuff, but because its going to be a gamepass for life game don't have to pay for the base.
I think I'd feel better about buying DLC for a first party Game Pass game. Nobody Saves the World, though? I don't know when it's leaving.
With first party game pass games they actually offer like collectors edition stuff without the base game. Like Redfall did that and I thought that was awesome. For 25 bucks I get the collectors edition stuff, but because its going to be a gamepass for life game don't have to pay for the base.
I think I'd feel better about buying DLC for a first party Game Pass game. Nobody Saves the World, though? I don't know when it's leaving.
I can agree with that, but most of the time when I'm playing a game on gamepass I'm just doing it to finish it, so if it leaves after that? Eh I got my money out of it. But I realize I probably have more extra income than most
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
With first party game pass games they actually offer like collectors edition stuff without the base game. Like Redfall did that and I thought that was awesome. For 25 bucks I get the collectors edition stuff, but because its going to be a gamepass for life game don't have to pay for the base.
I think I'd feel better about buying DLC for a first party Game Pass game. Nobody Saves the World, though? I don't know when it's leaving.
I mean, this is what happened with Code Vein; it went on sale before/as it left so I snagged it cheap. Generally, if a game is good enough to make me want to buy a thing for it, I'm pretty happy to also shell out the sale price when it leaves. (Because it'll always be at least 10% off, and seems like generally a good bit more.)
Game Pass discount is 10% always, yep. I think I paid about 30 for the Code Vein collectors/complete edition as it was leaving, which was more like 50-60%.
Game Pass discount is 10% always, yep. I think I paid about 30 for the Code Vein collectors/complete edition as it was leaving, which was more like 50-60%.
There are also occasionally higher discounts exclusively for Game Pass subscribers on specific titles, the same way Xbox Live Gold has various discounts every week. I don't believe they stack, unfortunately.
Speaking of... I think I have to quit Grounded. My fear of bugs and spiders just really doesn't do well with the game. Even with the arachnophobia turned to max I just couldn't handle it.
Speaking of... I think I have to quit Grounded. My fear of bugs and spiders just really doesn't do well with the game. Even with the arachnophobia turned to max I just couldn't handle it.
That's a shame I think that was my favorite survival open world game. Probably one of my favorite obsidian games of all time.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Speaking of... I think I have to quit Grounded. My fear of bugs and spiders just really doesn't do well with the game. Even with the arachnophobia turned to max I just couldn't handle it.
That's a shame I think that was my favorite survival open world game. Probably one of my favorite obsidian games of all time.
If I could turn off the wolf spider's menacing growls and stuff... And maybe feel like I'm progressing? That would be it. But I wandered around a bit, found the robot and then they told me to get the super chip... I finally got to the area but there were just so many orb weavers and stuff that I just couldn't do anything against and my anxiety was spiking the whole time.
Speaking of... I think I have to quit Grounded. My fear of bugs and spiders just really doesn't do well with the game. Even with the arachnophobia turned to max I just couldn't handle it.
Unfortunately, it's not Skyrim so there's no modding out the insects more generally to be trains or Macho Man Randy Savage.
Speaking of... I think I have to quit Grounded. My fear of bugs and spiders just really doesn't do well with the game. Even with the arachnophobia turned to max I just couldn't handle it.
That's a shame I think that was my favorite survival open world game. Probably one of my favorite obsidian games of all time.
If I could turn off the wolf spider's menacing growls and stuff... And maybe feel like I'm progressing? That would be it. But I wandered around a bit, found the robot and then they told me to get the super chip... I finally got to the area but there were just so many orb weavers and stuff that I just couldn't do anything against and my anxiety was spiking the whole time.
I could 100% see it being an issue, like I don't have a huge problem with spiders, but the spiders in grounded with sounds and like motions and lethality definitely was fucking terrifying.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
From the consumer side one thing that’s rarely mentioned is that it’s not necessarily a choice between buying or not buying Game Pass, if you’re a typical Xbox player. In my position, and the same goes for anyone whose main platform is Xbox and plays online games the question is: do I want to pay for Xbox Live Gold or pay slightly more to have Game Pass Ultimate. I might pay the $10 (?) for GP if I was on PC, but being on Xbox means I will definitely go for the upgrade.
There’s that, and also the network effects of being on Xbox with other friends who also have GP. A co-op game is going to come out and your friends are going to say “we should try X.” And I like no longer doing that old calculation that I used to do with those multiplayer games especially as a group that collectively pre-ordered Evolved; wondering if the game we want to play is actually fun, and if it is will it actually work, and if it works then the actual question will my friends actually play it as promised or drop it as soon as I buy it? Or worse, being the person who recommends the game and then feeling like I have to stick with it even if it turns out to be not as fun as I expected because everyone else bought in because of me. I like no longer thinking about any of that.
And we still abandon many games, even good ones, after 1-5 hours of play. It just feels way much better to do that within a service like this when you’re not paying directly for those specific games.
Yeah its way easier to use the free month of fall out 76 premium to try that game out again get upset about it and have spent nothing for the experience.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I've played a LOT of TERRIBLE co-op games thanks to Gamepass. Which is, ya know, kind of good, kind of bad. I had to withstand Outriders, Wolfenstein Youngblood, and Avengers but at least they only depleted my will to live and not my wallet too.
Game Pass is meant to monopolize video games as a service by shear brute force. It's the Uber playbook, lose money to offer an unsustainable service, but since you got more money than all the rest youll get the monopoly at the end and the law cant keep up with your lobbying and lawyers. The end game for game pass is the utter annihilation of competition.
Game Pass is meant to monopolize video games as a service by shear brute force. It's the Uber playbook, lose money to offer an unsustainable service, but since you got more money than all the rest youll get the monopoly at the end and the law cant keep up with your lobbying and lawyers. The end game for game pass is the utter annihilation of competition.
Enjoy those "free" games tho.
Then I guess Sony and Nintendo better step up their offerings before they get annihilated, eh?
Honestly, these aren't even the most impressive mental gymnastics we've seen in this thread so far. Gotta pump up those rookie numbers!
Game Pass is meant to monopolize video games as a service by shear brute force. It's the Uber playbook, lose money to offer an unsustainable service, but since you got more money than all the rest youll get the monopoly at the end and the law cant keep up with your lobbying and lawyers. The end game for game pass is the utter annihilation of competition.
Enjoy those "free" games tho.
As always when discussing Microsoft’s imminent gaming monopoly, it is worth taking a look at platform reality in console market.
Just feels like both Sony and Nintendo are finding success with their first party development studios, and in response Microsoft is sinking a shitload of money to just buy first party stuff for themselves after completely and totally fumbling all their IPs for the last decade. Like I understand in the gaming world Microsoft is a distant third but it feels like their version of "competition" is to lay waste to the land. Let's not forget that Microsoft has bought up dev teams only to shutter them before, and while I don't think it'll happen soon, all it takes is a change in leadership for them to start laying off evermore employees and picking the IP flesh from the bones
Just feels like both Sony and Nintendo are finding success with their first party development studios, and in response Microsoft is sinking a shitload of money to just buy first party stuff for themselves after completely and totally fumbling all their IPs for the last decade. Like I understand in the gaming world Microsoft is a distant third but it feels like their version of "competition" is to lay waste to the land. Let's not forget that Microsoft has bought up dev teams only to shutter them before, and while I don't think it'll happen soon, all it takes is a change in leadership for them to start laying off evermore employees and picking the IP flesh from the bones
I mean, that kind of is where Sony got those studios in the first place. Nintendo IDK, but I'd be willing to bet they bought some too. I've seen "no no it's an organic relationship because of longtime support blah blah" and yeah. Support with money. Just looks different acquiring a bunch over 10 (random number) years vs doing 'em all at once.
Said it before and I'll say it again, it's not that buying studios is inherently a bad thing! Its the scale of things, and Microsoft is on track to have more studios and IPs than Sony and Nintendo combined if they get this sale forced through. Right now everyone is saying well, outside the US Xbox is bad! Well, it won't matter when they're the ones selling CoD, Minecraft, Fallout, Doom, Elder Scrolls, Overwatch, Warcraft/WoW, StarCraft, Quake etc etc on those consoles (and PC) anyways. At this point it's kinda laughable to compare them, when in a few years the industry could shift dramatically as internet connections grow stronger and the landscape changes to favor digital and subscription stuff even more so than now. Microsoft might be the underdog with a gigantic piggy bank now, but should they gain more marketshare then they really will be a problem and it's easier to block these things than dismantle them later
Posts
It really has been more fun than I expected, and has so much more thought and new dialogue in it that it doesn't feel like a cheap cash grab using the name. If you go exploring on the map instead of to the objective the crew says it's because Zoro is lost but he's in denial about it, Sanji can't fight women enemies, characters have elementals based on their existing moveset, the story ties into existing arcs and places (Skypiea and The Five Elders). The only downside is the game should have allowed more costumes from various arcs or even some new designs. You have just pre-timeskip and post-timeskip, and Usopp had a Sogeking costume for a preorder bonus.
In no world was I ever going to pay for Pupperazzi but GP got me to play it for a few hours at least.
Similarly, despite the popularity I'd never have played Vampire Survivors - but I did, and then bought the DLC for it. I'll probably pop for the game too as a result.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm but yes, paying the same and losing out would be a pretty bad value proposition for me. And that is assuming it just somehow stops there and doesn't continue on and become just straight up more as has happened in the TV world.
I am absolutely not saying this would be worse for everyone. Obviously this set up is great for some people no matter the cost. But just that this exact cycle has already happened in the TV world and more and more people have started to see the cracks.
But that it is a very real and understandable concern. And should the future go that way there will be plenty of folks that supported it to get there that are unhappy with the result.
No. There's a fleet of strange games that I gave a try that I would not have at say, $5 to $10. Unpacking, The Artful Escape, Untitled Goose Game, etc. I didn't end up liking all of these, but I'm also not left with regrets about giving them a fair shot, either.
Part of the issue is that my "I'll try it for a small fee" quality requirement is INCREDIBLY higher than my "I will try it for no additional cost since I'm already on the service," willingness. My library is great and rents out DVDs and games, so I have the same policy there. Why wouldn't I give Cyberpunk a shot for the cost of... borrowing the game from the library, for free? Gamepass is that but for WAY more titles. When I didn't have it... well, I played 200+ hours of Destiny 2, and yes I DO have regrets on that score.
No, I understand this. But I have a different thought in mind.
Game Pass encourages Race To The Bottom.
Game Pass is a service that you pay a subscription fee for. Whatever that cost is, it means that all games on the service are, functionally, free. You're not paying anything extra, and you may not even consider the fee you pay to be any kind of significant loss. If you play one game a month it's 'already paid for itself' and so on. Which is fine.
But, in the case above with urahonky (if he does, in fact, have 600 games and is not exaggerating for effect [and even if he is and the number is smaller, say 100]) there is a host of games that real money was directly spent on. Games that were already on the radar. Games that had some kind of specific and personal value. And now games that are worth significantly less because 'free' games are available to play. These free games that weren't paid any attention to, that had no kind of personal value, have become more valuable by dint of not costing a single extra penny.
For me, Game Pass cannot provide any real value simply because my Dead Hamster Internet makes acquiring the games have a higher cost in addition to the subscription fee. If I'm going to have to spend 10, 20, 30 or more hours to download something, then why not spend that time downloading a game I have already paid money for? But I acknowledge I am an outlier. That most everyone else takes minutes to maybe a couple of hours to get a GP game and can start playing practically immediately. When I had Netflix long ago, I was able to use it to access things I wouldn't have watched otherwise and many of them became favourites. Or at least I enjoyed them. So I get the kind of 'rental' aspect that GP provides. (I find I also may not subscribe to GP even with better internet access due to how I value achievements and such. So 'renting' Xbox games incurs another cost to myself that likely isn't a factor for others.)
But, when I compare GP to RTTB, the most common response is going to be 'I wouldn't have played it if it wasn't free.'
And nothing against shoebox here, but this is entirely what is happening. If a game is too expensive at $5-10, when were is the floor? Some pubs/devs will see less sales via GP in the long run, but where do they price their game otherwise if there are people who wouldn't even bother for the price of a sandwich? So on to Game Pass they go, which gains them recognition to a wider audience. But then, what is the translation to future sales on a new title? Do they drop it on Game Pass again or hope that people will remember them and be willing to spend money directly?
For myself, because Game Pass has an extra hidden cost, I must be more careful, more discerning where I spend my money. Pay more attention to what is available and then decide if it would be worth actually paying for. Even at a sale price.
And none of this is to say that everyone, or even anyone, should agree with me. It's all a matter of personal value. But, every month Games with Gold provides to games for free (beyond paying for Gold). How much do people value those? How much has your thinking been altered simply by placing a higher value on all these 'free' games?
pleasepaypreacher.net
Steam: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198004484595
I'm curious how they calculate that. Because I've played a lot on Game Pass that I would not have purchased otherwise.
Looking back for an indeterminate amount of time I would have bought (eventually) Gears Tactics and Deathloop. Other games I would have waited for a steep sale or PS+ (like High on Life). And others that I've liked I wouldn't have known existed without Game Pass (Raji, The Legend of Tianding).
So I guess I'm not a typical player. All Game Pass is going for me is exposing me to games I wouldn't play otherwise and not really affecting my purchasing.
What I will say is that playing a thing on Game Pass makes me a ton less likely to buy DLC for it. Like I enjoyed Nobody Saves the World (and that's another that I probably would have bought), but I'm sure as hell not throwing down $5 for a new level that I can't ever play again once it leave Game Pass.
Now, I played Outer Worlds and while it was fairly fun to start, I petered out and ending the game was more of a "I wanna free up some disc space, let's bang this bitch out and move onto something else!" so yeah, no DLC purchase there.
Played Children of Morta on gamepass, bought DLC and full game once it left.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I'm saying that games are a lot more expensive than broadcast TV, and you need a bundle of gamepass services to begin approximating the same cost as a la carte purchases. The same argument mostly works with TV streaming, as long as you can kill your cable subscription, you're still better off with a bunch of different services.
The higher cost of games is part of why we haven't seen a proliferation of successful services. Gamepass feels like its on the borderline as is. PS+ rarely does day-one, and the day-one tier for EA is kind of high.
If you're more concerned with the hassle of managing multiple services rather than the total cost, well we can see how that is going on PC, with publishers largely retreating to Steam now. EA Play exists inside of steam. Gamepass PC struggles to gain traction while Microsoft first-party puts up great sales within Steam.
On consoles the manufacturer controls the ecosystem, they can and already do integrate EA Play into their stores, I'm sure they would insist on a similar for others. As long as you are downloading games (rather than streaming them) its going to be something that is difficult to encapsulate into a single app that sits within a larger store, so the store will have to get involved and unify the experience across the various publishers.
Ahh i see. But thats kinda the thing with the pricing. We are at the point where there are enough different services out there with prices high enough that it being a deal isn't even much of a thing. You can totally spend $100 a month on sub services.
I think I'd feel better about buying DLC for a first party Game Pass game. Nobody Saves the World, though? I don't know when it's leaving.
I can agree with that, but most of the time when I'm playing a game on gamepass I'm just doing it to finish it, so if it leaves after that? Eh I got my money out of it. But I realize I probably have more extra income than most
pleasepaypreacher.net
I mean, this is what happened with Code Vein; it went on sale before/as it left so I snagged it cheap. Generally, if a game is good enough to make me want to buy a thing for it, I'm pretty happy to also shell out the sale price when it leaves. (Because it'll always be at least 10% off, and seems like generally a good bit more.)
pleasepaypreacher.net
I can see why it has 16 million views (and an additional one from me now).
There are also occasionally higher discounts exclusively for Game Pass subscribers on specific titles, the same way Xbox Live Gold has various discounts every week. I don't believe they stack, unfortunately.
That's a shame I think that was my favorite survival open world game. Probably one of my favorite obsidian games of all time.
pleasepaypreacher.net
If I could turn off the wolf spider's menacing growls and stuff... And maybe feel like I'm progressing? That would be it. But I wandered around a bit, found the robot and then they told me to get the super chip... I finally got to the area but there were just so many orb weavers and stuff that I just couldn't do anything against and my anxiety was spiking the whole time.
Unfortunately, it's not Skyrim so there's no modding out the insects more generally to be trains or Macho Man Randy Savage.
I could 100% see it being an issue, like I don't have a huge problem with spiders, but the spiders in grounded with sounds and like motions and lethality definitely was fucking terrifying.
pleasepaypreacher.net
There’s that, and also the network effects of being on Xbox with other friends who also have GP. A co-op game is going to come out and your friends are going to say “we should try X.” And I like no longer doing that old calculation that I used to do with those multiplayer games especially as a group that collectively pre-ordered Evolved; wondering if the game we want to play is actually fun, and if it is will it actually work, and if it works then the actual question will my friends actually play it as promised or drop it as soon as I buy it? Or worse, being the person who recommends the game and then feeling like I have to stick with it even if it turns out to be not as fun as I expected because everyone else bought in because of me. I like no longer thinking about any of that.
And we still abandon many games, even good ones, after 1-5 hours of play. It just feels way much better to do that within a service like this when you’re not paying directly for those specific games.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Enjoy those "free" games tho.
Then I guess Sony and Nintendo better step up their offerings before they get annihilated, eh?
Honestly, these aren't even the most impressive mental gymnastics we've seen in this thread so far. Gotta pump up those rookie numbers!
As always when discussing Microsoft’s imminent gaming monopoly, it is worth taking a look at platform reality in console market.
US:
Europe:
Japan:
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
I mean, that kind of is where Sony got those studios in the first place. Nintendo IDK, but I'd be willing to bet they bought some too. I've seen "no no it's an organic relationship because of longtime support blah blah" and yeah. Support with money. Just looks different acquiring a bunch over 10 (random number) years vs doing 'em all at once.
PS - Local_H_Jay
Sub me on Youtube
And Twitch
I somehow missed this live action ad for Atomic Heart featuring Soldier Boy.
pleasepaypreacher.net
pleasepaypreacher.net