You Shall Not Pass!

Scot

The Game Pass, coming to us in various forms has only had the cheerleader treatment from gaming journalists. Like every new revenue method since games began the Pass does not just get a pass, the pom-poms come out.

The thing is, every new revenue method comes with issues some worse than others, from F2P to loot boxes to the impeding danceathon we will get about  crypto games they have all changed the gameplay landscape irrevocably and not for the better.

So what is the issue with Passes, what is the danger that I certainly have not seen mentioned elsewhere? Well, there is an analogy to paying for a "box" and having a pass system elsewhere in entertainment. It comes from the friction between releasing a film to cinemas and releasing it at a later date to TV networks. Back when I was a kid you could wait six to eight years for a film shown in the cinema to show on Terrestrial TV, now the same sort of film might take only two years. More recently the friction has been between cinema releases and streaming releases. Marvel films shown in the cinema then stream 40 to 60 days later, while in gaming more and more new titles are ending up on passes; why go to the cinema, why buy a full priced game?

The cinema has two cards up its sleeve gaming does not, its a "day out" and the "big screen". Paying for a "box" at launch gaming also has two card up its sleeve, the peer pressure of playing with your mates, or if solo being able to brag you are playing. I have to say that solo bragging rights does not seem that big a carrot to me.

Back in the day the period between cinema release and TV release became smaller and smaller, it was a real problem and a major factor in people just skipping anything but their favourite genres. The problems the cinema was having was talked about a lot, I will skip the reasons for its recovery as I don't see how gaming can mirror them. Now, cinema journalists are already questioning the benefits and damage streaming is doing to cinema.

Following that model we are going to get the time taken for a full priced game even the big hitters to go to pass getting smaller and smaller, that will impact whether players decide to buy a game or not. There is the possibility of a game making up loses as it goes to the pass, but that argument was used for what was happening to films and it did not work out. I will note we are talking about different beasts but entertainment is entertainment, they are not chalk and cheese.

Is a gaming industry that only releases to Pass a sustainable model for big AAA releases? Well that's the one thing I did see gaming journalists talking about without doing a welcoming song and dance, they raised a query over that, it seems unlikely to me for sure.


In Summation (I could not bother to read all that! )

High priced games are going to release earlier and earlier to Pass systems, to the detriment of AAA games which may not be able garner the budget needed for such extravaganzas, we will see fewer big budget games.


(Apologies to Tolkien for a Film Quote)

Slapshot1188

As a consumer, over the last few years... Gamepass has been by far the best gaming value I have seen.  Everyone is an individual and if you are someone that wants to own every game you play then it's not for you.  But I have played a bunch of games, many of which I would never have tried without the Gamepass.  Now I did always use the Gold-Utimate trick which drove the cost way down to something like $50 a year.  With the new conversion ratio it's not quite as good but will still be a great value to me.

Now if that netagively impacts future games... Im not so sure.    We will never see all games go to a single Pass.  There will always be competition.  Be it some other Pass from other companies or be it a service like Steam.  And that competition will drive the games to continue to innovate.

As for my favorite genre MMORPG... I can't see it getting much worse than it is today.

Scot

Slapshot1188 said:

As a consumer, over the last few years... Gamepass has been by far the best gaming value I have seen.  Everyone is an individual and if you are someone that wants to own every game you play then it's not for you.  But I have played a bunch of games, many of which I would never have tried without the Gamepass.  Now I did always use the Gold-Utimate trick which drove the cost way down to something like $50 a year.  With the new conversion ratio it's not quite as good but will still be a great value to me.

Now if that netagively impacts future games... Im not so sure.    We will never see all games go to a single Pass.  There will always be competition.  Be it some other Pass from other companies or be it a service like Steam.  And that competition will drive the games to continue to innovate.

As for my favorite genre MMORPG... I can't see it getting much worse than it is today.

I am not saying there are no advantages, think of how people first thought about seeing films on TV and then Streaming. There are likewise big advantages for the gamer. But we have never seen a new revenue system come in without a big problem, I guess the last major one was crowd funding, there is always a downside, that was one you helped wise me up to.

So how big a problem could it be? Yes, I think the big franchise names could be relatively immune but I am not sure. People thought that about the Hollywood blockbusters back in the day and even they were hit. The more immediate problem will be for the new AAA titles, it is going to be very easy for the next game with a franchise like "Diablo 4" to thumb its nose at a Pass. But what about totally new AAA games? This dilemma in films "when to launch and when to stream" has been called a 'roll of the die', it is fraught with uncertainty.

Dattelis

I know many people may not view at least gamepass like this but I've always viewed it as a 'demo' system, kind of like how they used to have those game magazine subscriptions that would give you a free demo disc every month. 

Game developers kind of hurt themselves in the long term and push people like me towards gamepass simply because most do not offer demos anymore. Then there's just games that flat out turn out poor (looking at you Redfail). Sure, Steam's 2 hour full refund policy can be nice and is good for games that gamepass doesn't have but sometimes issues do not creep up in games until a good 10+ hours in or the game's pacing/story can fall off 20+ hours in and kill the rest of the game for players. 

From personal experience, if I like a game via gamepass, I wont buy it through there and just buy it for steam (simply because I dont really like Microsoft's platform plus I have 300+ games on steam). Gamepass is also gonna get guaranteed business from me next year since Persona 3 Reload is going to be a day one release there. That's partly because Atlus' ports are kind all over the place. Even though P5R ran like a dream for me (and P3R seems to be using the same engine), I'm still having problems running P4G consistently.

Cactus_LFRez

I feel like the games industry is on the verge of collapse,  they keep searching for ways to draw more profits and are reaching oversaturation, and are maybe over leveraging themselves.

In that sense a game pass system is at odds with the live service model that is also being pushed.
And maybe we are seeing a battle of different systems with companies hedging their bets, unsure how long they can ride this live service wave, which has already seen casualties.

A game pass system is potentially more customer friendly, kind of filling the void of Blockbuster, allowing you to play many different games without having to buy them all.
Of course it could end up like streaming movies, you have to subscribe to like 6 plus services to get access to everything you want.
And I am not sure how they would make money off that.

Honestly though, I think AAA games should die and create space for smaller games with more variety.  I am ready for this era of gaming to end, I just hope it becomes something better.

Slapshot1188

Scot said:

Slapshot1188 said:

As a consumer, over the last few years... Gamepass has been by far the best gaming value I have seen.  Everyone is an individual and if you are someone that wants to own every game you play then it's not for you.  But I have played a bunch of games, many of which I would never have tried without the Gamepass.  Now I did always use the Gold-Utimate trick which drove the cost way down to something like $50 a year.  With the new conversion ratio it's not quite as good but will still be a great value to me.

Now if that netagively impacts future games... Im not so sure.    We will never see all games go to a single Pass.  There will always be competition.  Be it some other Pass from other companies or be it a service like Steam.  And that competition will drive the games to continue to innovate.

As for my favorite genre MMORPG... I can't see it getting much worse than it is today.

I am not saying there are no advantages, think of how people first thought about seeing films on TV and then Streaming. There are likewise big advantages for the gamer. But we have never seen a new revenue system come in without a big problem, I guess the last major one was crowd funding, there is always a downside, that was one you helped wise me up to.

So how big a problem could it be? Yes, I think the big franchise names could be relatively immune but I am not sure. People thought that about the Hollywood blockbusters back in the day and even they were hit. The more immediate problem will be for the new AAA titles, it is going to be very easy for the next game with a franchise like "Diablo 4" to thumb its nose at a Pass. But what about totally new AAA games? This dilemma in films "when to launch and when to stream" has been called a 'roll of the die', it is fraught with uncertainty.

My guess is that games will continue to focus on cash shop type items to drive revenue. 

There aren't a lot of "upgrades" that individual movies can offer through an app like Netflix, but a game on Gamepass can sell anything from cosmetics, to storage to VIP benefits or P2W cash shops.

cameltosis

I don't have a problem with subscription systems for streaming, be it films, TV or games.

They key is not going to be with distribution, or quality, but how the money is handled and dished out.

If these streaming platforms hand out money in a fair way - i.e. the most watched / streamed get the most money - then I think streaming will be an amazing tool for all industries! It essentially makes funding democratic: we decide who gets our money based on what we play.

The issue is that streaming doesn't work like that now, and the deals behind the scenes are all still fucked. It's why we're having the big writer / actor strikes at the moment, because Netflix et al aren't handing out money fairly. I've no doubt the same is true with Games Pass.

It is also for this reason that I don't personally have Games Pass. I boycott EA, but Microsoft cannot guarantee me that my money won't go to EA, even if I never play an EA game through game pass.

Iselin

This incoherent rant about (I think) the ability of AAA studios or any studio to keep making good games when a game pass system exists is predicated on the OP's ignorance about the remuneration those studios get when their game is on Game Pass either at release or later.

The financial arrangements are crucial and missing data if the OP's concern is the sustainability of studios.

I don't have any insider knowledge about the financial arrangements between MS and independent studios (what they do with releases from studios they own is their business and presumably makes sense to them) but I do have knowledge of one example of the Epic game store doing a one-year exclusivity agreement for one game from a local indie studio that had made it big with their previous release.

Suffice it to say that the studio was blown away by the $$ offered by Epic that guaranteed profitability beyond what they had experienced with their previous game on Steam before a single unit of the new game had sold to anyone anywhere.

Now, I have no idea if MS throws their money around the same way Epic does but I'm going to guess that the deals offered to 3rd parties for Game Pass inclusion of their games are similarly attractive.

lotrlore

I came here for the LotR-themed thread title, stayed for the good consumer discussion.

This is forums done right, y'all. 

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Wargfoot

I'm hesitant for several reasons:

1: If your account is banned for abuse in one game you could lose access to several titles all at once.  The same is true for hackers - if they one they get all of it. (If the game is on a service, how do I get back in at all?)

2: In the event we have a major event (comet, apocalypse, whatever) nobody will have access streaming services.  For some that means no books, no tv, no video, no games, no nothing because they packed everything into the cloud.

3: In the absence of several good streaming services a monopoly will begin to charge so much money it won't be a savings (see cable tv), in the event we have several strong services you'll end up needing to subscribe to all of them to get the games you want, so you won't be saving much money.

4: I wonder about customer service from companies distributed via a pass.

I like the idea for a few reasons:

1: I play Minecraft on a hosted server - alone - because I like the access to the store, the updates, and having everything reliably backed up.  So the 'cloud' and a 'service' can be a good thing.

2: I imagine many games that would never get attention end up on these passes and may get more exposure than if they tried to go it alone.

Random stuffs.

Cactus_LFRez

To add,

An interesting thought experiment,

We know the material conditions products are made in affect their design,

For instance the free to play model leads to the removal of features so they can be sold to players,
IE limit inventory space to sell more space, limit cosmetics to sell cosmetics, limit XP gain to sell XP boosters etc.

I wonder how the game pass model would affect game design?

My thought is game companies would be making money from from 2 avenues, the popularity of a game or whole catalog, leading to more desirability from game pass providers and better payment conditions and the potential to convert "rentals" into purchases.

In a way that creates conditions more similar to the 90s or early 00s, with maybe a shift toward whole company portfolios rather than single games.

Wargfoot

I won't mind all FTP/Free accounts going through some sort of pass to cut down on spam/exploit/griefers (you can ban them this way).   

ValdemarJ

The market appears over saturated to me and I don't find value in spending a license fee on a game I'll only play once. A library service like GamePass and PSPlus allow me to experience a lot of games I wouldn't even try. 

I've played so many different kinds of games since I've started using the service and that alone has added a lot of value to my hobby. Being exposed to so many different games has been eye opening.

GamePass specifically could do a lot better though. There could be a wider selection of AAA titles that stick around longer than a couple months. The service could feel more consistent and less "churny".

Also, after using GP for a long time now, I notice that it also heavily pushes its users to spend a lot on the games that are on the service. None of the "optional game subs" and a lot of the DLC for Microsoft first party titles aren't on GP. So, if you do play a game a lot, they want you to buy the DLC for it at least. That's such a low-brow "Walmart" tactic and it feels, dare I say, tawdry.

TL;DR - Overall, I like the service a lot and it's been good, but it could use some improvement especially if they're charging more now.

Brainy

Scot said:

I am not saying there are no advantages, think of how people first thought about seeing films on TV and then Streaming. 

You are spot on with your analysis and a little bit ahead of your time.  You are right with your correlation to streaming like netflix, this is exactly where the gaming industry is going.

Just like people before thought Netflix had good value so do people like xbox.  Fast forward when all the big gaming studios have their own version of gamepass, they will all be gobbling up old content to put on their service, then watch how other AAA's studios start to merge to create new services.  Afterwards there will be a rush for content, so a bunch of really trashy AAA games will come out.  Finally they will all just lay low and start releasing less and less good AAA content and sit on their marketshare.

Extremely predicatable, unfortunately I dont see anything stopping this from happening. Isnt this the same thing that happened to books and publishers?

Maybe a new entertainment tech will save us.

Slapshot1188

Brainy said:

Scot said:

I am not saying there are no advantages, think of how people first thought about seeing films on TV and then Streaming. 

You are spot on with your analysis and a little bit ahead of your time.  You are right with your correlation to streaming like netflix, this is exactly where the gaming industry is going.

Just like people before thought Netflix had good value so do people like xbox.  Fast forward when all the big gaming studios have their own version of gamepass, they will all be gobbling up old content to put on their service, then watch how other AAA's studios start to merge to create new services.  Afterwards there will be a rush for content, so a bunch of really trashy AAA games will come out.  Finally they will all just lay low and start releasing less and less good AAA content and sit on their marketshare.

Extremely predicatable, unfortunately I dont see anything stopping this from happening. Isnt this the same thing that happened to books and publishers?

Maybe a new entertainment tech will save us.

The difference is that games will continue to monetize through in game sales which movies cannot do.  

Scot

cameltosis said:

I don't have a problem with subscription systems for streaming, be it films, TV or games.

They key is not going to be with distribution, or quality, but how the money is handled and dished out.

If these streaming platforms hand out money in a fair way - i.e. the most watched / streamed get the most money - then I think streaming will be an amazing tool for all industries! It essentially makes funding democratic: we decide who gets our money based on what we play.

The issue is that streaming doesn't work like that now, and the deals behind the scenes are all still fucked. It's why we're having the big writer / actor strikes at the moment, because Netflix et al aren't handing out money fairly. I've no doubt the same is true with Games Pass.

It is also for this reason that I don't personally have Games Pass. I boycott EA, but Microsoft cannot guarantee me that my money won't go to EA, even if I never play an EA game through game pass.

I think hoping that gaming passes will turn out like you hope streaming will turn it is double wishful thinking. As you say streaming is not working like that now, if it was I would agree with you gaming could go that way.

Iselin said:

This incoherent rant about (I think) the ability of AAA studios or any studio to keep making good games when a game pass system exists is predicated on the OP's ignorance about the remuneration those studios get when their game is on Game Pass either at release or later.

The financial arrangements are crucial and missing data if the OP's concern is the sustainability of studios.

I don't have any insider knowledge about the financial arrangements between MS and independent studios (what they do with releases from studios they own is their business and presumably makes sense to them) but I do have knowledge of one example of the Epic game store doing a one-year exclusivity agreement for one game from a local indie studio that had made it big with their previous release.

Suffice it to say that the studio was blown away by the $$ offered by Epic that guaranteed profitability beyond what they had experienced with their previous game on Steam before a single unit of the new game had sold to anyone anywhere.

Now, I have no idea if MS throws their money around the same way Epic does but I'm going to guess that the deals offered to 3rd parties for Game Pass inclusion of their games are similarly attractive.

You seem to have got the gist of at least some of my "incoherent rant", so it can't have been that hard to understand. The lack of knowledge we have as to what the Pass is paying is problematic, you are quite right that obscures the issue, making it hard to draw conclusions. But what we can do is look at similar systems like the friction between cinema and TV/Streaming release and see if problems occurred and they did and still are. The main issue for cinemas right now is "we don't have enough releases", this problem is what could hit the box model.

Also, the funding you point out now may not occur in the future, as monopolies develop the holder of the monopoly tries to push prices down and that is primarily what they pay for a game to come onto the pass.

Of course gaming may not mirror film, but there is to my mind no other historical example that is as close to box and pass, that's why we need to take note.

Scot

templarga said:

What I like about Gamespass is that I can try games I am on the fence about. If I like it though, I will purchase it directly as I do believe companies should be awarded for a good product. I loved demo's back in the day for the same reason.

I do wonder what the "tried on Gamespass but then purchased it" ratio is. 

There was a guy above you who uses it the same way, it seems an expensive option to me, but each to their own?

Cactus_LFRez said:

To add,

An interesting thought experiment,

We know the material conditions products are made in affect their design,

For instance the free to play model leads to the removal of features so they can be sold to players,
IE limit inventory space to sell more space, limit cosmetics to sell cosmetics, limit XP gain to sell XP boosters etc.

I wonder how the game pass model would affect game design?

My thought is game companies would be making money from from 2 avenues, the popularity of a game or whole catalog, leading to more desirability from game pass providers and better payment conditions and the potential to convert "rentals" into purchases.

In a way that creates conditions more similar to the 90s or early 00s, with maybe a shift toward whole company portfolios rather than single games.

This is why I think it is rather faux ingenue of gaming journalists to just clap their hands for the pass. The idea a revenue system could effect games or gameplay, how could that be!

The two revenue streams is what makes the pass so attractive and makes cinema release plus streaming so attractive as well. It is the unintended consequences we have to be concerned about. For example I am sure the idea of F2P was never to flood MMOs with griefers and cheats but that's what happened.

Scot

Slapshot1188 said:

Brainy said:

Scot said:

I am not saying there are no advantages, think of how people first thought about seeing films on TV and then Streaming. 

You are spot on with your analysis and a little bit ahead of your time.  You are right with your correlation to streaming like netflix, this is exactly where the gaming industry is going.

Just like people before thought Netflix had good value so do people like xbox.  Fast forward when all the big gaming studios have their own version of gamepass, they will all be gobbling up old content to put on their service, then watch how other AAA's studios start to merge to create new services.  Afterwards there will be a rush for content, so a bunch of really trashy AAA games will come out.  Finally they will all just lay low and start releasing less and less good AAA content and sit on their marketshare.

Extremely predicatable, unfortunately I dont see anything stopping this from happening. Isnt this the same thing that happened to books and publishers?

Maybe a new entertainment tech will save us.

The difference is that games will continue to monetize through in game sales which movies cannot do.  

The books/publishers issue is close, but is it not muddier? Kindle is a service that becomes a publisher. Mind you if you end up putting all your games on a Pass are you really an independent gaming company any more? The same was said for Steam though and that was not as big an issue as was touted.

I don't think the situation is quite like that, yes games can continue monetization but does that mean AAA is unaffected? Does it not mean we will see more and more monetarization in AAA?

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

ValdemarJ

Playing a lot of different games I might not otherwise have done is a perk I take advantage of, not the reason I subscribe to GP.

It didn't start out that way for me when I first subbed. After a bit it kind of clicked, that if I was curious about strange games outside my lane, I could d/l and check them out and then uninstall them if I felt like it.

I don't have to convince myself I'll like a game before I try it like most box fee purchase experiences. I am free to keep an open mind. And if I don't like something I don't have to hate it and feel bitter because I just blew $70 on it. It's rather liberating.

Slapshot1188

Scot said:

The books/publishers issue is close, but is it not muddier? Kindle is a service that becomes a publisher. Mind you if you end up putting all your games on a Pass are you really an independent gaming company any more? The same was said for Steam though and that was not as big an issue as was touted.

I don't think the situation is quite like that, yes games can continue monetization but does that mean AAA is unaffected? Does it not mean we will see more and more monetarization in AAA?

Kindle is one of a few e-book formats.  Most books are on all of them.  Most books still are published by other companies.

As for your last sentence... of course we will see more and more monetization.  But this will happen whether a game is on Gamepass or not.

Scot

Slapshot1188 said:

Scot said:

The books/publishers issue is close, but is it not muddier? Kindle is a service that becomes a publisher. Mind you if you end up putting all your games on a Pass are you really an independent gaming company any more? The same was said for Steam though and that was not as big an issue as was touted.

I don't think the situation is quite like that, yes games can continue monetization but does that mean AAA is unaffected? Does it not mean we will see more and more monetarization in AAA?

Kindle is one of a few e-book formats.  Most books are on all of them.  Most books still are published by other companies.

As for your last sentence... of course we will see more and more monetization.  But this will happen whether a game is on Gamepass or not.

Yes, with books and e-publishers it does not quite hold as analogy, which is why I see it as muddied. Game passes could accelerate the monetarization though, that said when crypto comes in we are going to see cash shops with rosy nostalgia.

Cactus_LFRez

Scot said:

Yes, with books and e-publishers it does not quite hold as analogy, which is why I see it as muddied. Game passes could accelerate the monetarization though, that said when crypto comes in we are going to see cash shops with rosy nostalgia.

I was thinking game pass might actually curb micro transactions and season passes and merge them into a single service.

Like having different levels of game pass that get you bonuses in different games, instead of multiple season passes for individual games.

With Ubisoft Pass Gold you get a bonuses across all Ubisoft games, or something like that.

I am not sure whether that would be better or worse than what we have now.

Gorwe

While I don't mind what's good for me, one has to be careful about that. Because things change. Good today, bad tomorrow etc.

With that said, I don't have some voracious gaming appetite, so this don't bother me. I just purchase whatever I want(typically not much). And I like to own stuff ; as much as I can anyhow.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.