The cost of games relative to their respective prices seems to have hit a tipping point. The gaming industry has experienced several months year of studio la...
In fact lots are claiming the opposite since this leak came out and they started looking at the numbers and taking directly to devs involved.
Then please link that instead of their estimates, because if they were lying, publishers calling out bad math is exactly what Iβd expect to happen. What I see on this list though are a bunch of costs that can be spread out over several years, not paid out all at the same time. Jedi Survivor, Suicide Squad, and Mortal Kombat account for $800M of this list, and none of them came to Game Pass, meaning Microsoft did not opt to spend that money.
Games leave gamepass since when it comes to renewal they donβt want to since streaming cannablizes sales and leads to lower revenue (already said this) so itβs not Microsoft deciding itβs not profitable, itβs the game wanting control back.
You are misplacing cause and effect. Itβs more expensive for Microsoft to get someone elseβs game on Game Pass right at launch than it is after launch, because if itβs a game people are already excited for, it will eat sales, as opposed to something like Descenders where most people never even heard of it, so it would serve as a form of marketing. In that case, Microsoft and the other company are essentially making a bet with regards to how much the game would make if itβs not on Game Pass, and Microsoft pays them a guaranteed sum up front, which reduces risk but also reduces reward. When a game leaves Game Pass, itβs not because they saw their sales tanking and wanted to βtake back controlβ. Itβs that Microsoft isnβt offering them enough to make up for the sales theyβd expect to otherwise make for the next leasing period. Microsoft doesnβt offer them as much for the next period, because they donβt expect that keeping that game on the service keeps more people subscribed.
If you can produce that link that demonstrates what youβre claiming, Iβll read it, but otherwise, this sure looks like youβd rather believe in some boogeyman conspiracy theory than a simple truth.
Jedi Survivor, Suicide Squad, and Mortal Kombat account for $800M of this list, and none of them came to Game Pass, meaning Microsoft did not opt to spend that money.
Orβ¦ no amount of money was enough to make those games cannablize their sales, why do you think itβs only Microsoft making decisionsβ¦?
What truth? That Spencer says it profitable, but wonβt provide the information to prove itβ¦? Yet all the leaks and information point the opposite directionβ¦? You want the truth, donβt listen to Spencer and read between the lines lmfao. The last person you should be listening to on this, is the one at the top of it.
Provide anything other than Spencer claiming it, I bet while you attempt to find that youβll find the mountain thatβs behind you.
Removed by mod
Then please link that instead of their estimates, because if they were lying, publishers calling out bad math is exactly what Iβd expect to happen. What I see on this list though are a bunch of costs that can be spread out over several years, not paid out all at the same time. Jedi Survivor, Suicide Squad, and Mortal Kombat account for $800M of this list, and none of them came to Game Pass, meaning Microsoft did not opt to spend that money.
You are misplacing cause and effect. Itβs more expensive for Microsoft to get someone elseβs game on Game Pass right at launch than it is after launch, because if itβs a game people are already excited for, it will eat sales, as opposed to something like Descenders where most people never even heard of it, so it would serve as a form of marketing. In that case, Microsoft and the other company are essentially making a bet with regards to how much the game would make if itβs not on Game Pass, and Microsoft pays them a guaranteed sum up front, which reduces risk but also reduces reward. When a game leaves Game Pass, itβs not because they saw their sales tanking and wanted to βtake back controlβ. Itβs that Microsoft isnβt offering them enough to make up for the sales theyβd expect to otherwise make for the next leasing period. Microsoft doesnβt offer them as much for the next period, because they donβt expect that keeping that game on the service keeps more people subscribed.
If you can produce that link that demonstrates what youβre claiming, Iβll read it, but otherwise, this sure looks like youβd rather believe in some boogeyman conspiracy theory than a simple truth.
Orβ¦ no amount of money was enough to make those games cannablize their sales, why do you think itβs only Microsoft making decisionsβ¦?
What truth? That Spencer says it profitable, but wonβt provide the information to prove itβ¦? Yet all the leaks and information point the opposite directionβ¦? You want the truth, donβt listen to Spencer and read between the lines lmfao. The last person you should be listening to on this, is the one at the top of it.
Provide anything other than Spencer claiming it, I bet while you attempt to find that youβll find the mountain thatβs behind you.