Topic: Game Pass discussion

Snap! I feel exactly the same. Yet I do have a few concerns where this will end up, i'm more on the progressive side.

Agreed but that is ONLY the devs who are on Game Pass what about those who aren't. Mike Bithell (developer of Thomas Was Alone, John Wick Hex) was very briefly talking about how he had tried to get several of their games on it but failed.

I've definitely done that. There's also just too much to play on the Game Pass (not complaining btw), so it's a question of do I spend more money on a game not on there or just play what is there. I've done both but more and more frequently find myself NOT buying games, especially Day 1 at full price.

That's a fascinating point I hadn't considered. I still think we want affirmation and they will continue to thrive, I just think it changes from "is this worth your money?" to "is this worth you time?".

Me too! Don't be sorry, it's interesting to discuss these things and you made great points. And I find it impossible to keep posts short, heaven knows i've tried!!! not that it shows

@Col_McCafferty Thank you for coming back. We started this hornets nest

I'm not sure exactly where I sit on this. I think it's possible, especially less complete games with MTX/DLC, though we've seen that already rise and become the norm before game pass.

I lean more to @nessisonett viewpoint here. But @nessisonett we're aware we are speculating about potential issues here, the reality is nobody has the answers yet of how Game Pass, and it's like, will reshape the industry... that's kind of the point of this thread. So while I lean more on your view, keep it nice, we're just having some friendly discourse and speculating

But there are some early examples backing up @Col_McCafferty view. One example in Minecraft Dungeons, a game released primarily for Game pass that is 5 hours long but has around 8 hours of DLC. That used to be a full game. Will it be that you get the base game with Game Pass but have to pay for the full experience.

Another would be Halo:Infinite. Making the Multiplayer F2P with egregious slow progression to push you to battle passes. That used to be included in the full game and there was no deliberately slow progression to push you to MTX. That's not progress.

It's too early to say if this is a model they will continue to push, it's inconclusive. I suspect they will in the some cases not in others. I don't agree on ESVI or I bloody hope they don't!!! Gamer rage will be understandably unbearable if so.

I don't blame any devs for exploring different financial opportunities OR for wanting to BOTH be on Game Pass and sell on PS5. If I was a dev this would be a sensible decision. Hedge your bets, get some guaranteed money up front and sell to the larger platform. That's sensible, smart business.

I don't see the rest the same as you at all. Several devs HAVE come out and said Game pass has been good for them financially, and in raising their games profile for even more sales, so your statement doesn't quite ring true here.

But I respect that you're a man of principle.

100% Agreed! It's my favourite part about Game Pass, playing games I never would have otherwise, the 1st party AAA stuff (not to mention some 3rd party bangers too) is the icing on that sweet cake. Their curation is simply excellent too.

Also agreed, that was my initial take. I was interested WHY someone would do that. That's why I asked the question in the article, before coming here. While it's not my viewpoint at all, I do understand Game Pass is a contentious topic. You are right when you say "There are a lot of factors".

TLDR I'm much more positive about Game Pass than many here too, especially right now when it is in it's user acquisition phase, but that doesn't mean I don't have concerns for where it may lead the industry.

This is my second least favourite part of these Subscription services, at least PS now shows you when games are leaving. But most AAA games are on for a year+ (few exceptions like Rockstar). If you want to play it that should be long enough, just have to prioritise, which granted is hard with so much to play. It's not good for people like me that get FOMO tho' Too many games not enough time, see below.

You don't have to subscribe every month if you don't want to. They don't make annual cheaper to make monthly subs seem expensive and push you into a 'cheaper' annual sub (Sony take note). You can subscribe for £7.99 this month (cheaper if you shop around) and £7.99 in Jan and let it lapse in Feb/Mar for Elden Ring. It doesn't' have to be either/or you can have both

But it is definitely the value proposition for anyone who want's to play more than one or two specific games.

That's a GREAT point. This is my #1 complaint about Game Pass and sub services in general. I put off other games to feel I have my worth of Game Pass and keep up with the relentless releases. But I DO have to praise the level of curation, there is something for everyone and almost no dross. Even the 5/6/7 out of tens have redeeming features and are often cult hits. But this makes it harder!

I agree it's not for everyone. But I don't see it as shilling. For me who's been gaming for 30+ years and plays FAR too much it is genuinely the best deal in gaming, nothing comes close. If I found Returnal for £7.99 i'd shout it out here and elsewhere, loudly. I think it's just fans sharing what they think is a great deal. I can 100% see how that is nauseating if you are on the outside though. Would piss me off too

Happy gaming!

I don't really feel like I'm missing out on anything though. There are enough games on PS5 and I'm happy replaying the odd classic here and there like TLoU or God of War. I get more out of playing genuinely great games like this then I would from playing newer yet inferior games.

MS are playing the long game, making GP seem like the only model in town, crush the opposition in the process and then they can charge whatever the hell the want.

I'm incredibly suspicious of the monopoly that MS are trying to create in console gaming, plus I'm not a fan of their big franchises anyway. TES 6 might change my mind but that's at least 3 years away.

From those of us on 'the outside', we could be on 'the inside' for just £7.99 so why ain't we? As it isn't offering enough to us right now... I know that might sound counter-intuitive with it being so cheap but money isn't really the issue.

If xbox all of a sudden was battering playstation with banger after banger but with no shots fired back like 360 vs PS3 I'd be all over it... xbox that is not gamepass... but regardless of the current public-sphere's perception, the xbox series vs PS5 is nothing like the start of the 7th generation.

@themightyant there is no envy mate, rather concern at where gaming is headed. Sony can't match what MS are doing with GP, not with their AAA blockbusters anyway.

They'd either become a lot shorter and less ambitious or be full of MTXs and season passes or only be possible with a much higher subscription charge, which could lead some gamers to actually spending more on an annual basis and not less.

If you just like to play games and aren't too fussed at what you play, maybe Game Pass is the way to go but with me, Quality trumps Quantity all day long.

Not sure about this so called monopoly. MS are currently #3 in a 3 horse race. Yes they are playing the long game but I don't think it'll be a monopoly ever.

My worry is that Sony will follow suit with a like for like service, not the rebrand/reorganisation of PS+ & PS now that has been suggested. I currently LOVE that MS, Sony and Nintendo all have different strategies. More choice.

Re ESVI - 3 years is optimistic! But in X years streaming should work well enough you can just play it on your tv for a few months subscription which would be much cheaper than £70 on PS5! /jk

@colonelkilgore I know a couple of people who switched to Xbox for the first time, because of Game Pass on one hand and Sony "being anti-consumer" on the other - and that's fine, they seem to be happy with it.
Myself, I would not want to lose the opportunity to play games like Returnal, Ratchet & Clank, the Final Fantasy series, Guilty Gear and other PS console exclusives, even if the other option was completely free games (sure, I'm probably in a privileged situation being able to afford it all quite easily). That's not to say Xbox doesn't have good exclusive games - they're just nowhere near as appealing to me as the ones of PlayStation.
So yeah, Xbox might offer a more accessible entry point to gaming (with Game Pass and Series S) but for me PlayStation is still where it's at in regard to what actually matters - the games.
And yeah, a lot of them are or will be on PC but I'm sure I'm not the only one who never wants to be a PC gamer again

It's an interesting topic and I'd say I'm sort of 50/50 on this sort of model. I subscribe to TV and music services so really I should be ok with it but I'm actually not that ok with how the music services work and can see games going the same way as them.

I've mentioned it before in another post but basically I see this playing out as.... for most subscribers (not all but most) as they will end up not buying games that aren't on the service because they will have this "I'll wait till it's on <X subservice>" mentality. That means that it's sort of forcing publishers hands as they feel they have to have their games on that service to make any money. That's fine for the short and medium term as alongside the subs services we've still got game sales occurring on platforms like Playstation and Nintendo. What happens though when game sales collapse because everything is driven by subscriptions? There's basically no money to be made selling games anymore so the only place you can gets your money is from one of the streaming services but how much money is there realistically going to be available for actual games as the amount users are paying is a lot less than they would if buying games, plus the streaming services will no doubt be trying to recoup a lot of the money they spent originally building up their services by giving stuff away for less than it's worth.

That leaves only a set amount of cash to dish around to all these publishers that are making games, which is a lot less than they would have got if they'd have sold them in the traditional sense. So that most likely means that the smaller guys don't see much money at all and even the bigger publishers make less than they used to. This is evidenced by what's happened with music where the likes of Spotify actually end up paying small artists pretty much nothing even though they get a reasonable number of listens each month because it's such a small piece of the pie and there's only so much money in the pot.

Those feelings aside I do also question how much game sales are going to be affected by this due to that perceived value of it being on a subscription service. A good example that @Voltan bought up earlier was Hades. I bought it even though it released on GP because of all the positive praise but also because it was only £25. Now if that game had cost £70 but was also on GP then I'd definitely question why I was paying that for it and wonder why the publisher doesn't feel that their game is worth full price on all platforms. It would make me feel like I'm paying way over the odds for it and probably wait for a sale.

@Voltan I think that is the crux right now... if gaming isn't too much of a burden on your finances PlayStation or Nintendo (depending on your personal likes and dislikes) are the places to play. Where as if gaming has just seemed to be causing more and more of a financial impact then GamePass is the place to be.

Obviously 'some' generalisation there... but this thread doesn't seem averse to some of that in fairness 😉

The thing is that Sony is exhibiting the exact same pattern that Microsoft had a couple of years ago, which is that they are now on an acquisition spree. For what purpose are they acquiring so many studios? Well, with the rumour of PlayStation Game Pass, it does feel like they are going to follow suit with Microsoft's strategy and start releasing more of their own games on a subscription service of their own. Because that's what Microsoft did, they bought up a lot of studios purely for the reason of enriching the Game Pass library. So to me, it only makes sense that Sony is planning on doing the same thing. Whether that entails all first-party games being made available day one on the service or only a fair amount is yet to be seen though. Although considering the rumour states that PS5 games will be added later, it does seem that they'll be testing the waters first in order to see if the model is feasible or not.

But yeah, you don't really buy up tons of studios like that without a larger purpose in mind.

@render I have to say something about the Spotify and small artist thing, as I am a small time artist who is on Spotify myself.
I made more money from Spotify streams than I did selling my latest album on CD. Now, of course, if all those people bought the CD, I'd made a ton more - but I'm actually fairly certain I'd sell even less if my music wasn't on there.
You'll see artists complain about not getting enough from Spotify - and maybe they could pay more, I don't know, but most importantly it's usually artists that had been out there before sharing files over the internet became a thing. I'm just not convinced they would be making a lot more selling their music if streaming services didn't exist - as a lot of people would just resort to "illegal" downloads in that case.

@LtSarge highly possible and plausible... in my humble opinion though the 'more' likely reason is to prevent them from being bought by Microsoft.

@LtSarge Or it could be a defensive strategy to stop another publisher / console manufacturer from grabbing them?

Edit: @colonelkilgore snap!

@render great minds @render... great minds 😎

@colonelkilgore @render It makes sense for studios like Insomniac, Bluepoint and Housemarque. But what about the others? Does Sony really care that much about preventing studios such as Valkyrie Entertainment, Firesprite, Fabrik Games and so on from being acquired? What about all the third-party exclusivity deals they've made with studios like Firewalk or Jade Raymond's Haven? They're expanding way too much for it to only be a defensive strategy.

@Voltan It's good to hear from someone who benefits from Spotify then as this goes against most of the stories that I see. The ones I've read also seem to be from a mix of people, those artists that have been out there longer and newer artists that are trying to break through. Sure there were always people pirating music and you could do it that way but a lot of people were still buying music before streaming services came along. Now pretty much all music is seen as free and certainly the younger generation are really reluctant to pay for it. That's lead to artists having to get money from other things e.g. gig tickets and merchandise. Well really I'd argue that's where we are with games. You can't get your money from the game anymore so throw the base game out there and make money on MTX for stuff like cosmetics. With games though it has the profound affect of actually changing the types of games made and I don't think I like the idea of that.

Never suggested envy, not once. I completely agree GP isn't for everyone. Genuinely glad you are happy without.

I just wanted to hear your concerns for boycotting games that were on it day 1. I think some of them hold weight and others are typically human, fear of change, rather than based in fact. The truth is we won't know for a long time... until Skynet has taken over and it's too late 🤪

This is possible. You'll see I suggested two games where I feel this DOES already happen. But it's worth noting that only two of many that DON'T follow that model. But you're not omniscient, neither am I, and we don't know that this is where it is going. It's just a hunch you have. I'm not saying you are wrong, but it's not a fact by any means either.

I agree on quality. But I play basically all the same games you do on PS5. I doesn't have to be binary, either/or, you can have the best of both worlds. Many I would have bought are included in Game Pass, some even day 1, that saves me cash. Though I think my favourite part is the games I didn't know I wanted to play. It expands my horizons.

But as you rightly say, not for everyone.

Thanks for sharing your take, appreciated.

@LtSarge Worth noting that a lot of the studios that Sony acquired are ones that will work as support to Sony's "main" studios. It might be that they want to increase the output of their Naughty Dogs, Insomniacs and Santa Monicas and it makes more sense to have people experienced in working this way (so they can be delegated to work where they're currently needed) than expanding the existing studios.
Jimmy R. did talk about them wanting to release quality games more often, I believe.