Microsoft stopped releasing console sales numbers over a decade ago. Tough to say how they’re performing in hardware. But it’s also safe to say that they wouldn’t hide the number if it was good. But they don’t care about hardware anymore. It’s all about the subscription now.
I’m curious how that subscription value is gonna look in a few years now that Microsoft has cancelled basically everything and fired a ton of talent. How do you sell a subscription when you have no exclusive content for said subscription?
How do you convince third party AAA studios to put their game on a subscription service where they know they’ll make less money? Aside from buying the studio, that is.
Why would someone want to pay monthly, indefinitely, for access to some games?
You’re not gonna have time to play everything. And if you pick one game and play it endlessly, it’s a better value to just own the game outright. I only see the subscription model working for casual gamers, which are the exact kind of people who have no issues dropping a recurring expense if they aren’t getting their money’s worth. Sign up for a month here or there, play the new release, drop the subscription, rinse and repeat.
On the flip side, you’ve also effectively devalued your games to the people who would have paid full price. Why pay $70 for Doom or Indiana jones when I know I can pay like $15 for a month and beat them both, and unsubscribe till the next game comes out. I’ll either temporarily subscribe or wait for a steep discount.
I’m curious how that subscription value is gonna look in a few years now that Microsoft has cancelled basically everything and fired a ton of talent.
That’s the best argument against trusting they have any idea what they’re doing. I’ve been saying for like a decade now, they could just not do another Xbox, and call it job-done for turning consoles into PCs. Every game’s on every system because they’re all the same. The goddamn Switch 2 has raytracing cores.
Part of any moustache-twirling capitalist scheme is, like… caring when things make money? Sony going “oops, nevermind” on a failed shooter that took eight years to make is a cutthroat decision. Microsoft killing a studio for releasing a beloved and successful game is just bastardry. Especially if they just bought them, specifically to make that game. Microsoft effectively bribed your publisher to shut you down. You come into work one day, with all the equipment and people still there, and it’s like, nope, the studio doesn’t exist anymore. Somehow.
I’m left wondering if Microsoft even needed to do anything, for the console market to go this way. They correctly spotted what GTA3’s multiplatform releases meant for the industry. But beyond forcing the inclusion of hard drives… did they contribute to that process?
Microsoft stopped releasing console sales numbers over a decade ago. Tough to say how they’re performing in hardware. But it’s also safe to say that they wouldn’t hide the number if it was good. But they don’t care about hardware anymore. It’s all about the subscription now.
I’m curious how that subscription value is gonna look in a few years now that Microsoft has cancelled basically everything and fired a ton of talent. How do you sell a subscription when you have no exclusive content for said subscription?
How do you convince third party AAA studios to put their game on a subscription service where they know they’ll make less money? Aside from buying the studio, that is.
Why would someone want to pay monthly, indefinitely, for access to some games? You’re not gonna have time to play everything. And if you pick one game and play it endlessly, it’s a better value to just own the game outright. I only see the subscription model working for casual gamers, which are the exact kind of people who have no issues dropping a recurring expense if they aren’t getting their money’s worth. Sign up for a month here or there, play the new release, drop the subscription, rinse and repeat.
On the flip side, you’ve also effectively devalued your games to the people who would have paid full price. Why pay $70 for Doom or Indiana jones when I know I can pay like $15 for a month and beat them both, and unsubscribe till the next game comes out. I’ll either temporarily subscribe or wait for a steep discount.
Microsoft is bad for gaming as a whole.
That’s the best argument against trusting they have any idea what they’re doing. I’ve been saying for like a decade now, they could just not do another Xbox, and call it job-done for turning consoles into PCs. Every game’s on every system because they’re all the same. The goddamn Switch 2 has raytracing cores.
Part of any moustache-twirling capitalist scheme is, like… caring when things make money? Sony going “oops, nevermind” on a failed shooter that took eight years to make is a cutthroat decision. Microsoft killing a studio for releasing a beloved and successful game is just bastardry. Especially if they just bought them, specifically to make that game. Microsoft effectively bribed your publisher to shut you down. You come into work one day, with all the equipment and people still there, and it’s like, nope, the studio doesn’t exist anymore. Somehow.
I’m left wondering if Microsoft even needed to do anything, for the console market to go this way. They correctly spotted what GTA3’s multiplatform releases meant for the industry. But beyond forcing the inclusion of hard drives… did they contribute to that process?