Loot boxes are all but dead in AAA games, it seems, but the alternatives seem to be creating an even bigger backlash.
This is one of the things that worry me about services like GamePass, if you give away your games for pennies, profit has to come from somewhere else. And microtransactions will obviously be among them.
Then you get that tired ass "bu bu but they need to make the money back from somewhere, it's fine" No it's not fine because if that's the case then maybe they shouldn't have just given their big budget game away like that
I'm enjoying Gears 5 for less than $10 through the PC beta and without any additional online fees plus over 100 other games to play. How has your experience been??? It would be really helpful to read comments from others who try it and give honest opinions. Outer Worlds is coming, the new Metro is available, Forza Horizon 4 is available, Psychonauts 2 will be there. All it takes is self control and not buy the micro-transactions. Gears 5 is not intrusive with the way you play and if you feel $10 (or less for the PC version of Game Pass) is still too restrictive or prohibited then please explain, instead of the generalizations that this will lead to this or this will one day impact that.
This is an interview with the developer of Oxenfree, it turns out that putting their game on Games Pass, they actually got a sales increase across all other platforms. "What I was worried about was, 'Is this going to cannibalize other sales early on?' That was the main concern. If this is going to be out on the same platform -- I want people buying it on Xbox still -- but what we found out was not only did it not [cannibalize sales], it increased our sales everywhere else on every platform,” Krankel said." https://uk.ign.com/articles...
Just look at Netflix's declining quality in offerings...they make one good TV show/movie every 50 mediocre and forgettable ones most of which I can never get past the pilot or first 30 minutes and so I simply move on to the next one. Their library started feeling kinda pointless after a while..like a huge filler pile where you need to look really hard to find something that interests you and then find the resolve to actually see it to the end. I really hope game sub service offerings wont end up like that. That said, as long as I can choose not to sub on any of these services I wont.
If the game was barebones then that's a reason to worry but Gears 5 is a jam-packed game. Most people were there for the Campaign, which delivered in spades.
The problem is people want to assume that somehow this subscription style of publishing is going to make as much or more money than selling games traditionally. If this is more profitable costs are going to have to be cut and since there is no real middle man that cut will come from development. There is a very good chance that next gen will be shorter more and more dependent on GAAS & MT's And the fact that Sony decided to still focus on traditional sales on top of a subscription instead of doing like Microsoft which is basically going services only tells me that Sony still sees the most profitable thing being traditional sales. Versus Microsoft where every game Microsoft has released has sold less at retail than the game before it with Gears 5 basically not even charting and selling less than 25% of Gears 4. Perhaps Microsoft has painted itself into a corner yet again buy not really thinking about what they were doing and what the end result would be. Let's just hope they don't take the whole industry off the cliff with them.
I agree. I'm a fan of choices, so I just ignore the "buy iron" or whatever part of the game and play what I paid for.
@MopedGames If Microsoft is delivering feature packed games like Gears 5 perhaps they're financial experts have already factored in how to maintain or increase production costs while delivering a compelling product. Maybe they are currently running a relatively small loss. Netflix adopted a loss model while Simultaneously increasing output and content quality...the result....subscriptions increased significantly and they are making more revenue than ever. When you have a stockpile of money...you can invest in yourself.
@343_Guilty_Spark All the games on gamepass so far are games that were developed based on the old model, we won't know for 5 or more years how subscriptions have effected the industry.
MS has figured out how much they're willing to lose to subsidize Gears 5 to use as a marketing tool to try and get people to use their service. Whether that continues indefinately or not still remains to be seen. As all these other publishers decide to throw their hat in the ring, we'll be looking at less content that those publishers are willing to license to MS. Just like we see Disney not giving stuff to Netflix and what not. Then what is MS going to do? Well....there is doing what Amazon and Netflix realized they had to do....which was create their own content. But realistically, how many high profile, multi-million dollar productions can MS create with the scope and content of Gears 5 in a single year and be able to support itself off a $10/month sub cost. Or even a $15 month sub cost. it costs a lot less to make a TV series than it does to make a single game. Things like game pass, or even steaming services are going to see rapid growth, and then implode in upon themselves, and in the mean time, these companies are going to be designing games to find a way to maximize the profit they can make off them, because you don't spend $100 million to make and market a game, just to not make money on it with the relative minimal amount of profit made off of sub costs. I'm sorry, but I've spent the last 15 years losing faith in the gaming industry to do what is right for the consumers. All this positivity is all predicated on the notion that these companies are somehow more interested in not screwing over the customers, despite the fact that we have been complaining about that very thing since horse armor graced our fair consoles.
@343_Guilty_Spark Netflix has not made $1 of profit so good analogy there. Look up any article about it, they are all over the internet. Source: My best friend works in the industry. As a company, Netflix has made ZERO profit.
Quantum Break has Microtransactions?
And that has to do with? The smarter gaming public knew you don't get something for nothing.
Tell us more about how the Gamepass model works again? I'd love to hear how the financials look, since you're an insider.
Chances are, that with or without game pass, we'd see these, "evolving" MT strategies. It's not even like these egregious plans for monetization are really new, in various implementations. I think we're more likely to see them in a service based scenario though, and as time goes on, we'll see more game design centered around pushing people towards the MT model. Anyone taking a payment to put the game on the service isn't going to get as much as they would selling the game outright. the service provider can rely on the sub costs, but lose a lot on the individual game sale. Like most thing involving MT, we'll see all sorts of experiments to see what the customer is willing to tolerate....just like we have with the traditional models.
I've been saying this since the beginning and everyone said i was stupid and wrong. I will give you all another warning. AAA single player games will not be made in a streaming only future. A - AA games will be the only single player experiences with their multiplayer feature being sold separately, like ND said about the last of us mp, at a later date. they will have a ton of mt's.. so pay $10 for a service that is the equivalent to a slot machine in a casino.
Its f2p style but with an entry fee. This is my biggest worry with subscription gaming!
Microsoft all about making gaming as service oriented as possible
No one is forcing anyone to buy these MT's though, it's like that pay to win modal article a little while back and how a lot of people didn't mind because you're not forced to buy any of the weapons.
Well if no one buys the MT's and and Microsoft sells the games for pennies and people stop buying games traditionally how does Microsoft pay for the games?
So, MS is selling the game through retail and digitally for pennies? How about all the subscribers for Live? What about the cut MS makes from third parties for selling their games, DLC on their marketplace? Not to mention the million of subscribers to Game Pass also. I'm positive people are still buying their games traditionally. I have to imagine MS has a steady stream of income that can support their first party devs plus the ones they just bought. I would be more worried if MS was forcing you to buy these MT's because they are required to finish or fully enjoy the complete game.
Perfect stealth troll at the TLOU. Point is - ms is introducing mobile game FTP tactics into their AAA games. Gamepass subscribers don't care, but I reckon the 16,000 people who bought the game launch week in the UK would be a little pissed.
"Point is - ms is introducing mobile game FTP tactics into their AAA games." Pretty positive this was introduced long before MS and I am also 100% sure it's still all optional and cosmetic. "but I reckon the 16,000 people who bought the game launch week in the UK would be a little pissed." Exactly why? Are the MT's not offered to the GamePass subscribers? Do the gamepass subscribers get free textures. Exactly what is it that these UK blokes who paid for the game through retail are complaining about? I'm sure it can't be for paying for more powerful weapons because Gears 5 doesn't have that disgusting practice to get pissed about.
"No one is forcing anyone to buy these MT's though" That's such a tiring excuse now lets be honest
You know what is even more tiresome, crying about options that aren't mandatory. How long have we had MT's for now? How many more decades of video game playing are we going to whine about this?
if you aren’t forced to buy them and they have no bearing on how the game plays, other then your characters appearance, then what’s the problem? Especially when these optional MTs create free expansions and DLC. Now if they had these MTs and still tried to charge you got DLC or Expansions (TLOU$) then i could understand complaints
People who have xbox's, love Gamepass. People who don't have xbox's, hate Gamepass. That should tell you all you need to know. Nobody seems to have a problem with optional, cosmetic micro-transactions on other platforms, why freak out when xbox does it?
It may be optional but the way they make you have to use iron, how its bought and earned and the fact that if you do want certain cosmetics some of them are put behind the paywall loop that you either have to overly grind at or pay up for, its the wrong way to do mts in a full priced game. "The first time players can unlock Iron through Tour of Duty is at hitting the rank "Officer II" or level 24 . At that level, the reward is 100 Iron. The amount of Iron increases as players hit the levels where it is listed as the reward, but receiving the currency is still a rare occurrence, even for the most committed Gears head The biggest issue with the system overall is how the items are locked to one drop pool or the other. Gears 5 players who really want all the cosmetics can't just play a lot and hope for the items they want. Eventually, they will have to earn or purchase Iron to get premium items, which isn't spending money on random loot boxes, but it's not ideal either." No excuse for it, optional or not nothing in a full priced game should be locked behind a system like this, why cant they just offer the cosmetics for a fair price for those that want to pay? they could still use a system to fairly reward players without having to grind out iron in a full priced AAA game.
But he's right. Just now, these services can charge you a fee to not be forced to buy these MT. Doesn't matter that if it wasn't a MS service, and lets say this was EA, then I'm sure the tone of the nature of the MT model on a sub model would be very different. We've complained about MT for a long time now. I don't see why because it's on a paywall service, that it's fine now. I mean, I thought services like these were supposed to help the sales of a game....despite that obviously not happening with MS games. @Gangsta and Krib The problem isn't that they are there, it's that games that have heavy MT schemes tend to often be designed around making purchases more appealing than spending countless hours grinding out for something desirable. It'd be hard to point to a single game as an example of this being the norm, but if you look at the last 10-15 years or so, there is an obvious shift in game design to do exactly what we all have said at some point is happening. Don't try to defend it because it's on MS service and it's a MS game. They are what they are, and all publishers are guilty of it. It's not confined to MS. But instead of being complacent, fight against it to try and make it known that as a consumer you don't like this kind of crap. I don't buy MT. I don't mind certain kinds if they don't affect game play, or if they're available otherwise and don't require a stupid amount of grind. In general, it's not the MT that are the problem, it's the implementation of those MT in the game design.
It's a slippery slope mate and ms is hitting full steam ahead. This is the tip of the iceberg of their monetization tactics (although also employed by others), to recoup lost revenue from game sales. I would've thought that was pretty clear.
"It's a slippery slope mate and ms is hitting full steam ahead." Of course they are, even though Sony has been ahead in that area longer right mate? "This is the tip of the iceberg..." The tip? This has been going on since last gen?
I also noticed you didn't answer or expand on your little UK comment....I'm actually curious as to why only people in the UK would be upset according to you
Why would I expand on what clearly was an attempt at trolling, 16,000 launch weekend sales is abysmal and downright embarrassing. No wonder we have - 'Gamepass mega hit' to add to our growing vocabulary of ms superlatives.
the tip of the ice berg was UC3 charging $60 for a game and then introducing Pay To Win MTs. Any Pay to win MTs are bad. Optional cosmetics tho? i couldn’t give a damn about dressing up my character or guns with special skins. Former PS Boss Yoshida said it best at the beginning of this gen “Microtransaction per se is not a bad thing," he went on to write. "How the game is designed around it could become a problem." There’s a reason i have over 80 crates sitting in my inventory on Rocket League. Let the suckers pay for that, i keep getting free content updates
@oldboy Oooooooooooooooooooooooh, lol. Gotcha @Kribwalker "Former PS Boss Yoshida said it best at the beginning of this gen “Microtransaction per se is not a bad thing," he went on to write. "How the game is designed around it could become a problem."" Let's not also forget his other quote, "Yoshida notes that they offer an "alternative path for busy people," and to "read reviews when they come out."" But I do like this articles closing statement, "Microtransaction rage is far too common these days, as completely optional fees that I will never use don't really bother me, so long as the game is entertaining in its own right -- and as Yoshida notes, isn't designed around it."
@Kribwalker @gangsta_red Ya know the big flaw in your argument is your using games that are a generation old as your example. Microsoft is is basically trying to fund their whole game development on the back on MT's today.
Moped games TLOU Remastered UC4 Every MLB game with FUT modes (every year) GtSport Driveclub Killzone Shadowfall All full of MTs One of sony’s biggest earners in the gaming space in recent years, Fate/Grand order is a mobile game loaded with MTs. That’s plenty of recent examples
gangsta - mate - how did you get me? I freely admitted what that statement was and it's intent. No ambiguity in my comments - unlike most of yours.
Hey, question. Are you going to turn this into a fanboy thing like in that other article, or is everything MS doing good for gaming, and everyone is wrong for having an opinion on it that you disagree with?
The cosmetic stuff is fine, if it's a fair price, it shouldn't be put behind a weird coin or iron paywall though, we all know how that stuff works....
I played through the campaign twice, a bit of horde, and a whole lot of vs multiplayer. Never did I once look at the crates or feel the need to.
But MT are optional annnnnnd not forced so whats the big deal ?? I'm confused .. The game is completely playable without purchasing any MT
"But MT are optional annnnnnd not forced so whats the big deal ?? I'm confused " Because when you have MT's in your game people assume you're forced to buy them, the game is now automatically GaaS and anything else to cause an unnecessary freak out. I would have a big problem if they had pay to win type MT's or DLC that featured a real ending or anything similar. But this worrying about MT's is the new thing to now associate subscription services with and scream how bad it all is.
So you don't have a problem with people purchasing microtransactions on a game that isn't even owned by them, only to lose everything if their subscription lapses? These MTs on Gamepass games absolutely shouldn't exist.
@Ricegum "So you don't have a problem with people purchasing microtransactions on a game that isn't even owned by them, only to lose everything if their subscription lapses?" As soon as they subscribe, rent the game or even buy the game again, everything bought will be still there. You do realize this right? That all your saves, purchases and anything else is still on you HDD even if your subscription runs out. Are you even sure you know what you're even talking about?
MTs by themselves, off to the side of the game isn't & wasn't that big of a deal. Now days it has got a lot worse with actual game design decisions based around them & constant internet connection requirements to play single player portions. Full priced games with a lot of F2P design.
Games at $ 1 have a price greater than $ 1.
Gamepass is a surviving strategy. You don't see the industry leaders, Sony and Nintendo, doing this gamepass stuff.
Nope, only the successful giants seem to be adopting this model. Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Disney +. These companies are struggling to survive, right?
Non of those are gaming companies. We are talking about gaming companies, "face-palm 🤦♂️""
This is only the beginning.
I remember seeing a report that Gears 5 lost 90% of its playerbase on Steam already. That's a paid only playerbase too. I can't imagine too many people are sticking with one game when you are getting a new game with the subscription constantly. That and the fact theres too much oversaturation and a lack of time to dedicate to all of this.
So now Xbox has too many games?! Haha they can't seem to catch a break.
Just wait. It may not be now, or in the near future, but all of these people defending this crap will regret that they backed anything like this.
No, they won't. Any you're welcome to sit out of the subscription model and purchase your games as you do now. No reason to mess it up for the rest of us.
i will never sub to a game streaming site from the big three console leaders. i will buy a ps5 and buy my games for it to play when i want. i will not support a system that takes ownership of my games away from me. PS PLUS is bad enough as it is.
I don't think they're bad if you look at them as a supplimental service. Like Netflix may not be someone's primary way of watching TV or movies, but is a good replacement for what used to be rentals. I certainly wouldn't want one as a primary source for my gaming needs, because it's too limiting to whatever is available on the service. There are games I like which likely aren't going to be on these services that much. Namely, a lot of those niche Japanese games.
fair enough. but my main issue is that they see that they can make money from micro transactions and AA games. i know for a fact that sony wouldn't be able to sustain this service as is with AAA games being released on the service. i am worried they will want to go all in on streaming games and cut production of their AAA single player games to maintain the service. that and the fact that Naughty Dog said they won't have a MP feature for the last of us and that it will be it's own game. this ill go to ps now for sure. so already a game has had it's budget cut for the single player by taking away the mp aspect of the game.
To be able to maintain the quality and quantity level, they'd certainly have to have a lot of subs. MS as well. It takes about 4 months of subs to make up the revenue from one lost sale of the game. But that doesn't factor in the profit margin of that sub cost, and since I know licensing all this other content isn't cheap, chances are, that for every individual who doesn't buy the game to just play it on a sub, even a full years worth of subs aren't going to cover the lost sale. MT makes sense for a service like this. I think that's abundantly clear. On the flip side, MT are a thing without these kinds of services. What concerns me most is that games will start being designed more around mobile principles which make buying stuff more appealing, and heavier cuts to in game content in the guise of it being to support a game long term. However, GaaS on a paid sub should have that long term support paid for through the sub itself. Some people are saying Gears 5 MT are OK because it means free content in the future. But, in the mean time, they're paying for a sub service, which is basically a $10/month MT....assuming they aren't just locked in on the current subsidized price which they seem to think is going to last forever. I see a lot of eventualities for how these kinds of services will deliver content, and MT with heavier F2P implementations, and episodic gaming to keep people coming back are the two biggest ones. Both are not generally things the gaming community gets excited for...but hey, they got 2 years for a buck or two, so why not? An argument I can't disagree with, because the value is there, but I still think the long term implementations aren't going to be something that people will end up liking. But like with MT, they'll come to be complacent in accepting it, because hey, we didn't complain enough way back in the day when it would have made a difference. It's MT all over again, all wrapped up in a pretty bow, delivered for cheap, and somehow, the future of gaming is going to be supported by a bunch of disparate services which will probably end up being more money overall than the average person spends on gaming in a year.
Mts are evil
Free map packs but with cosmetic MT's is a fine system. I'm confused why someone would want to go back to the days of $10 to $15 map packs where only like half your friends actually have them so you barely play the new maps.
I’d gladly pay nothing for my games In gamepass if they include cosmetic only microtransactions. None of that pay to win BS. As long as the game quality is not compromised, then it’s all good. However, gears microtransactions are horribly overpriced and need to be fixed.
I think the strategy is to get people to try game pass for cheap. See if it’s for them, get their name out there. Then they will get revenue when the cheap trial runs out and people pay full price. If it’s not for them, hey at least they got a few dollars anyway. I think they have a long term view on the service and are willing to take a loss initially to get people on board. Regarding loot boxes? Well it’s dumb. I have never, ever bought into a single one. But apparently a lot of people are since they make billions from that. I’ve never met anyone who has bought one either, and apparently no one here on n4g has bought one. So who is buying them? Are we all lying and we are in fact buying them? I do not like them, or defend them. But they have been around since before Game Pass. They make so much money that it’s stupid not to include them. People want them otherwise they wouldn’t include them. It’s simple capitalism.
Microtransactions will be the death of gaming
I hate this box so much, so I just steer clear of it and so does every single person I know. Gamepass on PC is only good for the cheap chance to play the launch exclusives on it lol. Then you just dump gamepass again, until another 'good' game of theirs launches on it. Will probably be waited years for that.