Support NeoGAF

[DeepEnigma]

To what reasonable and rationale objective metrics are you basing your opinion on that this creates less competition?

I would love to hear someone make the claim that this will further divide platform sales into a greater disparity.

Leaving the largest 3rd party publisher to remain the 4+ decades long third party publisher, does not make for "less competition."

That was easy.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

I'm in a place where there are areas so rural they don't even have cellphone service.

Taking you at your word your experience is not universal. So, you can't say its fud when its clearly not. Unless you want to claim everyone else is lying.

 

[Topher]

I'm in a place where there are areas so rural they don't even have cellphone service.

Sure, but his point still stands. There are plenty of rural areas in relation to a data center. Your current experience isn't representative of all experiences when it comes to game streaming.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Game streaming,

 

[feynoob]

Which doesn't materialize in more money for the artists.

It does. As the artist can do tour music, and earn more money from ticket sales.
Without Streaming service , artist won't be able to get alot of exposure. This means less recognition, and less money in the long run.

 

[ManaByte]

Sure, but his point still stands. There are plenty of rural areas in relation to a data center. Your current experience isn't representative of all experiences when it comes to game streaming.

But I don't buy the "rural areas of the US don't have broadband" argument in 2022. Like I said, there are bumfuck banjo-playing backwoods areas here with ZERO cell coverage, but the houses there can still get at least 10-50mbps down broadband.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

But I don't buy the "rural areas of the US don't have broadband" argument in 2022. Like I said, there are bumfuck banjo-playing backwoods areas here with ZERO cell coverage, but the houses there can still get at least 10-50mbps down broadband.

You're right. Everyone else is full of shit and your experience is flawless with streaming no matter where you go. Enjoy the worst possible way to play games.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

It does. As the artist can do tour music, and earn more money from ticket sales.
Without Streaming service , artist won't be able to get alot of exposure. This means less recognition, and less money in the long run.

What is the video game equivalent of tours and ticket sales?

DLC? Yay, more DLC! I love DLC! Especially when I am paying a subscription fee and then need to still buy DLC for a game I don't even own!

 

[DeepEnigma]

What is the video game equivalent of tours and ticket sales?

DLC? Yay, more DLC! I love DLC! Especially when I am paying a subscription fee and then need to still buy DLC for a game I don't even own!

That's the trap

It's why when game makers agree to go on both PS+ and GP, they never put their ultimate/complete editions or the like. Only the base games hoping people would buy the DLC and MTX items. The perception to some end users is that it's a cheaper impulse, forgetting they don't even own the game itself.

 

[feynoob]

What is the video game equivalent of tours and ticket sales?

Game sales, mtx.

DLC? Yay, more DLC! I love DLC! Especially when I am paying a subscription fee and then need to still buy DLC for a game I don't even own!

Good for you.
But others aren't like you. Just because you like to waste your money buying multiple games at higher price, doesn't others are dumb as you.

Plus you really don't own anything, without the original system.

If you go to Xbox from PS or vice versa, your bought games won't be able to transfer with you. Meaning you have to spend extra money for the same game.

So much for ownership games

 

[Punished Miku]

Game sales, mtx.

Remasters, ports, remakes, merch (t-shirts, soundtrack), film and TV rights, toys, etc.

 

[feynoob]

Remasters, ports, remakes, merch (t-shirts, soundtrack), film and TV rights, toys, etc.

People don't know that.
They only think developers make money for game sales only.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Remasters, ports, remakes, merch (t-shirts, soundtrack), film and TV rights, toys, etc.

The vast majority of games don't get those things.

 

[feynoob]

That's the trap

It's why when game makers agree to go on both PS+ and GP, they never put their ultimate/complete editions or the like. Only the base games hoping people would buy the DLC and MTX items. The perception to some end users is that it's a cheaper impulse, forgetting they don't even own the game itself.

Isn't the point for cheap entry?
Getting the base game for cheap, and buy the dlc if you like it?

You guys make it out to be like a sin to buy them.

You ownership advocates sound like vegans at this point.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

I can see the first two as they’re heavily involved in the development of fable and perfect dark. I don’t think Microsoft wants cdpr plus that’s a public traded company I don’t think Microsoft wants to go through this activision thing anytime soon. I can see them picking up individually like avalanche who’s working on contraband and maybe a Japanese publisher.

Yea, CDPR is publicly traded, but still going to cost roughly around $12-$14 billion, and CDPR doesn't bring anywhere near the same kind of concerns that Activision with COD did.

It would be a far easier purchase. CDPR is Polish studio who is just about to start up a US Studio. Microsoft would willingly divest GOG also because they don't want that.

I'm always curious how Ezekiel uses the laughing emoji response to a post. He's laughing at Microsoft potentially buying a far cheaper CDPR as they're literally making the far more unthinkable Activision Blizzard currently? No, I'm laughing at you buddy.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Isn't the point for cheap entry?
Getting the base game for cheap, and buy the dlc if you like it?

You guys make it out to be like a sin to buy them.

You ownership advocates sound like vegans at this point.

You don't own the base game. You are buying stuff for a game you do not own.

Your last sentence is dumb, and you should feel bad.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

But I don't buy the "rural areas of the US don't have broadband" argument in 2022. Like I said, there are bumfuck banjo-playing backwoods areas here with ZERO cell coverage, but the houses there can still get at least 10-50mbps down broadband.

Not only that, Biden and his administration have passed a bill that should start leading to more broadband in rural areas throughout 2023.

https://www.usda.gov/media/press-re...ministration-announces-502-million-high-speed

$502 million so far in over 20 states, so it's literally about to get better.

 

[feynoob]

You don't own the base game. You are buying stuff for a game you do not own.

That is the point of service subs.

It covers the base game for you, while you will own the dlc.

If you plan to buy the game in the future, you will have the dlc and the game together.

You aren't wasting money here.

 

[DeepEnigma]

That is the point of service subs.

It covers the base game for you, while you will own the dlc.

If you plan to buy the game in the future, you will have the dlc and the game together.

You aren't wasting money here.

Ok.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Not only that, Biden and his administration have passed a bill that should start leading to more broadband in rural areas throughout 2023.

https://www.usda.gov/media/press-re...ministration-announces-502-million-high-speed

$502 million so far in over 20 states, so it's literally about to get better.

Between this and your pervious political post i'd ease up there. I don't want to see one of my favorite gaffers catch a ban.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Not only that, Biden and his administration have passed a bill that should start leading to more broadband in rural areas throughout 2023.

https://www.usda.gov/media/press-re...ministration-announces-502-million-high-speed

$502 million so far in over 20 states, so it's literally about to get better.

That amount isn't going to go very far with how inflated government contracts are. I suspect lots will disappear into the ether per usual as well.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

It does. As the artist can do tour music, and earn more money from ticket sales.
Without Streaming service , artist won't be able to get alot of exposure. This means less recognition, and less money in the long run.

Not from Spotify.

The point is:

Subscription service ≠ automatic win/ slam dunk.

 

[Topher]

But I don't buy the "rural areas of the US don't have broadband" argument in 2022. Like I said, there are bumfuck banjo-playing backwoods areas here with ZERO cell coverage, but the houses there can still get at least 10-50mbps down broadband.

How would you know what speeds the bumfucks are getting while sitting in a hotel with commercial wifi? I know for a fact that coworkers of mine who live 15 to 20 minutes from me are getting 6bmbs ADSL. I know because I asked after seeing their shitty pixelated webcam video.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Isn't the point for cheap entry?
Getting the base game for cheap, and buy the dlc if you like it?

You guys make it out to be like a sin to buy them.

You ownership advocates sound like vegans at this point.

Money isn't even the issue here, at least from my perspective. I am the one willing to pay $70 to play a game after all - I don't care about a cheap games, in fact I actually don't want a race to the bottom to make games as cheap as possible. I want a game that pays the developer enough so that they can develop them as they want to and don't have to fuck up their game design to cut out portions of the game for DLC and include gambling mtx. I don't give a shit about tv shows and toys and any of that other garbage - I want full, complete games to play from day one.

If this is where gaming goes that is fine, there are thousands of games already released that I haven't played yet. I will spend $200 on a used 3DO before I buy a loot ticket to gamble to open a treasure chest in the DLC I bought that should have been included in the base game in the first place for a game I am subscribing to play because the developer needs to nickel and dime me because the subscription doesn't pay their bills.

 

[feynoob]

Money isn't even the issue here, at least from my perspective. I am the one willing to pay $70 to play a game after all - I don't care about a cheap games, in fact I actually don't want a race to the bottom to make games as cheap as possible. I want a game that pays the developer enough so that they can develop them as they want to and don't have to fuck up their game design to cut out portions of the game for DLC and include gambling mtx. I don't give a shit about tv shows and toys and any of that other garbage - I want full, complete games to play from day one.

Developers don't put their games on Sub services for free.
That is where your mistake is. They negotiate the price and agree to it.
Sub service don't change the way games are being made. Dlc, mtx and other revenue existed before this model. They can coexist together.

If this is where gaming goes that is fine, there are thousands of games already released that I haven't played yet. I will spend $200 on a used 3DO before I buy a loot ticket to gamble to open a treasure chest in the DLC I bought that should have been included in the base game in the first place for a game I am subscribing to play because the developer needs to nickel and dime me because the subscription doesn't pay their bills.

You must be in coma then, if you don't see those things happening around you.

Battle front 2, racing games, mtx in single player games.

What you described is happening without Sub services.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Money isn't even the issue here, at least from my perspective. I am the one willing to pay $70 to play a game after all - I don't care about a cheap games, in fact I actually don't want a race to the bottom to make games as cheap as possible. I want a game that pays the developer enough so that they can develop them as they want to and don't have to fuck up their game design to cut out portions of the game for DLC and include gambling mtx. I don't give a shit about tv shows and toys and any of that other garbage - I want full, complete games to play from day one.

If this is where gaming goes that is fine, there are thousands of games already released that I haven't played yet. I will spend $200 on a used 3DO before I buy a loot ticket to gamble to open a treasure chest in the DLC I bought that should have been included in the base game in the first place for a game I am subscribing to play because the developer needs to nickel and dime me because the subscription doesn't pay their bills.

 

[feynoob]

Not really, he is wrong.

You just need to watch gaming news to see the current state.

Sony is making 10 live service games, which would be filled with lootboxes and mtx and dlc sales.

They are doing that, because the current is making insane profit from these models right now (Fortnite, overwatch).

 

[DeepEnigma]

Not really, he is wrong.

You just need to watch gaming news to see the current state.

Sony is making 10 live service games, which would be filled with lootboxes and mtx and dlc sales.

They are doing that, because the current is making insane profit from these models right now (Fortnite, overwatch).

You are not revealing anything we don't already know. He is not wrong as a consumer opinion.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

How would you know what speeds the bumfucks are getting while sitting in a hotel with commercial wifi? I know for a fact that coworkers of mine who live 15 to 20 minutes from me are getting 6bmbs ADSL. I know because I asked after seeing their shitty pixelated webcam video.

You're just spreading fud you lying son of a bitch. /s In case it's not very obvious

 

[feynoob]

You are not revealing anything we don't already know. He is not wrong as a consumer opinion.

He is wrong, as he is basing a wrong information as his opinion.

 

[DeepEnigma]

He is wrong, as he is basing a wrong information as his opinion.

No... he is not.

It's literally what they are doing, and if that should spread to more AAA single player experiences, he will just get out of modern gaming. Something a lot of us said we would do with the massive wells of backlogs.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Developers don't put their games on Sub services for free.
That is where your mistake is. They negotiate the price and agree to it.
Sub service don't change the way games are being made. Dlc, mtx and other revenue existed before this model. They can coexist together.

Musicians don't put their music on Spotify for free either, yet it isn't financially sustainable for them and they need alternate sources of income. It is even completely questionable if streaming TV and movie services work, because right now they are all cost cutting, raising prices, adding advertising, and churning subscribers badly.

You must be in coma then, if you don't see those things happening around you.

Battle front 2, racing games, mtx in single player games.

What you described is happening without Sub services.

I agree, and that is why I don't buy any of those games and never will. If someone buys Ubisoft or EA games they deserve it.

Live service games are a different beast because those don't cost money in the first place and are sustained solely by whales that make terrible financial decisions. They are also incredibly feast or famine and unless a game is a top live service game it probably won't exist for very long. Oh, and when it ceases to exist nobody can play the game anymore. At all. Great for preservation and gaming's future right there.

 

[feynoob]

Musicians don't put their music on Spotify for free either, yet it isn't financially sustainable for them and they need alternate sources of income. It is even completely questionable if streaming TV and movie services work, because right now they are all cost cutting, raising prices, adding advertising, and churning subscribers badly

How do you expect musicians to make money then?
Without a big platform, their reach is very small.
Unless you are part of music label, good luck sustaining yourself with sea of other artist.

I agree, and that is why I don't buy any of those games and never will. If someone buys Ubisoft or EA games they deserve it.

But their success for profit makes other developers use their tactics.

Live service games are a different beast because those don't cost money in the first place and are sustained solely by whales that make terrible financial decisions. They are also incredibly feast or famine and unless a game is a top live service game it probably won't exist for very long. Oh, and when it ceases to exist nobody can play the game anymore. At all. Great for preservation and gaming's future right there.

There are live service games which cost money. Destiny 2 is notorious for removing owned content.

While some live service games fails, there others who succeed (warzone, apex). Those games encourage more live service games.

It won't stop there, as long as people are willing to spend on those games.

 

[feynoob]

No... he is not.

It's literally what they are doing, and if that should spread to more AAA single player experiences, he will just get out of modern gaming. Something a lot of us said we would do with the massive wells of backlogs.

What are they doing that is exclusive to Sub services?

We literally haven't seen anything exclusive to a Sub services.

Everything that is happening there, is already happening in the gaming world.

 

[DeepEnigma]

What are they doing that is exclusive to Sub services?

We literally haven't seen anything exclusive to a Sub services.

Everything that is happening there, is already happening in the gaming world.

Who is talking about exclusives to a sub service? If all your games are on it day one, something has to eventually give. Especially when they admitted they were saturated with their service reach already.

 

[Orbital2060]

Money isn't even the issue here, at least from my perspective. I am the one willing to pay $70 to play a game after all - I don't care about a cheap games, in fact I actually don't want a race to the bottom to make games as cheap as possible. I want a game that pays the developer enough so that they can develop them as they want to and don't have to fuck up their game design to cut out portions of the game for DLC and include gambling mtx. I don't give a shit about tv shows and toys and any of that other garbage - I want full, complete games to play from day one.

If this is where gaming goes that is fine, there are thousands of games already released that I haven't played yet. I will spend $200 on a used 3DO before I buy a loot ticket to gamble to open a treasure chest in the DLC I bought that should have been included in the base game in the first place for a game I am subscribing to play because the developer needs to nickel and dime me because the subscription doesn't pay their bills.

Maybe Im stepping into a larger discussion youre into that I missed, but when I read this I wonder if youve played any of the 1p games released on Game Pass? Theres nothing cheap about any of them; on the contrary, its been 5 years now and some of the most interesting games Ive played in that period have also been first party Xbox games on Game Pass. There is not a single indication yet of any race to the bottom here.

And why does it have to be so black and white in terms of either selling games at 90 dollars (where I live) - OR deal with a ton of f2p fortnite clones? This has not happened yet at least.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

It may never happen, who knows. Gaming may have unique challenges movies and music don't due to latency, the need for a controller, or the high difficulty of games just being a more limiting form of media compared to purely passive media like movies/music. But they're making a sound bet that it will happen based on multiple past examples. Not a slam dunk, not a guarantee, but a logical bet. We'll see. Luckily, even with movies most of them are still available physically if you want it. I like options.

Yep. Technology will evolve, software will evolve. If Halo Infinite campaign is a game that can work so well via cloud, that alone tells me the mileage for cloud gaming is much higher than I ever thought. Turn based RPGs, slower paced real-time RPGs of the sword and magic type, titles like Starfield, and a whole host of other game types are viable today via Xbox Cloud, so I can only imagine the future.

I know Starfield isn't out yet, but it's pretty clear it will be a solid cloud title based on games that already work great and are similar enough.

 

[feynoob]

Who is talking about exclusives to a sub service? If all your games are on it day one, something has to eventually give. Especially when they admitted they were saturated with their service reach already.

This is a genius take.
As if those changes won't affect outside gamepass.
Truly a smart choice for MS.

Lose Xbox and Steam sales, in order to accomodate more gamepass games.

Very smart business choice.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This is a genius take.
As if those changes won't affect outside gamepass.
Truly a smart choice for MS.

Lose Xbox and Steam sales, in order to accomodate more gamepass games.

Very smart business choice.

 

[feynoob]

 

[feynoob]

Microsoft Eyes ‘Super App’ to Break Apple and Google’s Hold on Mobile Search

Microsoft recently considered building a “super app” that could combine shopping, messaging, web search, news feeds and other services in a one-stop smartphone app, in what would be an ambitious move by the software giant to expand further into consumer services, according to people with direct ...

www.theinformation.com

Microsoft recently considered building a "super app" that could combine shopping, messaging, web search, news feeds and other services in a one-stop smartphone app, in what would be an ambitious move by the software giant to expand further into consumer services, according to people with direct knowledge of the discussions. Microsoft executives wanted the app to boost the company's multibillion-dollar advertising business and Bing search, as well as draw more users to Teams messaging and other mobile services.

By creating an all-in-one app that people don't need to leave to access its other offerings, Microsoft hoped to emulate a mobile strategy that has worked for Tencent. The Chinese firm's WeChat app, which combines messaging with shopping, online games, news and a variety of services including grocery ordering, is a source of inspiration for top Microsoft executives, the people said.

While it isn't clear whether Microsoft will ultimately launch such an app, the people with knowledge of the discussions said CEO Satya Nadella has laid the groundwork by pushing the Bing search engine to work better with other Microsoft mobile products. For instance, he has directed Bing to integrate with Microsoft's Teams messaging and Outlook email apps, making it easier for customers to share search results in messages. A spokesperson for Microsoft didn't comment for this article.

At Microsoft, the super app idea took flight when the company in 2019 hired Mikhail Parakhin from Russia-based Yandex, where he oversaw a large team working on products including search, a mobile web browser and ads, according to a person familiar with his hire. In addition to WeChat, another model for Microsoft's potential super app was Yandex Go, a food-delivery, taxi and courier app Parakhin helped develop, the person said.

 

[reksveks]

 

[Neofire]

Money isn't even the issue here, at least from my perspective. I am the one willing to pay $70 to play a game after all - I don't care about a cheap games, in fact I actually don't want a race to the bottom to make games as cheap as possible. I want a game that pays the developer enough so that they can develop them as they want to and don't have to fuck up their game design to cut out portions of the game for DLC and include gambling mtx. I don't give a shit about tv shows and toys and any of that other garbage - I want full, complete games to play from day one.

If this is where gaming goes that is fine, there are thousands of games already released that I haven't played yet. I will spend $200 on a used 3DO before I buy a loot ticket to gamble to open a treasure chest in the DLC I bought that should have been included in the base game in the first place for a game I am subscribing to play because the developer needs to nickel and dime me because the subscription doesn't pay their bills.

This comment is hard to argue with, my guy has a great point.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

How do you expect musicians to make money then?
Without a big platform, their reach is very small.
Unless you are part of music label, good luck sustaining yourself with sea of other artist.

Gun point is generally not an effective method of doing and retaining business, but as you say, musicians are at the point where they don't have any other choice. Which is exactly the type of leverage Microsoft wants with Gamepass in the future, but nobody seems to consider this.

But their success for profit makes other developers use their tactics.


There are live service games which cost money. Destiny 2 is notorious for removing owned content.

While some live service games fails, there others who succeed (warzone, apex). Those games encourage more live service games.

It won't stop there, as long as people are willing to spend on those games.

I cannot refute that if people are willing to spend, or not spend, then that is where the market will go. I just do not like the direction, and fortunately I don't need new games so however things shake out so be it.

Maybe Im stepping into a larger discussion youre into that I missed, but when I read this I wonder if youve played any of the 1p games released on Game Pass? Theres nothing cheap about any of them; on the contrary, its been 5 years now and some of the most interesting games Ive played in that period have also been first party Xbox games on Game Pass. There is not a single indication yet of any race to the bottom here.

And why does it have to be so black and white in terms of either selling games at 90 dollars (where I live) - OR deal with a ton of f2p fortnite clones? This has not happened yet at least.

I mean, literally the number 1 complaint about Xbox was the lack of first party games this year despite the large number of studios they have. Totally coincidentally I'm sure, a Gamepass sub still uses up months if they release games or not.

 

[reksveks]

Video interview

 

[Cheezewizz]

Becasue the dude didn't't ask about it
Are you going to ask how "they aren't" or are you going to ignore it too?

I'm just going off of what you said.

Google it .

I did. Outside of people like Neil Young being mad because they signed Joe Rogan, I'm not seeing much. So you stating "It's pretty well known" isn't getting much help from Google.

The pandemic just exacerbate the transition. Now the studios are sill trying to figure out this shit.

No, the pandemic, and subsequent lock downs jump started that issue. I can agree that the market was trending that way already, so I think it's just to what degree streaming vs pandemic is to blame. Which is largely irrelevant.

There are HUGE implications (outside the scope of this interaction) and I already made comments about it.

You mean as far as MS's tweet? It's a possibility for sure, but I wouldn't categorize them as being huge.

The point I am making (use your brain) is:

1. Comment about Sony being blockbuster they need to evolve if they dont want to be left behind

I agree that it wasn't the smartest comparison to make, but there is some truth to it.

2. Sony has been offering video games with a subscription even before Xbox.

Of course, but outside of PS+ they completely let PSNow die on the vine. Which ultimately lead them to rolling it into PS+.

"Oh...but is about Day One Games"

It's not all about Day One Games, but it is factor. A pretty big one at that.

Sure...sony has made a handful of releases day one as well. What is the big deal.

Well, the big deal is that they don't do often or regularly. And tbh that's fine if that's the direction they want to go. But the numbers speak for themselves. If they want to compete with MS in services then Sony will absolutely have to do better.

"Oh.... But is about AAA games Day One"

I haven't heard this specific argument much if at all.

And that is what I am saying. That's is the fucking point, the drama, the controversy is categorical about AAA Day One games.

Who are all the people saying that all the day one games have to be AAA? The drama and controversy isn't about AAA. It's about subbing to a service, and getting their 1st party games day one vs subbing to a service, and getting to buy their 1st party games day one, whatever they decide to throw up there that month.

 

[feynoob]

Gun point is generally not an effective method of doing and retaining business, but as you say, musicians are at the point where they don't have any other choice. Which is exactly the type of leverage Microsoft wants with Gamepass in the future, but nobody seems to consider this.

Musicians have a choice.
Either take their chances like old musicians, or expand their influence.

Those streaming service connects them to audience, who would never had the chance to listen to their songs.

MS isn't going to force those devs. The market is the one that is forcing them to do that.
We are getting all kind of new games in high volume, compared to past releases. You also need to account of new developers that are making their own studios.

I cannot refute that if people are willing to spend, or not spend, then that is where the market will go. I just do not like the direction, and fortunately I don't need new games so however things shake out so be it.

Same here. I left most of mmo games, due to too much mtx.
Right now, I only play SP games.

 

[Cheezewizz]

You don't own the base game. You are buying stuff for a game you do not own.

Your last sentence is dumb, and you should feel bad.

Well technically you don't own any of it if it's dlc.

 

[feynoob]

Subscription service ≠ automatic win/ slam dunk.

It's a choice.
Sub to service games of you want to save money.

Don't Sub to it, if you want to own your games.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

How would you know what speeds the bumfucks are getting while sitting in a hotel with commercial wifi? I know for a fact that coworkers of mine who live 15 to 20 minutes from me are getting 6bmbs ADSL. I know because I asked after seeing their shitty pixelated webcam video.

Same with family back in Indiana

My nephews live fairly close to my house where I have 3 gig speeds and their only internet is via hughs net crap where it takes them all weekend to download a single patch for COD

Its just not feasible for companies to run miles of line for a couple of customers