From VG247: "Naraka: Bladepoint, the third-person action battle royale from 24 Entertainment, has been holding a solid spot among the most popular games on Steam ever since its release almost one year ago. However, as you may have seen during Xbox and Bethesda’s not-E3 presentation the game is breaking free of the PC platform and heading to Xbox consoles. And it's available day one on Game Pass, to boot.
To find out more about the decision to hop on over to Microsoft’s side of town, I sat down with marketing manager Archer Wang. We also discussed what the studio hopes to gain from dropping Naraka: Bladepoint on Game Pass, and how the team aims to balance the game now that they’ve got a whole new audience to worry about."
Wccftech interviewed the developers of Naraka: Bladepoint about the PS5 Pro console and how they're using the new hardware in their game.
Naraka Bladepoint is among the top ten most-played games on Steam. Picture PUBG or Counter-Strike, but purely with melee weapons. Like its shooter counterparts, it doesn’t quite have a notable rival either. With a free-to-play model and paid cosmetics, Bladepoint has amassed a 300K+ player base on Steam alone.
Naraka: Bladepoint is getting crossovers with The Witcher and Tomb Raider, as well as a new map, a new weapon type, and much more.
That’s the gamble. Do you take the set amount from the start or do you bet on an audience to push you over the top? It’s a risk game, taking the guaranteed money isn’t the wrong move. Neither is gambling it all on your product but your game could go unnoticed no matter how good it is.
Gamepass is almost like marketing for indies. The price of their marketing is their launch numbers for better or worse. Instead of paying for marketing they bet on their profits. I’m sure there are numbers bonuses on top of their flat rate as well. You still have to compete on gamepass but at least you are getting an immediate return and possibly great exposure. I’d rather have a marketing battle in the game space than the media space as a small time dev. Wasted money there.
I bet single player games with no DLC and, specially, no MTs would sing a different tune.
But they know they're going to lose sales.
The only reasonable thing that makes GP a go to for devs is compensation from MS, which in turn cuts into GP's potential profits. If any.
From my personal experience, if I beat a game on Game Pass and I enjoyed it, then I'm happy pay for the sequel at full price. In that sense, Game Pass is an investment towards better sales for that IP in the future.
The gamepass model for sure kicks ass for indies and older games, and it's good to give them exposure and put people on something they might have otherwise missed out on. Plus, the check they get to put their games on the service is probably damn good.
But, like the CEO of Take Two said when he gave his opinion that was failed on N4G a couple of times, putting AAA games on sub services day one is where the real problem is. It's like making games so they can fail.