Topic: Official Push Square Xbox Thread

@render on that day, I'll issue a full mea culpa and tell you that getting to play the forgotten City by cloud streaming on a crap laptop wasn't worth burning it all down 🙈

@colonelkilgore I don't see this making Sony offer new games on a service. Of course I have no actual insight into their finances but I'm not sure they can afford it while making the games they make - and these events won't make it any easier.
And of course, I'd rather still have to pay for their games than have their quality compromised.

@Voltan yeah I feel the same way (about making purchases to ensure quality etc) but I’d imagine that absolutely no suggestion is off the table at Sony HQ right now.

@colonelkilgore @Voltan @Kidfried @render Yeah MS seems intent to kill off the traditional paid for games market. It like that skit Sony did about swapping games poked the MS bear! 😂

@Kidfried They are trying to sweep that one under the rug for sure. Unfortunately not enough people care about these sorts of issues and vote with their feet when money is concerned, or saving it anyway. It's like Amazon paying their fair share of taxes, people didn't like it but did they stop shopping on Amazon - nope!

@R1spam I will look out for it 😉

$70bn really makes the couple of hundred million Sony spent on Insomniac seem great value though

@themcnoisy I haven't used it that much to be honest. I mainly bought it so I wouldn't feel so bad about getting D-Pad heavy games on the Xbox. Apart from testing it out fully when it arrived, I've yet to actually play a D-Pad heavy game 😅

Listen I understand everyones not happy. The market we have been in, for me since 1986 when I could start asking for games rather than plastic tat, has been fine. None of us have been bankrupted because of gaming in the 80s,90s or 00s.

If it's not broke don't fix it. Will games become less thought provoking and less brilliant on a subscription service? Probably in my opinion. No need to fork out millions on a behemothic title if everyones tied in. Also gaas will become even worse which not many of us Pushsquare heads are asking for.

Onto a counter argument and the reality is Sony used to have the IGC and binned that the minute PS4 became a runaway success. For many the PS Plus instant game collection was a major factor in PS3s rejuvenation. It certainly was for me and the 5/6 games a month early doors on PS4 was amazing.

That started to dwindle and we arguably had the worst 7 months on psplus last year. 1x online PS5 game and dead PS4 games. Whoopee. Sony stupidly failed to acknowledge that free games win hearts and minds and instead decided to focus on £70 games (too expensive) a crazy looking console (which is great when it's hidden) with a paltry 600gb SSD (which although fast is tiny really).

The games I wanted on PS5 were £70 and I can't warrant it for 1 game. Other than maybe HZD or the next Gran Turismo. Don't get me wrong I love Sony's games, Detroit, HZD and Dreams absolutely rocked my world. Sony have Microsoft smashed to bits in this regard. But they are games, very good games, but games nonetheless.

Since having the Xbox series X, 6 new games were on the service since my birthday including mass effect trilogy, the pedestrian and descenders. Today I got Windjammers 2, HItman collection and some Ubisoft FPS and 3 other games. To not be part of Gamepass is actually stupid. 12 games I will play this month alone (not counting Forza, Halo and Ori) all for the paltry subscription fee. Which I found for the price of £85 per year. Or 1 game on PS5 and a Domino's.

Will it go up in price? Most certainly. So Ive just bought 3 years stacked. You all game, we need to see what Sony has in store, as bargains go, Gamepass right now is the best Ive ever had.

@themcnoisy I've said this before and I'll say it again, people who don't like Game Pass have never tried it out, and people who like it have used it and know full well how damn good it is. Once you give it a try, that's when you'll come to that realisation.

I'm glad to see that you're enjoying it!

@LtSarge it's great. I had an amazing run on the PS4, pro and now my PS5. All great and all with great games. I would argue the PS5 has a better user interface and controller than the series X, it has my current favourite game this gen so far in MIles Morales and Astrobot on PS5 is pure nostalgia gamified in a nintedoesque way.

But now In playing great games all the time without worrying about digging into my household bill fund. I bought an 8 bit do controller which is fabulous btw and Im as happy as Larry (the UI needs some work still though tbh). Ive got my PS5 for the big hitters and will use Xbox as my daily machine. it also helps they have MS rewards, what a little bonus. If I carry on my current trajectory I can have a bonus coffee at cafe Nero in Autumn ROFL. So yeah until HZD and GT arrive on the PS5 I can blast Gamepass. Best of both worlds.

@LtSarge The only thing I can say as something for people that may not be a fan of Game Pass is the fact that they like to own games, and obviously Game Pass is essentially a rental service.

I'd say I'm somewhere in the middle or something like that. I still prefer to own games, especially physical copies on the PS5 due to it being a much more convenient way to install games. The Kraken compression making the games smaller, along with the UHD format being able to hold full copies of games on them in a lot of cases instead of having to download most of a lot of games like on Xbox.

With that said, obviously I see the value that Game Pass offers. There were still games that I played on my Series X that I likely never would have otherwise, so it's not like it's not worthwhile for me to continue to subscribe to it via Xbox Live Gold and then one month of Game Pass. If they ever stopped allowing people to do that, I'd have to reconsider being a subscriber as I'd be fine just paying for the essential games and leaving the indies behind if I had to, but until that day comes I'll continue to consider it a good value.

@LtSarge Just like with anything, there are people that have tried Gamepass and not liked it. And of course, vice versa.

Not sure why it seems so difficult for some people to accept that Gamepass ain't for everyone. We are well aware how good value the service is, and I don't think anyone is disputing that.

For me gaming is more than just value. That is one factor but but not the only factor. Otherwise I wouldn't have bought a 500 quid console on day 1.

I kinda have my own version of gamepass going on with over 200 games owned and over 50 yet to play. This are games that I've chosen. I will most likely not get round to playing every single game I've bought, but I'm cool with that and that is very much up to me.

The other thing that puts me off Gamepass is that I'm not overly keen on subscribing to another service. I don't sign up to every TV and Film service, and I don't plan too either. If I do choose to join another one, an existing one gets dropped. I've been thinking about cancelling PS Now recently as I just don't use it. It is a good service and I've gotten good value out of it, but if I'm not using I don't see the point in staying subbed. I will probably wait until Project Spartcus is actually a thing to decide.

@JohnnyShoulder pretty much my sentiments exactly… trouble is, that basically makes us the gaming equivalent of Republicans right now. We’ll be tarred with all sorts of character slurs next just because we don’t like the idea of gaming-socialism! 🤣

@JohnnyShoulder I just read in the terms and conditions for game pass - it says a member must indoctrinate another member otherwise they will forever be cast out to walk the plains of eternal damnation. That explains a lot!! 😆

This makes A LOT of sense!

@JohnnyShoulder The ever-present backlog is probably also the single biggest deterrent from Game Pass for me. I have probably more than a generation worth of unplayed games to check out at this point (6+ years), so why would I waste money on a subscription service when I still need to play games I've already paid for?

Another big downside of the service for me is its Netflix-esque set-up. I like playing games in my own time. I don't want to have to schedule my gaming around a rotating service. It works better for Netflix since movies take... what... three hours at max to finish? Games take tens, occasionally hundreds of hours.

Whereas, with something like PS+, I always have access to the games on that service if I'm subbed, so there's less of a rush to play everything.

Which isn't to say I don't see the value of Game Pass. I obviously do. If I was an Xbox-only gamer and primarily or only played Xbox games, then I'd be all over GP. But I'm not. Being a multiplatform gamer means I have hundreds of games available across a wide range of different systems. Especially if you include Steam and PC games in the mix.

@themcnoisy Sounds great man! I'm currently using Game Pass every other month or so in order to build up a list of games to play between each month so that I have plenty of new titles to play when I subscribe to the service again. That way I can play a good mix of new and old games throughout the year.

@KilloWertz Completely agree with you! I find the best way to enjoy games right now is to mix it up by buying certain games physically and playing a bunch of others digitally through Game Pass. Best of both worlds really and I just like having different options in terms of how I want to consume games.

I can understand that Playstation Fanboys are not happy. Some of the games they 'enjoy' will no longer be on their platform and CoD on PS in recent years has had more and/or earlier access to content 'ONLY on Playstation' so I can understand their upset.

CoD MP ain't going anywhere and its most likely to go 'Free to Play' on ANY platform - inc Playstation. The free to play model - apart from the fact most Online MP games are going or are F2P so difficult to 'charge' for a new game - means that 'everyone' can play on any device with NO barrier to 'entry' - also NO exclusive maps, modes etc to ANYONE...

Making a 'new' game - whether 'Exclusive' or NOT 'splits' the CoD Community. Its either going to split them between platforms (new on Game Pass vs old game on PS) or between 'generations' (CoD 2022 vs CoD 2024). Therefore, it makes much more sense to create a F2P MP CoD game with Seasons and maybe a 'refresh' every few years - Start with a 'Modern' era for a few years, maybe then refresh Warzone and MP to a more historical setting etc - point is, everyone is getting the 'SAME' Content at the SAME time and keeping the CoD: Online Community 'Happy'.

Raven could basically become like 343 to Halo, Coalition to Gears, Raven to CoD Online to maintain and update both MP and Warzone. Have access to 'every map' ever made to 'remaster', remake etc. Maybe make a CoD Online Hub where one mode could be a 'retro' playlist that this month is CoD4 so you have CoD4 maps and Loadouts, next month maybe BO3 MP. They could have a 'Community' section for creating 'new' modes or perhaps let you play Advanced Warfare maps but with say CoD:MW2 weapons, movement and killstreaks (no exo-skeletons) which could be interesting in BO3 as the Water and wall running opened up new routes but can't with CoD:MW2 movement as you'd drown - making those maps 'feel' and play different. Point is, they have a LONG history they can use to 'keep' the future of CoD fresh without needing 'new' games every year or two splitting the Community between those that bought the 'new' CoD and those still left on the 'older' game(s) The F2P model keeps CoD MP available for 'everyone' with all the same modes, maps etc.

CoD: Zombies will 'exist' on Playstation because those games with 'CoD: Zombies' will continue to 'exist'. Want to play Mob of the Dead or whatever maps are on PS will 'remain' on Playstation. Treyarch however could make a 'brand new' Zombies game that is basically the same 'Game-play' and structure as CoD: Zombies, with a whole new cast (maybe get Horror actors as lead characters to play), completely 'new' origin story (not WW2 Nazi's to 'fit' the CoD name) - a 'spiritual' successor if you like, that will be 'exclusive' where Game Pass exists. PS CoD: Zombie fans may well be left out and 'annoyed' that no more CoD:Zombies games will come and have to 'make do' with replaying all the existing games or sign up to Game Pass.

Infinity Ward could make a 'new' first Person shooter campaign to bring all those PS fans of Infinity Ward 'Campaigns' to Game Pass, or maybe want to try a 3rd Person Action adventure after decades of CoD only. Sledgehammer may have their own IP's they want to make, High Moon could revisit their 'Darkwatch' IP (PLEASE), and Beenox could make a Kart Racer/Smash Bros type game with characters from Spyro, Crash, Banjo, Conker, Psychonauts, Halo, Perfect Dark, Doom, Wolfenstein, Quake, Hexen, CoD, Fable, Hellblade, Skyrim, Redfall, Gears of War, Fallout etc EXCLUSIVELY to Game Pass.

Regardless of what you 'feel' about the subscription model, the fact it 'exists' and is MS's primary platform (if you buy an Xbox, they still want you to subscribe to Game Pass) changes the entire outlook of MS as a Game provider. They need 'BIG' Games every month - not 2 or 3 a year, particularly around Holiday to sell 'consoles', because they want to bring people into Game Pass every month. Not only that, they want to 'keep' you subscribed 'every' month - not sign up for 1month, blast through their biggest games released over the 'year' and cancel. They want to keep you 'month' after 'month' with 'big' games people want to play...

That also feeds into another point about Game Pass - Games aren't built/greenlighted etc because the 'Publisher' thinks they will be the 'best' selling game - hence so many sequel or big licence tie-in (marvel, star wars, harry potter etc) games or sudden trending games like Battle Royale. Now its about Subscriber 'growth', player enjoyment and engagement, subscriber retention. That also means they have more creative freedom to 'experiment' as 'Sales' risk isn't part of the conversation.

They 'can't' just be mediocre or average games - they have to be the games that people WANT to play first and foremost, have to be 'great' games otherwise you don't get 'gamers' wanting to 'subscribe' and stay subscribed. Forza Horizon 5 is a 'Great' game and won many critics and peoples 'Game of the Year', Psychonauts 2 and of course Deathloop, which with MS's money and commitment helped Arcane polish and add more to BOTH these, are 'Great' Games. Even Halo, which in 2020 looked AWFUL ended up a 'Great' game (yes its not the 'next-gen' visual treat we expected but still a great game, MSFS on Console is a 'Great' game - all critically acclaimed, all with 'high' player praise etc.

MS have stated (since they moved to a 'different' model and under NEW management) that they want Studio's making the games they want (not games they are 'forced' to for commercial reasons) and giving them a platform to reach 'everyone'. Ninja Theory had to pimp out most of their staff to work on 'others' projects to fund a 'small' team to make the game they 'wanted' - Hellblade. MS Acquired them and now their 'whole' studio is working on 'Ninja Theory' games. Undead Labs are making Undead Labs games. Playground wanted to expand and make an open world RPG - MS acquired them, offered them 'Fable' (which really 'helped' as that instantly got hype and attention on a Studio know only for Racing - and certainly going to help attract people into Game Pass over a 'new' RPG from a Racing game developer), Obsidian struggled with Outer Worlds funding but can now make 2 and a 'new' RPG they wanted to make 'Avowed'. The Initiative may have taken 'Perfect Dark', not only because it has 'great' potential, but also because they are a 'new' unknown so having a known IP makes people 'excited' and hyped but all these are 'games' they want to make.

Its more important to have 30+ studio's all making their own games to have 30+ 'new' games on Game Pass. If they can make 5 or 6 great games a year, that's 6-7 great games they 'need' to find for those month's a First Party game can't fill. That's where Xbox publishing also comes in - Contraband by Avalanche (Mad Max, Just Cause) is one of these and maybe that Cloud based Kojima project that was rumoured could be another. ID@Xbox adds the variety of 'independent' games too. Any other months that Xbox Studio's and/or Xbox Publishing can't fulfil, then you'll get a 'multi-platform' Day 1 game because they 'NEED' at least 1 BIG game per month to get you to Subscribe and KEEP you subscribed. They don't really want you paying your tiny 'monthly' fee to subscribe for 1month a 'year' to 'binge' play their 2 or 3 'exclusive' games and then cancel. That's something Sony will need to consider with their SP games - being able to play Uncharted, R&C, Last of Us1&2 etc stories for £10 a month (for example) and cancelling until Sony's next 'couple' of exclusives you want to play are on their service instead of paying £70 each. FH5 isn't a 8hr campaign, Halo I expect 'could be' but Sea of Thieves is ongoing, Psychonauts maybe could be played, but MSFS is too big and 'growing' too, Starfield is likely to be 'massive' and good luck completing everything in a month, Redfall looks like it will not be a one and done type game...

I don't know that Fable Legends would be cancelled today - it would be perfect for Game Pass but too risky to 'sell'. I don't know if Scalebound would be cancelled today but with 'escalating' costs and 'poor' hardware sales, the risk vs reward becomes an issue. With 'Game Pass', those projects may of made more sense as Commercial success isn't the metric anymore, its Subscriber growth, satisfaction and keeping them subscribed month after month.

Sony is in a 'great' position with its 'sales' focussed model. The 'risk' vs 'Reward' is a lot lower as a platform holder, publisher and developer of games. Getting them into PS leads to more 'revenue' too but 3rd Party Publishers lose revenue to platform holders (using their Trademarks, losing retailer revenue etc) so 'risk vs their 'reward' is a lot more of a factor. That's why Sony can spend 'extra' time on Polish, take 'extra' creative risk and with a 'large' loyal fanbase buying 'services, other games etc, the 'risk' is significantly lower than with EA, Ubisoft etc. That shows their 'business' model, the same model most, if not all console had before, is a 'great' model too BUT that's not the same model MS have now.

The Xbox is a MS platform but also a 'Game Pass' platform. People are buying Xboxes because of Game Pass, not because the want to play Starfield OR Halo specifically - like buying PS5 because of H:FW, GoW and Uncharted for example - but because of Game Pass. All those deals, like R6: Extraction, Hitman trilogy, ME:L edition, MLB21, Outriders etc etc are NOT made to 'benefit' Xbox owners, they still have to buy those like every Playstation owner, they are for 'Game Pass subscribers' only. MS don't really care if you buy a Series X to buy Starfield or buy Forza, they want you to Subscribe to grow their Subscriber base and to do that, they need 'big' games that people WANT to play first and foremost - not games which may/may not be 'Commercial' successes.

That's why MS don't tell you how many Series S/X consoles have been sold or how many copies of FH5 were sold, they are telling you 'Subscriber' numbers over 25m), telling you how many players played in the first week (over 10m played FH5). R&C took a while to reach 1m sales but FH5 was played by over 10m in its first week - NOT saying 1 is better than another but when less than 600k played 'Returnal' (however good, bad etc) in the first month, that's not 'great' for the developer who put their heart and soul into the project, critically loved by most, but then have so few play and experience it - they can't control how much it cost and whether or not that severely impacted its 'reach' and no doubt may find new appreciative players when Sony drop the price or it comes to PS+/Spartacus.

@BAMozzy nah, you think you understand… but you’re just skimming the surface. Very few Push Square regulars even play CoD, what concerns the majority of PlayStation players on here is… if we lose the CoD (& who knows in the future maybe the FIFA) ‘casuals’, then the PlayStation install base and annual revenue could drop so much that the 1st Party AAA action-adventure blockbusters that no one seems to be able to make quite like Sony will no longer be financially viable (& therefore stop being made).

Also, the x-thot gloating and goading since the deal was announced probably ruffled some feathers too… but losing CoD in of itself is just one of those things. It’s just business… Microsoft move a lot like i play poker ie just brute force it with by far and away the most chips, absolutely no nuance or skill but that’s capitalism.