Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Sony is blocking MS from getting Victoria on gamepass?
So, money is the issue, like I said.
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Axios: Microsoft misses Xbox Game Pass subscriber target for second year
- Thread starter FalsettoVibe
- Start date
So, money is the issue, like I said.
feynoob
Banned
It will be, should cloud gaming find its foot.
Current console wise, it wont. There are limited consoles in the world, and half of those users would subscribe to services like this.
Your only option is one way, which doesnt need a console, and can be used everywhere. Its why they are fully investing in cloud gaming.
feynoob
Banned
Do you have selective memory?
This is what I mean, when I say, we wont reach anywhere with this argument.
Sony not blocking the game wont guarentee them getting those games on gamepass.
Read this part clearly. Victoria 3 is the result of failed negotiation.
Superayate
Member
Are you kidding ? The most important shutdowns during pandemic occured during march to june 2020 in EU and US (east) for example... (Italia, France, England, Spain etc...)
Some example => https://medium.com/super-jump/the-state-of-gaming-in-the-usa-and-europe-in-2020-a45133b53b32
"The US faced roughly two months of COVID-induced lockdown earlier this year, and it’s no surprise that, as mentioned above, consumers spent a lot of money on video games. In fact, this first quarter saw the highest total of spending on video game products in US history, up 9% over Q1 of 2019. Things really took off in the second quarter, with April showing a 73% increase year over year, May coming in at +52%, and June at +26% (Data from NPD)."
Last edited:
Those people misunderstood the purpose of GP and probably still do.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
No, you need to make your points clearer. I asked you repeatedly why Victoria 3 is no longer coming to gamepass.
So, why don't you drop the stuck up attitude and answer the question. If it's not money, and it's not Sony, then why isn't Victoria 3 coming to gamepass.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
And I clearly stated that very well.
What part of negotiation do you not understand? Do you think games, are magically dropped on gamepass?
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
What part of the question are you failing to grasp? Why did the devs not accept MS's offer? If it's not money then what? This isn't hard.
Last edited:
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
feynoob
Banned
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I mean how would it even work? MS offers Sony 30% of GP of the revenue generated from GP subscribers on the PSN? How would you ascertain that? You'd have to have a similar setup where you'd buy specifically game pass for PlayStation.
Now does this version of GamePass have the same value as PC and console? i.e. Does GP coming to PS mean that Microsoft Studios games all publish on PlayStation? I.e. Halo?
The reality is that even at 30% of revenue (which would be significant profit, without cost), why would Sony want to do this? First, they aren't going to get Halo and other games almost certainly right? Second, this would impact both PS+, their individual software royalties from 3rd parties, AND their brand value.
feynoob
Banned
I told you about it in everyway. You wont understand it, if you have other thoughts.
You cant expect people to accept your deal, because you think whatever you are working on is profitable in the long term. There would always be people, who would be against it. People who would look after their interest. People who want to take the risk of gaining more money.
Until gamepass reaches that critical moment(35+m userbase), everyone would have those doubts. Its a part of running a business.
Sony marketing deal is just a tiny bit of that puzzle. Since MS main obstacle is convincing those people, that gamepass is good for them. And it wont ruin them financially.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
What a fucking copout response. Just stick with "I don't know" and be done with it.
So, once again, as I keep telling you, it's an issue of money.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
This is like Apple trying to iphones, on samsung stores. It just doesnt make sense for either company.
MS is loosing the ability to increase their console userbase. Sony is losing their revenue.
No sane business man would agree to this deal.
feynoob
Banned
Which brings to the main point, negotiation.
Money disagreement is part of that failed negotiation.
Your angle is issue money. My angle is negotiation not going very well for any number of reason.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Now give a reason
Last edited:
FalsettoVibe
Member
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Ultimately, I don't envision GamePass surviving in its current state. Netflix learned the same lesson. Eventually, the cost of external content becomes too expensive and destroys your margins.
I think it'll become more expensive, and more Microsoft-focused with indies and the occasional big 3rd party title. Find any major subscription service that hasn't run into this.
feynoob
Banned
- Excutive bonuses for the company.
- Believing in your product having a higher success.
- Not trusting the new model, for bring more money.
- Money the other party offering is not good.
- The said platform not having enough users to cover the estimated loss sales.
There are others, which I have no idea about.
But that is the gist of it
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
So money
feynoob
Banned
It can survive, depending on how MS handles the console production side of it. That is what holding back gamepass console.
They also need to increase investment in pc side of gamepass. That is the highly important part right now. With slow console production, and the conversion rate, PC seems to be the driving factor of increasing those numbers.
Games like Wow, Riot games, and rts games would generally attract PC users to the service.
IF MS can accumalte 20m pc users in 3-5 years, it would be a great deal for them.
Bonfires Down
Member
Got it. This holiday is hopefully the last time they are supply constrained.
feynoob
Banned
Money is money. Your entire point of business is money. Everything is money. Your time is money.
Glad we are able to reach the end point.
Now lets end this stupid topic.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Money is money. Your entire point of business is money. Everything is money. Your time is money.
Glad we are able to reach the end point.
Now lets end this stupid topic.
Should have just fucking agreed with me from the start if you were just going to end it with money anyway lmao
Last edited:
Negotiator
Member
Satya Nadella - Agenda Contributor
Bachelor's in Electrical Engineering, Mangalore University; Master's in Computer Science, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee; MBA, University of Chicago. Former member, technology staff, Sun Microsystems. 1992, joined Microsoft; held leadership roles in both enterprise and consumer businesses...
www.weforum.org
MatrixReloaded101
Member
I don’t see how they expect the service to grow without releasing games. This year’s output as been horrible.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
Do people think they own anything?
You dont even own the house that you bought. You have to pay to electricity, gas, taxes and everything.
No one owns anything. Plus everything that you bought, has a risk of losing, breaking down and other shit.
GHG
Member
This is the thing that gets me with the complaints surrounding Sony's marketing deal clauses, do people realistically think Activision would have agreed to do some sort of day one gamepass deal considering the amount of money they rake in year after year from full priced sales? If they felt gamepass would have been more attractive then they wouldn't have signed that contract (same goes for all the other developers and publishers Sony have marketing deals with).
Where are all these big 3rd party AAA blockbuster games appearing on gamepass day one? Because I'm not seeing them.
Firstly the publishers who own these kinds of games have no reason to even sit down at the negotiation table and secondly, even if they did, the amount of money required would be obscene. Microsoft know this, which is why they've gone the acquisition route. So I don't know why they're attempting to frame their recent moves as being motivated by 3rd party marketing clauses locking them out of doing day 1 gamepass deals for certain games. You would have to be born yesterday to believe that.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Until the commies come and take my house away no I think I do own my house
GHG
Member
TheGodfather07
Member
says who? even phil spencer is claiming otherwise and they would know. why would cloud gaming find its foot? nobody cares about cloud gaming and never will. google and sony already know it and microsoft have realised it and have recently said that consumer adoption is slow. cloud gaming is like the "doomsday is coming". its forever coming but never actually comes! i still remember people saying most people will be playing over the cloud by 2020! lol.
Last edited:
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Yup. Microsoft might be able to spend obscene amounts of money, but it's apparent the ones in charge of gamepass third party relations don't have that same privilege. Their budget is tight enough that they have to wait for games like guardians to flop before they can even sit at the negotiation table
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
The bigger problem Microsoft isn't considering with Game Pass is the difficulty of retaining subscribers can and will impact the ability to retain consumers from one console to the next. Unless you physically or digitally own this software and you're able to play it on the next system, there really isn't a sense of forced retention here.
PC is definitely the driver here, but Microsoft has to ask themselves if PC gamers haven't jumped in now, what will make them jump next year. You make some good points around WOW and others, but it'll be interesting to see how they maintain those numbers and whether they canabolize revenue.
feynoob
Banned
Cloud gaming is early youtube as of now. It would be a hit, if they keep investing and improving it
The reason why it matters, is because the accessibility it has. The ability to access your games from a browser, smart tv, and to an extend your mobile phone means reaching a larger audience.
Gamepass benifits from larger audience, like netflix does. If userbase is small, it would not hit a higher target, due to limited ceiling. Which is why cloud gaming is important. Larger audience=more userbase.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
That's the big push behind Activision Blizzard. They need content NOW, like yesterday. Combined with Bethesda, it might be enough to limp along until their smaller studios can put out content.
Microsoft knows its over paying for Activision, but it doesn't care. They're in a bind and they know that Sony is quickly figuring out their supply issues, at some point when you see consoles on shelves, you're going to see what demand really looks like and if they are quickly outpaced now there will be no catching up.
If I were them I would have bought T2 instead.
Edit: But the problem with T2 is that GTA doesn't come out every year.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
general audience dont care about that. Considering most played games are f2p games, which can be shut down at any moment.
As for audience retention, this is the most vital part, after userbase. Having fresh content means, keeping the current userbase happy. Not having enough content means, people would leave your service. You need all kind of content, ranging from shooter, rpg, racing, horror, fighting, jrpg, rts, kids, etc. That kind of content makes your service a little bit attractive, instead of big AAA games. Not everyone has the same taste.
The recent focus on pc side helped those numbers rise higher. And now with riot games deal, it could increase faster.
Last edited:
NickFire
Member
I am on the fence about this one. Part of me agrees with you. Another part thinks GP could increase brand loyalty when a new gen starts down the road because of backwards compatibility. With the days of clean breaks behind us, the library carries over now. So a GP user leaving Xbox next gen would be facing a blank library when new games will be sparse. Of course, do the masses actually care about that when picking a console in a new gen? It's a fair question I think.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Those who think MS overshot their estimates on purpose need to remember this didn’t happen in a vacuum. High demand for next gen, Xbox series S, Xcloud, their biggest hitters in Forza and Halo, with no price hike anywhere.
I said it before and I will say it again, it was easy to fill GP with a stream of quality content because it happened near the end of last gen. It’s no so easy right now, but it’s easier on PC… until it isn’t anymore.
Netflix of gaming? Netflix released 395 new shows in 2021.
I said it before and I will say it again, it was easy to fill GP with a stream of quality content because it happened near the end of last gen. It’s no so easy right now, but it’s easier on PC… until it isn’t anymore.
Netflix of gaming? Netflix released 395 new shows in 2021.
Last edited:
The premium wasn't crazy at the time, it may have been better than the zynga deal.
It will be interesting to see how the B and K revenue will do in next week earning reports.
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
It was crazy because everyone knew that Activision was overvalued at the time. Their stock is entirely held up by this deal.
overvalued in what way? Profits/Earnings was pretty good at the time.
Every stock was largely overvalued but don't think ABK is an outlier in particular.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
That’s weird, one of the biggest complaints people have about the acquisitions is that Microsoft should have just spent money securing GamePass titles or timed exclusives instead of buying the studios. Not enough people understand that the costs for this will be enormous and there’s less return on that investment than owning the studio and getting all the revenue.
I haven’t seen anyone claiming games like RE8 or Activision titles would hit GamePass day one but they could easily hit after six months or a year, but we all know now that Sony blocks this from happening.
And that’s fine, it’s business. It just makes Sony’s ABK whining all the more hilarious because they actively engage in the tactics they claim MS might maybe potentially engage in if they own CoD.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
You're not kidding there. Doing something is fine, but then telling a regulatory body that they don't want someone else to do the same is where it becomes funny/worse.
Last edited:
Pelta88
Member
"Sony is blocking games from GP" is a nonsensical narrative.
I think it was Andrew House who stated publicly that the PS4's install base gives them better terms in terms of marketing deals which of course were happening decades before GP was created. So essentially, and by Microsoft's legally binding admissions, publishers and developers charge PlayStation less because of their platform's reach. Essentially
Publisher: I got a game
Playstation: Will give you double the instal base and a presence in every single country
XBOX: Gamepass isn't reaching its projections. We told the CMA that cloud isn't being adopted at a significant rate and our console market is mostly US and UK
Where do you think each publisher is going for the long term sustainability of their IP? Do anyone actually believe that when a dev/Publisher comes to negotiate with XB GP that they're listening to Phil's PR about GP being "The Future Or Gaming" or looking at the actual numbers which XBOX is obligated to provide legally as part of the negotiations.
Playstaion isn't keeping anything off any platform. Devs/Publishers are simply going with what is the most lucrative offer. And if anyone disagrees with this basic point.. Ask them why Microsoft tried and failed to make GamePass part of the PS eco system?
I think it was Andrew House who stated publicly that the PS4's install base gives them better terms in terms of marketing deals which of course were happening decades before GP was created. So essentially, and by Microsoft's legally binding admissions, publishers and developers charge PlayStation less because of their platform's reach. Essentially
Publisher: I got a game
Playstation: Will give you double the instal base and a presence in every single country
XBOX: Gamepass isn't reaching its projections. We told the CMA that cloud isn't being adopted at a significant rate and our console market is mostly US and UK
Where do you think each publisher is going for the long term sustainability of their IP? Do anyone actually believe that when a dev/Publisher comes to negotiate with XB GP that they're listening to Phil's PR about GP being "The Future Or Gaming" or looking at the actual numbers which XBOX is obligated to provide legally as part of the negotiations.
Playstaion isn't keeping anything off any platform. Devs/Publishers are simply going with what is the most lucrative offer. And if anyone disagrees with this basic point.. Ask them why Microsoft tried and failed to make GamePass part of the PS eco system?
Last edited:
Swift_Star
Banned
It won't. PC gamers will buy the game, not sign up to GP just for this.
feynoob
Banned
Why do people uderstimate PC users?
They have EA play, and Uplay+.
They would want gamepass, when its 10$ a month.
Swift_Star
Banned
Nobody is underestimating PC users, actually. It's because they're smart that they'll simply buy the game, not subscribe to GP fot it. Starfield is $60 once. GP is $120 a year, why would anyone interested in this subscribe to it? It's not gonna happen.
Last edited:
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Sony would pay less for marketing deals. Sony would pay more for subscription deals, because as you said, they have a much larger user base. Look at Ark, Sony paid more for a month of access than MS paid for the game to be on GamePass for over a year.
Also, you can claim Sony doesn’t do it or need to do it all you want, yet they do it.