Support NeoGAF

[Ridicululzz]

Yeah of course they're happy that they're going to reach more players lol

With that said though, I'm wondering how the game will perform sales wise. Not sure how big the Indiana Jones IP still is.

 

[Moriarty1889]

Of course they are happy. Playstation gamers will actually buy their game. However, its MS own doing that ruined their game sales by creating day one releases on Gamepass. That in turn conditioned Xbox gamers to not buy the games and instead wait for them to come to Gamepass. The numbers speak for themselves and are why they are now putting their games on Playstation.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

If you really believe this you you are a truly special level of stupid.

Are you REALLY trying to argue that Xbox is in a healthy position. Xbox is the child of a rich person who is getting cutoff.

Anyone with a functioning brain knows that.

The issue is that Xbox was hemorrhaging money for years but as long as they didn't lose that much money the big guys like Satya didn't care

Then they blew $6 billion on Bethesda and followed by blowing $70 billion on Activision Blizzard while generating a lot of negative public opinion and also a lot of unfriendly government attention and I don't care if you're Microsoft or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at some level after you blow that kind of cash and burn that much political capital the guys in charge will start paying attention

So now Xbox actually needs to generate positive revenue for MS probably for the first time in that divisions history. Next 12 months gonna be wild for Xbox

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I suppose you could try it on Gamepass for cheap, you may like it? They've definitely nailed the look and tone of the movie's.

Like I said, I have zero interest in a game like this in first person. It was a huge mistake not to make this a 3rd person action game.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Well no shit! This is business. Why would you want your game to be exclusive to the least popular platform? That's millions of sales that won't even be possible on xbox because of its non existent install base. The ones that are left don't even purchase games anymore.

 

[ShaiKhulud1989]

Indiana Jones and the Platform of Solvency

 

[Ebrietas]

The issue is that Xbox was hemorrhaging money for years but as long as they didn't lose that much money the big guys like Satya didn't care

Then they blew $6 billion on Bethesda and followed by blowing $70 billion on Activision Blizzard while generating a lot of negative public opinion and also a lot of unfriendly government attention and I don't care if you're Microsoft or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at some level after you blow that kind of cash and burn that much political capital the guys in charge will start paying attention

So now Xbox actually needs to generate positive revenue for MS probably for the first time in that divisions history. Next 12 months gonna be wild for Xbox

It's amazing how they spent all that money with the aim of taking games away from PS and driving them out of the market...only to have to turn around and keep everything multiplatform anyway because their own console completely cratered in terms of hardware and software sales and the higher ups at MS are now demanding a positive return on their 80 billion investment.

Sony was able to take Xbox out of the equation without having to spend a dime of their own. MS foot the entire bill for them. Phil is a true business genius.

 

[Barakov]

Source​

There's definitely a chance it will sell more and Machine Games won't go under. Given how many people under the Xbox umbrella have lost their jobs this is a pretty good thing for them.

 

[Negotiator101]

Like I said, I have zero interest in a game like this in first person. It was a huge mistake not to make this a 3rd person action game.

Fair enough.

 

[Moses85]

You could keep it

Was waiting for him

 

[AFBT88]

Then again, they are going after the non existence "modern audience", and I wonder if being on PS5 will be enough to save them.

How are they going after "modern audience", im sorry but i haven't followed this game other than watching the trailers. What have they done?

 

[mayham2199]

It's not hard to figure out.

Because this deal was made several years ago, when MS was in a less precarious position and PS5 and XS sales were much closer. The game was announced in January 2021. The next Xbox and PS consoles had come out and were selling out. At the time, few expected Xbox to win the generation, but expected them to be much more competitive now that they owned Bethesda. Nobody expected Xbox to completely shit the bed at that time.

It's also now well known that Disney exclusives require specific sales number that MS could have easily sold as doable at the time of the negotiation.

Again, not hard to figure out.

It's possible Disney forced them but doesn't it just seem more likely that this is just part of their push to go multiplat? Even if Disney forced them I don't believe for one second Disney forced them to announce it during Gamescom. They did the announcement during gamescom IMO to send a clear message. There are more games coming I just feel like Disney has nothing to do with this.

 

[Badlucktroll]

gotta be better than this one

 

[Lunarorbit]

gotta be better than this one

Fuck.....ptsd. I don't remember what version of this I played but the perspective on this level is so fucking weird. It made it mind numbingly frustrating to play it.

Reminded me of one of the 1st games I had called crystal castle, which I couldn't stand. In hindsight I think I was just too young to figure it out

 

[mitch1971]

You could keep it

When a parent with a stutter tells the nurse the name for the birth cetificate.

 

[Moriarty1889]

How the fuck they went from making testosterone filled, macho fps wolfenstein to...that?

Holy shit is this gonna be like the last indy movie?

Sadly, these are the type of weirdos that these devs are loaded with working on games.

 

[Ozriel]

Of course they are happy. Playstation gamers will actually buy their game. However, its MS own doing that ruined their game sales by creating day one releases on Gamepass. That in turn conditioned Xbox gamers to not buy the games and instead wait for them to come to Gamepass. The numbers speak for themselves and are why they are now putting their games on Playstation.

This thread keeps delivering hilarious takes like this one that pretends Steam doesn’t exist, and pretends that Microsoft doesn’t care about providing content for GamePass.

I’ve also lost track…are these the same ‘conditioned’ GamePass subscribers that were expected to ditch the service with the price hike?

 

[Ristifer]

How are they going after "modern audience", im sorry but i haven't followed this game other than watching the trailers. What have they done?

Nothing yet. People just keep pasting that one picture in any Indy thread, waiting for the moment that they can call it out.

 

[PJX]

This thread keeps delivering hilarious takes like this one that pretends Steam doesn’t exist, and pretends that Microsoft doesn’t care about providing content for GamePass.

I’ve also lost track…are these the same ‘conditioned’ GamePass subscribers that were expected to ditch the service with the price hike?

As a 3D artist / developer, it isn't a secret in the development community that Gamepass has killed sales of games on the platform. We''ve done our own study and found out that 8 out of 10 gamers won't play a game if it isn't on Gamepass.

 

[Humdinger]

How are they going after "modern audience", im sorry but i haven't followed this game other than watching the trailers. What have they done?

There was an early trailer where Indy was following after a strong female character. Indy seemed like a confused doofus, and she seemed like she was leading and knew what she was doing. That's about the only thing I've noticed so far. Maybe that was just an anomaly, but it does fit with the photo of the narrative director.

I'd like to play the game. I enjoy old-fashioned action-adventure games, and with the decline of Uncharted and Tomb Raider, I'm open for something new. I'm going to be paying attention to the "modern audience" element, though. If it's too in-your-face, I'll pass.

I also can't see paying $70 for it. I'll pick it up for $40 or lower.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

How are they going after "modern audience", im sorry but i haven't followed this game other than watching the trailers. What have they done?

Go watch "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny" for more information

Or don't, because it's shit

 

[BlackTron]

Like I said, I have zero interest in a game like this in first person. It was a huge mistake not to make this a 3rd person action game.

If this were third person it might be the first game in a while I'd be tempted to play without waiting for a price drop. Knowing it was built from the ground-up as a first person game just makes me unsure when I will get around to it. Unless reviews really slam it I'll probably try it eventually.

 

[BlackTron]

Then again, they are going after the non existence "modern audience", and I wonder if being on PS5 will be enough to save them.

This is a great way to introduce life long PS players what XGS are all about.

 

[CuckooBananaNuts]

Go watch "Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny" for more information

Or don't, because it's shit

That entire first intro sequence with a CGI Harrison Ford was so immensely painful to watch.

 

[Ozriel]

As a 3D artist / developer, it isn't a secret in the development community that Gamepass has killed sales of games on the platform. We''ve done our own study and found out that 8 out of 10 gamers won't play a game if it isn't on Gamepass.

And yet, GamePass didn’t manage to kill sales of Madden College Football 25 on the console. Didn’t kill sales of FIFA or COD in previous years. Didn’t kill sales of Diablo 4, last year.

It’s probably killed sales of some indie titles, since many of those tend to end up on GP…but there’s no indication that 80% of gamers on the platform are staying away from buying premium games that aren’t on the service.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I don't know. Spider-Man isn't on Xbox. And other Bethesda gamed on PS5 aren't owned by Disney.

Goddamn....does this REALLY have to explained? Are you people really just THAT fucking clueless?

I mean seriously...

Spiderman not being on Xbox happened because Sony had significant leverage in terms of userbase. Sony had the means to keep the game exclusive since it could easily meet the sales figures.

Not to mention that Sony also owns the movie rights to the character, which also gave Sony an advantage.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

No way this is possible, since they both signed an agreement for exclusivity.

THEN. WHAT. FUCKING. HAPPENED?

 

[JohnnyFootball]

And yet, GamePass didn’t manage to kill sales of Madden College Football 25 on the console. Didn’t kill sales of FIFA or COD in previous years. Didn’t kill sales of Diablo 4, last year.

It’s probably killed sales of some indie titles, since many of those tend to end up on GP…but there’s no indication that 80% of gamers on the platform are staying away from buying premium games that aren’t on the service.

Newsflash....those games weren't Day 1.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

It's possible Disney forced them but doesn't it just seem more likely that this is just part of their push to go multiplat? Even if Disney forced them I don't believe for one second Disney forced them to announce it during Gamescom. They did the announcement during gamescom IMO to send a clear message. There are more games coming I just feel like Disney has nothing to do with this.

All of that could be a factor together. Maybe. Maybe not. But I won't believe that DIsney didn't have a hand in forcing it to happen.

However, even I feel it was a bit tacky to announce it that way...as a one more thing.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Goddamn....does this REALLY have to explained? Are you people really just THAT fucking clueless?

I mean seriously...

Spiderman not being on Xbox happened because Sony had significant leverage in terms of userbase. Sony had the means to keep the game exclusive since it could easily meet the sales figures.

Not to mention that Sony also owns the movie rights to the character, which also gave Sony an advantage.

This is not correct. When negotiating the rights for Spider-Man on consoles, Disney actually approached both MS and Sony. MS didn't want to pay, Sony did.

The rest is history

 

[JohnnyFootball]

The issue is that Xbox was hemorrhaging money for years but as long as they didn't lose that much money the big guys like Satya didn't care

Then they blew $6 billion on Bethesda and followed by blowing $70 billion on Activision Blizzard while generating a lot of negative public opinion and also a lot of unfriendly government attention and I don't care if you're Microsoft or the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia at some level after you blow that kind of cash and burn that much political capital the guys in charge will start paying attention

So now Xbox actually needs to generate positive revenue for MS probably for the first time in that divisions history. Next 12 months gonna be wild for Xbox

Yep. Big Daddy Phil and Matt Booty legit tried to spend Sony outta business and spectacularly failed.

The worst part. If MS had just hired proper people to run their first party studios and delivered high quality first party exclusives and followed the blueprint left by PS3 era Sony....then we would have healthy competition right now.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

that 80% of gamers

are not subscribed to Game Pass

 

[Sooner]

Goddamn....does this REALLY have to explained? Are you people really just THAT fucking clueless?

I mean seriously...

Spiderman not being on Xbox happened because Sony had significant leverage in terms of userbase. Sony had the means to keep the game exclusive since it could easily meet the sales figures.

Not to mention that Sony also owns the movie rights to the character, which also gave Sony an advantage.

Nice to meet you.

 

[SwordofOlympus]

Who wants to play this garbage after they emasculated Indy in the last movie? Seriously?

 

[Ozzie666]

Who wants to play this garbage after they emasculated Indy in the last movie? Seriously?

To be fair, the first 20 minutes was at least somewhat the Old Indy and had the good vibes. What happened after that to the character and the plot, thats another story.

 

[CuckooBananaNuts]

To be fair, the first 20 minutes was at least somewhat the Old Indy and had the good vibes. What happened after that to the character and the plot, thats another story.

The first 20 minutes was a CGI Harrison Ford.

 

[laynelane]

No way this is possible, since they both signed an agreement for exclusivity.

I tend to agree with this. We can't know for sure what goes on behind closed doors with these contract negotiations, but this is what Disney had to say when MS renegotiated to exclude PS in 2021:

Disney’s head of gaming, Sean Shoptaw, told Axios: With “Xbox still being one of the bigger marketplaces for games, we didn’t feel like we were going to be overly exclusionary. We felt like it’s still going to reach a broad set of folks, and we felt, financially and strategically for the game, that made sense at the time.”

Source.

It's possible they approached Xbox and renegotiated the contract again, but it's more likely that Xbox itself changed their decision on this.

 

[Heisenberg007]

34 million gamepass subscribers at 20 a month equals what? What does that come up too? In 2 months that's 1.2 billion dollars. I'm sure Indiana Jones won't make a fraction of that in Playstation sales.

So why is Xbox putting Indiana Jones on PlayStation then?

 

[vaibhavpisal]

So why is Xbox putting Indiana Jones on PlayStation then?

Because Phil is generous.

 

[kensama]

That's weird to read from Xbox player (fanboy?), that now Xbox admit it could not compete with Sony in hardware and the Gamepass strategy is struggling, Sony should follow them in doom

Of course exclusivity are important and Sony should not port their game elsewhere than a PlayStation; Even port their game on PC for me is a bad move. But in the same time i understand that game cost exploded in 20 years.
Maybe the way is to not compet so much in graphics and more in fun as Nintendo.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Because Phil is generous.

Yes, this statement is all about altruistic generousness.

 

[FlyyGOD]

So why is Xbox putting Indiana Jones on PlayStation then?

To make more money. The Activision deal cost 68 billion dollars. Indiana Jones probably cost upwards of 200 million dollars to make. I'm sure the top heads wanna make their money back as fast as possible.The same reason Sony are making games for PC and switch now.

 

[yazenov]

Microsoft is making Billions of of Gamepass yearly but isn't making any sort of profit? Most of the games on Gamepass make a percentage on the amount of time their games are played. How many games are added into Gamepass yearly maybe 20 to 30. Even if Microsoft paid for 30 games at 10 million each a year(which they dont) totalling 300,000,000 they'd still make a profit.

To make more money. The Activision deal cost 68 billion dollars. Indiana Jones probably cost upwards of 200 million dollars to make. I'm sure the top heads wanna make their money back as fast as possible.The same reason Sony are making games for PC and switch now.

They want to make money outside of their walled garden because Gamepass is burning cash for them with their tiny console user base. And their Gamepass subscriber growth has stalled if not outright shrank. MS is now combining Gamepass Core aka poor man's Gamepass into the calculation to hide the fact that Gamepass growth is stagnant. I don't know the actual Gamepass Ultimate Subs, but I do know it's probably by far below the number you've stated.

This is just 1st party game, but 1 single subscription fee paid by a customer is distributed into several games (I'm not even counting 3rd party, which needs to get paid to be on Gamepass). Here is the list of 1st party games in 2024 for MS off the top of my head:

Hellblade 2
Indiana Jones
Age of Mythology: Retold
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Avowed should be on the list, but it got delayed to 2025. So Imagine paying for the development and marketing for all those games for 12 months worth of subscriptions, and paying for all those servers to run the services> and also the 3rd party pubs. Yeah, that's why MS doesn't disclose the gaming division profits, as they are most probably in the red. Don't be fooled by the revenue chest pumping, which was also inflated by the Activision Blizzard acquisition.

MS had no choice but to release games on the PS5 or face dire financial consequences for its gaming division (Xbox).

 

[N30RYU]

You know what would be awesome (for the meltdowns) PSVR2 support on top that none give a hit of the game on PS5

 

[Ozriel]

They want to make money outside of their walled garden because Gamepass is burning cash for them with their tiny console user base.

Steam is a Microsoft walled garden now?

And their Gamepass subscriber growth has stalled if not outright shrank. MS is now combining Gamepass Core aka poor man's Gamepass into the calculation to hide the fact that Gamepass growth is stagnant. I don't know the actual Gamepass Ultimate Subs, but I do know it's probably by far below the number you've stated.

And GamePass revenue should go up with the increase in price.

If the price increase leads to customers dropping GP, then that means more customers buying games the traditional way.

This is just 1st party game, but 1 single subscription fee paid by a customer is distributed into several games (I'm not even counting 3rd party, which needs to get paid to be on Gamepass). Here is the list of 1st party games in 2024 for MS off the top of my head:

Hellblade 2
Indiana Jones
Age of Mythology: Retold
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Avowed should be on the list, but it got delayed to 2025. So Imagine paying for the development and marketing for all those games for 12 months worth of subscriptions, and paying for all those servers to run the services> and also the 3rd party pubs. Yeah, that's why MS doesn't disclose the gaming division profits, as they are most probably in the red. Don't be fooled by the revenue chest pumping, which was also inflated by the Activision Blizzard acquisition.

these games are also sold at retail and on Steam, and usually sell more than enough on Steam alone to recoup dev costs, if the game is good. Games like Hellblade 2 would have flopped everywhere, sales wise.
There’s no logic in imagining a well received Indiana Jones game would have to recoup all dev expenses from GamePass revenue alone.

Meanwhile, the revenue from GP is in billions of dollars yearly, so not a trivial amount.

MS had no choice but to release games on the PS5 or face dire financial consequences for its gaming division (Xbox).

There’s no real proof of these ‘dire financial consequences’. What we know for sure is that releasing on PlayStation can significantly improve economics, and that’s what shareholders, Satya and Amy Hood are interested in.
The biggest obstacle Microsoft faces is in consistently making quality games that people want to buy. They’ve certainly never needed a cross platform release to make the Forza Horizon games financially successful, and they definitely didn’t need to put Sea of Thieves on PS5 for that project to be very financially successful.

 

[Topher]

34 million gamepass subscribers at 20 a month equals what? What does that come up too? In 2 months that's 1.2 billion dollars. I'm sure Indiana Jones won't make a fraction of that in Playstation sales.

A good chunk of that Game Pass revenue goes right back out to publishers. How much we don't know but those games on the service are not there for free. So no....Indy isn't going to bring in as much revenue, but very well could be more profitable for Microsoft depending on how well received the game is.

Edit: And your numbers assume all "34 million" Game Pass subscribers are paying for Ultimate and that just isn't true.

 

[yazenov]

Steam is a Microsoft walled garden now?



And GamePass revenue should go up with the increase in price.

If the price increase leads to customers dropping GP, then that means more customers buying games the traditional way.




these games are also sold at retail and on Steam, and usually sell more than enough on Steam alone to recoup dev costs, if the game is good. Games like Hellblade 2 would have flopped everywhere, sales wise.
There’s no logic in imagining a well received Indiana Jones game would have to recoup all dev expenses from GamePass revenue alone.

Meanwhile, the revenue from GP is in billions of dollars yearly, so not a trivial amount.




There’s no real proof of these ‘dire financial consequences’. What we know for sure is that releasing on PlayStation can significantly improve economics, and that’s what shareholders, Satya and Amy Hood are interested in.
The biggest obstacle Microsoft faces is in consistently making quality games that people want to buy. They’ve certainly never needed a cross platform release to make the Forza Horizon games financially successful, and they definitely didn’t need to put Sea of Thieves on PS5 for that project to be very financially successful.

Yeah Steam and other consoles such as PS5 and Switch are outside their ecosystem. Gamepass was introduced to us last generation on the Xbox one. It was a flop as it didn't drive console growth, hence they decided to release their 1st party games on PC day one during the Xbox Series generation.

And that wasn't enough so they decided to flip flop their console exclusive policies just recently in the 4th year of their console launch, after the purchase of Activision Blizzard. Yeah, so they have made a pivot since their Plan A and Plan B didn't work out to well for their financials.

And GamePass revenue should go up with the increase in price.

If the price increase leads to customers dropping GP, then that means more customers buying games the traditional way.

A price increase will most certainly lead to a drop in subscribers. That's just logic and common sense. Even before the price hike, Gamepass growth has stalled. Its not looking good for Gamepass. And the problem with MS Gamepass subscribers is that they are trained to wait for games instead of buying them. So MS had no option but to beg Sony to put their games on the PS5 and pay that 30% cut to finance the console wars against MS.

Which will lead to making their console hardware sales more irrelevant that it already is. Aka dead.

these games are also sold at retail and on Steam, and usually sell more than enough on Steam alone to recoup dev costs, if the game is good. Games like Hellblade 2 would have flopped everywhere, sales wise.
There’s no logic in imagining a well received Indiana Jones game would have to recoup all dev expenses from GamePass revenue alone.

Meanwhile, the revenue from GP is in billions of dollars yearly, so not a trivial amount.

I disagree if the game flops on Xbox or Steam then it will also flop on PS5 or Switch. Some certain audiences are on other platforms by way of cultivating those audiences. For example, Capcom games may flop on Xbox and sell decent on Steam, but the bulk of those sales could be made on PS5/Swtich. Hence many Capcom games skipping the Xbox console outright.

PS5 also have the Uncharted audience. So Indiana Jones might do well on PlayStation more so than Steam / Xbox. But making it timed exclusive might make its chances of successful on the PS platform less likely.

All platforms have different audiences with varied preferences that gravitate more towards certain genres imo. Such as shoot bangs audience on Xbox , opposed to the JRPG crowed on other platforms. However, Steam is apparently not enough for MS to offset its losses so they had to release their games on the largest console userbase PS5/Switch.

There’s no real proof of these ‘dire financial consequences’

The proof is in the pudding. They are going multiplatform. What more proof you need ?

 

[Ozriel]

A good chunk of that Game Pass revenue goes right back out to publishers. How much we don't know but those games on the service are not there for free. So no....Indy isn't going to bring in as much revenue, but very well could be more profitable for Microsoft depending on how well received the game is.

Edit: And your numbers assume all "34 million" Game Pass subscribers are paying for Ultimate and that just isn't true.

Given that the bulk of new Gamepass third party adds are of the AA or indie variety, and AAA games are brought in later, I’d wager the costs aren’t as crazy as people think. But certainly it’s misleading for people to think of GP in revenue terms only.

With GamePass Ultimate moving up in price and no Day 1 first party games on the cheaper tier, the average revenue per user should be going up for the Ultimate portion of GamePass.

34 million gamepass subscribers at 20 a month equals what? What does that come up too? In 2 months that's 1.2 billion dollars. I'm sure Indiana Jones won't make a fraction of that in Playstation sales.

This is wildly optimistic. Much of that includes GamePass core subscriptions, and PC GamePass drives down the average cost. Not to mention folks like me that subscribe years ahead, markets like India and Turkey where regional pricing is included and then bundled GamePass in stuff like the ROG Ally etc.

Best to work with something like $12 as an average.

 

[Topher]

Given that the bulk of new Gamepass third party adds are of the AA or indie variety, and AAA games are brought in later, I’d wager the costs aren’t as crazy as people think. But certainly it’s misleading for people to think of GP in revenue terms only.

With GamePass Ultimate moving up in price and no Day 1 first party games on the cheaper tier, the average revenue per user should be going up for the Ultimate portion of GamePass.

Fair assumptions. I think the middle tier shrinks and the vast majority of subscribers will be in Core and Ultimate.

 

[deriks]

Well, duh. It's money

Only Sonyboys are on this "Xbox is doomed" stravaganza