Support NeoGAF

[LectureMaster]

For developers, Gamepass is the worst thing to happen to the industry.

As a developer, Game Pass doesn't benefit studios the way it was promised. Developers were told that putting their games on Game Pass would lead to increased sales through greater exposure, but that hasn’t worked out as expected. Talking to a few developers that I know they stated that while the...

www.neogaf.com

PC Game Pass added 137 games worth $4,800 in 2024 BEST DEAL IN GAMING

No matter your personal opinions on gaming subscription services, there’s no escaping the fact that Game Pass represents some pretty amazing value. While there’s no guarantee that any of your favorite games in the library will hang around forever, you’re still getting access to heaps of titles...

www.neogaf.com

Analysis - Hardware - Platform - Releasing games on Xbox Game Pass hurts sales by upwards of 80%, according to Christopher Dring

According to a thread opened by journalist Christopher Dring on the Install Base forum, who has become known for publishing sales data for the UK, has shared some interesting information. Getting straight to the point, Christopher Dring claims that releasing a game on Xbox Game Pass does YES...

www.neogaf.com

 

[adamsapple]

The topic sounds like OP is just talking about all developers in general not specifically indie. OP can clarify though when they get the chance to though haha.

OP is very clearly talking about Indie studios.

Unless Microsft is doing a huge payout, a lot of indie developers I know aren't seeing reasons to release their games on the platform and they payout has decreased dramatically since the buyouts.

I suggest you get involved in the indie scene. You'll learn a lot. Attend a few meet ups, shows, conferences and people will talk. I'm in a Discord channel called Game Dev Local. We used to do monthly meet ups before Covid in central London not we do meets up in Brighton every couple of months. I'm in another group that's dedicated to Unity programmers and we do meets up every month near Clapham Common (London in case you don't know). But yeah, sure Jan.

If you want talk generally, PS+ and Game Pass are broadly the same with the biggest distinction being that GP gets a lot more day 1 titles and has options for both console and PC (and cloud), not just console.

 

[kevboard]

The topic sounds like OP is just talking about all developers in general not specifically indie. OP can clarify though when they get the chance to though haha.

why would a first party studio care about game sales? it makes no sense to claim a first party studio has any issues with their games being in gamepass day 1. that's literally their whole job, to make games that are day 1 in gamepass.

 

[adamsapple]

I'll just leave this here.

Citizen Sleeper developer praises Xbox Game Pass for 'keeping a lot of indie studios going'

Citizen Sleeper developer Gareth Damian Martin says that Xbox Game Pass is responsible for helping to keep many indie studios open.

www.yahoo.com

Citizen Sleeper developer praises Xbox Game Pass for 'keeping a lot of indie studios going'

 

[PJX]

The topic sounds like OP is just talking about all developers in general not specifically indie. OP can clarify though when they get the chance to though haha.

Yes I'm talking about all developers.

I'm working on a game at the moment with a team made up of people who were let go or their studio closed down. We started developing the game for all four platforms but in the end we decided to drop Xbox because we just don't see it as a viable platform. It's not worth the risk at the moment and we aren't th eonly ones who have this thought process.

 

[Edgelord79]

While it makes sense that subscription services would devalue games over the long term, as a consumer here’s my beef with developers:

- Buggy and incomplete games they want full price for
- Games we pay full price for and then get asked for more money in the game.

So… it’s kind of hard for me to feel sympathy even though I do understand all developers should not get painted with the same brush.

Is also possible some developers actually benefit from subscription services? Or are you making a blanket statement that all lose from it?

 

[Punished Miku]

Repeat price hikes, microtransactions, DLC, season pass, battle pass, early access, digital only, post release patches with no QA, re-releases, remasters, always online, all pro developer / publisher.

Rentals. Pro consumer.

Industry is doomed.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

No this is the worst thing in the industry.

Can you identify each person's gender and pronouns?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Gamepass is so corrosive to gamer mentality that it even prevents them from spending on FREE TO PLAY games lmao

 

[The Cockatrice]

If its the worst thing, why release it on gamepass then? Just release your indie on steam only and maybe it gains success or maybe it gets buried like hundreds of others weekly.

 

[Rawbutt Jellybean]

I'm working on a game at the moment with a team of made up people who were let go or their studio closed down.

ftfy

 

[Punished Miku]

Yes I'm talking about all developers.

I'm working on a game at the moment with a team made up of people who were let go or their studio closed down. We started developing the game for all four platforms but in the end we decided to drop Xbox because we just don't see it as a viable platform. It's not worth the risk at the moment and we aren't th eonly ones who have this thought process.

GP is also on PC. Its even cheaper there too. They also get Epic free games, cheap keys and bundles.

In the end it wont matter what you drop. Xbox will likely be open store so there will be options to buy games. Can play GP and buy other stuff on whatever store you want to list it on.

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

Yes I'm talking about all developers.

I'm working on a game at the moment with a team made up of people who were let go or their studio closed down. We started developing the game for all four platforms but in the end we decided to drop Xbox because we just don't see it as a viable platform. It's not worth the risk at the moment and we aren't th eonly ones who have this thought process.

What does that have to do with Gamepass?

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

I already stated a model in which Game Pass could've become not only the "savior" of the industry but also of the medium. Now our pal Phil has to deal with his dumb decisions.

It is filling me with anxiety the fact that MS hasn't made any statement about GP reaching 100M subs. Did Micahel Pachter lie?!?!

 

[willothedog]

'A studio I know', bullshit, that was clearly spat out by an LLM.

 

[PJX]

Repeat price hikes, microtransactions, DLC, season pass, battle pass, early access, digital only, post release patches with no QA, re-releases, remasters, always online, all pro developer / publisher.

Rentals. Pro consumer.

Industry is doomed.

I never said the industry was doomed. I also never mentioned anything about consumers. I am talking from a developer standpoint.

 

[Shadowstar39]

You don't need to write code to understand that providing your product for free to millions of people will reduce the sales of the product which would otherwise be available only through.. purchase.

It's crazy the gamepass defense force in action around these parts. Can't critize their "free games"... Well look what happened to mobile with the race to the bottom. You will have nothing but shovel ware, f2p gaas and first party titles on there eventually.

 

[Punished Miku]

I never said the industry was doomed. I also never mentioned anything about consumers. I am talking from a developer standpoint.

I know. I'm here to point out that anything good for consumers will likely be bad for you.

More options for us for less cost is good for consumers. Its one of the only consumer wins in 20 years. Its all been consumers getting fucked for the most part with price hike after price hike.

 

[mayham2199]

Maybe but imo it’s part of the reason xbox went multiplat so I love it because that’s just good for the consumer.

 

[Ozriel]

You don't need to write code to understand that providing your product for free to millions of people will reduce the sales of the product which would otherwise be available only through.. purchase.

You’re imagine that developers put their products on GamePass for free?

 

[jakinov]

Game Pass shifts this model to a subscription-based payout, which can be inconsistent and tied to engagement metrics rather than actual game purchases. This leads to financial uncertainty for studios, especially indie developers.

What do you mean by subscription-based payout? They've talked about how developers get paid before and it varies based on what the developer wants. Some developers want it to be based on engagement, some take lump sums and some even get their full development costs paid for. It was stated that they tend to prefer the lump sum.

With so many titles available for a low monthly fee, the perceived value of individual games decreases. Consumers may become less willing to pay full price for games outside the subscription, creating a "race to the bottom" in pricing.

I don't think that's really an issue most of the catalog is old stuff that people already perceive as lower value. Unless Microsoft does a really good job at disrupting the industry so badly by making such good games that vast majority of consumes will settle for Microsoft games because of such great value, I would not expect the kind of impact where people aren't buying games in general anymore at current prices.

Unsustainable Expectations: Game Pass fosters a culture where players expect to access a large library of high-quality games at minimal cost. This places pressure on developers to lower prices or join the subscription service, often at unfavorable terms.

What's unsustainable about the expectations? It's simply a different model with tradeoffs on risk/reward. Devs probably aren't going to lower price because Gampeass lets you play a bunch random games you can find at walmart in the <$10 bin. Again, unless Microsoft actually executes on their games business extremely well there's probably going to be little impact on how consumes spend money on games overall.

Additionally, it can be challenging for smaller games to stand out among a vast library.

I don't think that's a real problem. How is that different than a small game sitting behind a storefront with 100x the games that gamepass offers?


In regards to losing sales, it's going to be a case by case basis on whether or not you lose money from being on gamepass. Timing and what deal you make matter. In some cases, it's going to be the only way some of these games even break-even. In other cases it's incremental revenue. It's pretty hard to track whether or not your game would have sold well otherwise as you don't have a crystal ball or time machine to prove it. There's going to be people butthurt because they want their cake and to be able to eat it too. There's going to be people who see metrics of people playing the game on gamepass and automatically attribute that to lost sales without being able to prove that they would have actually bought it at full price in an alternate reality. Gamepass is going to cannibalize game sales but it doesn't really matter if you get paid enough to be on gamepass.

 

[Sanepar]

For gamers too but we had luck this thing didn't become mainstream way to consume games.

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

It's crazy the gamepass defense force in action around these parts. Can't critize their "free games"... Well look what happened to mobile with the race to the bottom. You will have nothing but shovel ware, f2p gaas and first party titles on there eventually.

Steam is already full of Shovelware and F2P GaaS, GP didn;t cause that.

Conversely, I don't see why the defence force for corporations extracting as much money as possible from consumers would be celebrated.

Where I live, Sony new release titles have increased in price by around $40 ... financially that's working out great for them, but they were;t exactly struggling during the PS4 era either. Should I applaud them as a consumer for that?

 

[adamsapple]

You’re imagine that developers put their products on GamePass for free?

I love the part where he thinks games on GP are provided 'for free to millions of people'.

I swear the level of discourse here is getting dumber on average very fast.

 

[Ozriel]

It's crazy the gamepass defense force in action around these parts. Can't critize their "free games"... Well look what happened to mobile with the race to the bottom. You will have nothing but shovel ware, f2p gaas and first party titles on there eventually.

This is the fate you guys have been darkly warning about since 2018. Yet to happen for some mysterious reason. Heck, even MS first party didn’t even universally go the GaaS or F2P route like the scaremongers claimed.

If Steam sales with steep discounts and Epic/Amazon giveaways didn’t ‘devalue’ games, I doubt GamePass will.

I never said the industry was doomed. I also never mentioned anything about consumers. I am talking from a developer standpoint.

Well, on Jan 23rd you’ll get to watch the devs behind Expedition 33 tell you why they’ve put their AA RPG in GamePass.

 

[MiguelItUp]

Come on man, at least try, lmao.

This is no different than a "leak" post that reads, "____________ is being reveled tomorrow."

There's no proof, no merit, no nothing, lol.

Hope you had fun OP.

 

[DownLikeBCPowder]

You’re imagine that developers put their products on GamePass for free?

No. If you read my other posts that is obvious, because I reference back end payments. Whether that back end payment is worth potential sales is a gamble that may be beneficial to some, which I also state.

 

[Clear]

I feel like I've stressed this point so many times over the years: NOT ALL DEVELOPERS WILL BE AFFECTED TO THE SAME DEGREE.

Small devs who's titles are not spotlighted by the service providers are pretty much fucked. Too much competition for attention, a commercial playing field that makes them seem uncompetitive on price, limited marketing/visibility... Basically roll the dice on virality and hope it comes up sixes.

Small devs who's titles are spotlighted will see good returns initially, but this will tail-off over time as they'll find themselves low-balled on buyouts/royalty rates because they are now dependent upon the service provider. At which point they'll be faced with the prospect of "kissing the ring" or hope they have generated enough goodwill and their product is good enough that they can stand on their own. (e.g. Moon)

Medium sized devs/smaller publishers will find themselves in a similar position but they at least have some ability to market themselves, and as known quantities commercially are better positioned to make more favourable deals with the service providers. Buy-outs here will offer some sort of safety net in the form of guaranteed money to recoup dev costs, but obviously will reduce their revenue from actual sales.

For big/corporate devs, its a positive. Quick cash-out money on failed products, or an additional source of long-tail revenue. Day #1 releases will be rare though, and if they do agree to them they will be adequately paid.

So basically those least able to self-market will suffer the most severely, whereas the safe and corporate will do as well or better than previously.

The major consequence being it will become increasingly hard for small studios to grow into medium or large size ones without the patronage of the service provider, who will to a degree get to cherry-pick teams and talent to acquire. They will be the kingmakers

 

[kazuyamishima]

Some points of OP are questionable

But even Bobby Kotick stated that GP has a negative impact on the finances of games.

But GAF knows better

 

[bender]

I actually think for Indies, Game Pass is a decent play. Not only do they get up front funding to complete games, being on the platform gives them a decent shot of being discovered and discoverability seems like a huge hurdle for smaller projects given platforms like Steam see ~50 new releases per day.

 

[Power Pro]

No this is the worst thing in the industry.

 

[SenkiDala]

I don't think this is news to anyone. Xbox gamers are conditioned to not buy games now. Even free to play lol.

I buy games.

The cousin of OP who work in a studio but shhh it's a serect, seems to have a great life

 

[Rawbutt Jellybean]

For gamers too but we had luck this thing didn't become mainstream way to consume games.

There's 10s of millions of people who pay for these services across all 3 consoles to do just that. Seems pretty mainstream to me. We're lucky that such services are an option.

 

[Ozriel]

No. If you read my other posts that is obvious, because I reference back end payments. Whether that back end payment is worth potential sales is a gamble that may be beneficial to some, which I also state.

Then perhaps don’t say ‘devs give out their products for free’ when you know they’re paid for it?

For a multiplatform indie dev, why wouldn’t the deal be beneficial? You get payment that easily covers the port to Xbox, and still try for full retail revenue on Steam, Switch and - to a lesser extent - PS.

Some points of OP are questionable

But even Bobby Kotick stated that GP has a negative impact on the finances of games.

But GAF knows better

It’s an entirely different calculation for AAA third party games, especially games that would be projected to sell extremely well.

 

[ArtHands]

OP sounds like those physical blu ray people getting angry over people subscribing to Netflix

 

[Ozzie666]

This is what Nintendo does so well, protects their IPS, protects the value and sale price of their games. It creates stregnth in the brand and so much more. It's the complete opposite of what gamepass actually does. The de-evaluation of games, brand and IPS is a real thing. Throw away games help no one, even old movie tie-in games had more value.

Microsoft has socially engineered their small audience to accept the platform as a subscription based service. Nintendo has engineered their loyal fans to buy exclusive first party content, almost religiously.

What started out as an offer too be good to be true, became an unsustainable mess, because it was flawed without insane subscription numbers.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Little games programed by you using your little sister's crayon artwork isn't going to cut it.
If you want my money, you better work for it.

 

[DownLikeBCPowder]

Then perhaps don’t say ‘devs give out their products for free’ when you know they’re paid for it?

For a multiplatform indie dev, why wouldn’t the deal be beneficial? You get payment that easily covers the port to Xbox, and still try for full retail revenue on Steam, Switch and - to a lesser extent - PS.



It’s an entirely different calculation for AAA third party games, especially games that would be projected to sell extremely well.

I completely understand and agree that it can be beneficial for some, which is what I've stated now twice. Is it right for everyone? I don't think so. I think for those that don't have the ability to reach exposure, high quality, breakout potential, etc then it could be a safer bet for them to secure the back end capital. For some developers, I'm sure this is the best choice at the moment in the current market (heavily saturated) to secure the capital.

However, it isn't true that they can still attempt for full retail revenue on Steam - that would be true if Gamepass didn't cross over to that platform (PC), but it does. There is certainly crossover there that has an impact.

 

[ReBurn]

The thing that interests me most about this developer take is that the majority of commercial software sold today is delivered via some kind subscription or service. Moving to subscription pricing was the only way most commercial software companies could continue to develop and maintain their products because one-time sales just couldn't produce enough revenue at the prices the market would bear. Development costs were becoming too high.

With video game production timelines and cost continuing to rise to the point where a single failure can kill a studio it really is necessary that some portion of games in a developer's catalog be able to bring in recurring revenue to subsidize one-time sales, whether it be live service with MTX or subscription. Services like game pass, PS plus, ea play and Ubisoft connect serve that purpose for publishers. For developers who don't have their own service they're going to have to use someone else's like game pass or PS plus. Like it or not subscriptions are here to stay because they are a necessary source of revenue to help keep the lights on.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

This is what Nintendo does so well, protects their IPS, protects the value and sale price of their games. It creates stregnth in the brand and so much more. It's the complete opposite of what gamepass actually does. The de-evaluation of games, brand and IPS is a real thing. Throw away games help no one, even old movie tie-in games had more value.

Microsoft has socially engineered their small audience to accept the platform as a subscription based service. Nintendo has engineered their loyal fans to buy exclusive first party content, almost religiously.

What started out as an offer too be good to be true, became an unsustainable mess, because it was flawed without insane subscription numbers.

It was supposed to be an offer you can't refuse, The Godfather style

Once they got to 200 million subs or whatever their goal was, they could basically drive Nintendo and Sony out of business because they could afford to lose infinity money building up to that subscriber base and the competitors could not. This is why all the Netflix competitors have been hemorrhaging money but Netflix makes record profits year after year

Unfortunately for MS, they never got anyone outside of already existing Xbox owners to care or want to invest in the platform just to subscribe to video games

Netflix succeeded because you can use Netflix on anything. That was never going to work when Gamepass is restricted only to Xbox

The gaming industry is fortunate that MS's grand plan to monopolize and destroy gaming failed so spectacularly

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

TIL GamePass is responsible for the value problems and struggle of indie games that have plagued the industry for years and years before GamePass even launched.

 

[TehGoomba7s]

Games launching Day One on game pass aside from MS published games is a sure red flag they are terrible and would bomb without getting a game pass paycheck. Outriders, Back4Blood, Flintlock etc all seemed great at the time they were "free" and they all sucked so badly it was clear to see why those devs took the money.

 

[Kumomeme]

1: no developer is forced to put their game into GamePass.

2: game rentals were massive in the 90s, where people rented games instead of buying them.

3: EA, Ubisoft and Sony all have their own subscription services with day 1 releases and dozens/hundreds of games included.

did people rent massive number of library of game at a time with minimal cost during 90s?

 

[Punished Miku]

did people rent massive number of library of game at a time with minimal cost during 90s?

They get way, way more money now than they did in the 90s. Weird huh?

 

[Hari Seldon]

Indy games are devalued because there is simply too many of them. Supply is way larger than demand. Additionally they are competing with AAA F2P games now.

 

[Moriarty1889]

No this is the worst thing in the industry.

What a bunch of freaks.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

With video game production timelines and cost continuing to rise to the point where a single failure can kill a studio

we know thanks to Jason that a lot of the issues are coming from mismanagement.

it really is necessary that some portion of games in a developer's catalog be able to bring in recurring revenue to subsidize one-time sales, whether it be live service with MTX or subscription.

this is the videogame desing philosophy moving forward for all games. (also ads... just look ar mobile gaming)

Services like game pass, PS plus, ea play and Ubisoft connect serve that purpose for publishers. For developers who don't have their own service they're going to have to use someone else's like game pass or PS plus.

there is no need to offer day and date game on any service (unless you want to prioritize the growth of such service or if it's your main business model)

These kind of services are just part of the economic chain of a game release lifecycle.

full price > price drops > definitive editions > sub services.

Like it or not subscriptions are here to stay because they are a necessary source of revenue to help keep the lights on.

it couldn't save Tango.

 

[Edgelord79]

I will admit that subscription services when I used them (not since my Gamepass sub ran out) did teach me two things;

1) Be much more selective with what I pay full price for.

2) There is a lot of crap out there and the adage that you get what you pay for doesn’t necessarily apply to games.

I don’t buy things just to “support” an industry that is worth billions. This is not the same thing as the starving artist selling a painting on the street. I buy things that give me the best value. If I can get it cheaper than I will.

I do like to own most of my games but there is a lot competing for my money. It seems that during a time when games have gone up in price, technology is increasing in price, getting things require pre-orders, suspicious scarcity on hardware, etc… blaming an an option that brings more eyes to a game and more options to consumers may be a bit tone deaf.

 

[Rawbutt Jellybean]

Games launching Day One on game pass aside from MS published games is a sure red flag they are terrible and would bomb without getting a game pass paycheck. Outriders, Back4Blood, Flintlock etc all seemed great at the time they were "free" and they all sucked so badly it was clear to see why those devs took the money.

Lies of P, MLB The Show, and Kunitsu-Gama aren't "terrible" and that's off the top of my head.

 

[Generic]

As a developer, Game Pass doesn't benefit studios the way it was promised. Developers were told that putting their games on Game Pass would lead to increased sales through greater exposure, but that hasn’t worked out as expected. Talking to a few developers that I know they stated that while the initial spike in visibility was noticeable, it hasn’t translated into the kind of long-term sales growth theye were led to believe. Instead, players seem content to engage with their game on the service and then move on to the next title, leaving traditional revenue streams stagnant. Does Game Pass harm developers in ways that are only becoming clear now. Unless Microsft is doing a huge payout, a lot of indie developers I know aren't seeing reasons to release their games on the platform and they payout has decreased dramatically since the buyouts.

A studio I know sent the following assestment to me.

• Revenue Uncertainty: Developers often rely on upfront sales for predictable revenue. Game Pass shifts this model to a subscription-based payout, which can be inconsistent and tied to engagement metrics rather than actual game purchases. This leads to financial uncertainty for studios, especially indie developers.
• Devaluation of Games: With so many titles available for a low monthly fee, the perceived value of individual games decreases. Consumers may become less willing to pay full price for games outside the subscription, creating a "race to the bottom" in pricing.
• Unsustainable Expectations: Game Pass fosters a culture where players expect to access a large library of high-quality games at minimal cost. This places pressure on developers to lower prices or join the subscription service, often at unfavorable terms.
• Lack of Long-Tail Sales: Titles on Game Pass may experience a surge in engagement initially but suffer from reduced long-term sales as players move to newer titles within the subscription. This affects studios that rely on steady income from evergreen titles.
• Indie Developers Struggle: While exposure on Game Pass can boost visibility, many indie developers report that the revenue from the platform doesn’t compensate for the loss of traditional sales. Additionally, it can be challenging for smaller games to stand out among a vast library.

• Devaluation of Games: With so many titles available for a low monthly fee, the perceived value of individual games decreases. Consumers may become less willing to pay full price for games outside the subscription, creating a "race to the bottom" in pricing."

Good, games should cost less.