Support NeoGAF

[Banjo64]

Excellent. And Cooking Simulator fits the bill as a smaller title.
Now who’s got a combative attitude?

Having to say something 3 times so you understand it doesn’t make me combative you (or somebody) said Cooking Sims inclusion is more warranted over ‘smaller games’ - I was just setting that statement straight.

Never said Gears 5 was crap. I think it’s a great game myself. 68% userscore and declining CCUs so it’s clear many disagree, likely based on the MP.

Quelle surprise.

Never played it before. I’ve been pretty clear about using Steam user metrics as an indicator of quality.

Admittedly not as impressive as you taking one look at the name and determining quality, but it’s something.

Quelle surprise.

 

[Wohc]

As has been pointed out to you numerous times, the people who like this type of game (and who have actually played it) clearly disagree with your well thought out assessment (as evidenced by the Steam reviews). Grow up.

Been like 5 hours into it now and love it. Just let him hate.

 

[Banjo64]

As has been pointed out to you numerous times, the people who like this type of game (and who have actually played it) clearly disagree with your well thought out assessment (as evidenced by the Steam reviews). Grow up.

Post your play time and thoughts please. The guy on the first page did. And his thoughts weren’t compelling;

The PC version is OK, but it's an incredibly odd game.

The campaign is based on time trials, you have to serve customers before they get angry, but by playing like that, it becomes incredibly stressful and hectic. What is fun in Cooking Simulator is taking your time and cooking the meal right and learning how to make stuff. But the campaign works against that, it rather wants to be a stressful time trail campaign where you sprint back and forth throwing shit into a pan. This is the main reason for the bad reviews, it's just a bad way to experience the game.

And for some weird reason, they added these weird physics, for example, when you turn quick, all the food fly off the plate. Combined with the hectic pace of the campaign, this means you will run around spilling food everywhere. It's like playing one of these comedy games like surgeon simulator.

The game is really cool early on in the campaign when it goes slow, but it turns into a different annoying sort of game after two or three hours.

 

[SportsFan581]

As in all things, everyone's opinion is just that, an opinion and everybody has one.

Case in point is the powerwash simulator, a lot of GP users online seem to legitimately like that game, I tried it on cloud and I have to say I don't get the appeal on that. Borrrring to me. But, clearly I am not all gamers. Not liking something personally is hardly good evidence of said thing having no value.

 

[Kilau]

They are still crap games.

I’d love to see the play time/achievement lists of the people defending these games to see how much they’ve played

 

[Dr. Wilkinson]

What's the reason for F2P games?

I can’t think of one. Why would a game that is free need to be on a paid subscription service. A f2p game itself is a subscription service, essentially. To get the most out of it, if you play over a long period of time

 

[Banjo64]

U mad lad

 

[poppabk]

5 minutes and the novelty wears off. It's a dogshit streamer game.

Get a couple of people playing and it's a fun hour or so of doing weird shit. It's basically the part in an open world game where you got bored of doing missions and just start fucking about but that is the entire game.

 

[PianistaMacabro]

People talk as if overcooked wasnt a great game. Definitely better than plenty of generic AAA

 

[SportsFan581]

People talk as if overcooked wasnt a great game. Definitely better than plenty of generic AAA

Agreed. I have put some time into Overcooked 2, a solid little pickup and play game. Has a bit of an arcade feel to it.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

People talk as if overcooked wasnt a great game. Definitely better than plenty of generic AAA

Overcooked was great but also super stressful, especially in four player mode. At some point we were all loudly shouting at each other

 

[ByWatterson]

$600k is pocket change to Microsoft.

 

[SportsFan581]

Overcooked was great but also super stressful, especially in four player mode. At some point we were all loudly shouting at each other

I hadn't even noticed there was a multi-player mode, I can see how that would happen.

 

[Ozriel]

$600k is pocket change to Microsoft.

More importantly, it’s only a fraction of the monthly GamePass revenue.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

More importantly, it’s only a fraction of the monthly GamePass revenue.

Roughly 0.3% of the monthly revenue, according to Ampere estimates. Not sure if sustainable

 

[phil_t98]

Roughly 0.3% of the monthly revenue, according to Ampere estimates. Not sure if sustainable

I think those estimates are under what is coming in to

 

[flying_sq]

Maybe for some of the games there is a console or game pass exclusive clause on the next game they make. Or MS is trying to buy goodwill among devs.

 

[adamsapple]

Roughly 0.3% of the monthly revenue, according to Ampere estimates. Not sure if sustainable

Good thing they got cooking simulator, Phil will need to start cooking at home to pinch some pennies.

 

[Zok310]

What is MS gonna do when devs start jacking up the cost to have their shit on GP..

 

[SmurfMustard]

Overcooked was great but also super stressful, especially in four player mode. At some point we were all loudly shouting at each other

And that is where the real fun begins. Especially with couples.

 

[Ozriel]

What is MS gonna do when devs start jacking up the cost to have their shit on GP..

Probably buy more studios and increasingly rely on a bigger first party slate?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

What is MS gonna do when devs start jacking up the cost to have their shit on GP..

Supply and demand still applies. If they jack up the prices too much, they lose out on good money.

 

[treemk]

This game is probably a lot more valuable outside of the Neogaf bubble but the prices does seem high.

 

[THE DUCK]

Why do the scores matter if gamers want to play it? That's all that really matters on a monthly pass system - user demand. Have you seen some of the garbage on Netflix that people love love love and subscribe for?

 

[mckmas8808]

If they have to pay that much for garbage, I don't see this being sustainable.

It'll be sustainable if MS deems it worthy. They have enough money to burn through. But we are seeing Streaming video companies start to feel the hurt and are either raising prices or coming up with Ad-tier models to support the streaming future.

 

[Ozriel]

It'll be sustainable if MS deems it worthy. They have enough money to burn through. But we are seeing Streaming video companies start to feel the hurt and are either raising prices or coming up with Ad-tier models to support the streaming future.

Did you even read through the thread?

 

[JLB]

Completely sustainable.

Yeah, this should be a problem for a company that is doing 211M per day with Azure alone.

 

[SoloKingRobert]

Microsoft supports indie devs with a buttload of Money...

 

[Negotiator101]

Microsoft paid "Big Cheese" $600,000. The money itself is "Big Cheese" you see, slices of cheddar.

https://game-news24.com/2022/08/15/microsoft-paid-600000-to-bring-chef-simulator-to-game-pass/
https://www.aroged.com/2022/08/16/microsoft-paid-600000-to-bring-chef-simulator-to-game-pass/
https://wtftime-ru.translate.goog/a...tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc


This makes me wonder what they are paying for to bring other games to Game Pass that don't join voluntarily? Especially AAA games? $6 million? $60 million?

I know they want to have a large library but if they are paying that kind of money for small indies I think they may be going about this the wrong way. Cooking Simulator isn't the type of game to attract a large audience to sub to Game Pass, and it's not a console seller either.

Of course, this depends on how reliable this information is but given that Big Cheese is a polish studio and all the links are European related gaming sites, there is a high likelihood on their accuracy but always use caution.

I think Microsoft needs to be a bit more careful with what companies they throw their money at, the game isn't bad but $600,000 could have been used to grab a game that would be a bigger drive to the service or the Xbox console at large. That's a lot of money for a game that may bring in less interest to Game Pass than Luckys Tale.

And they paid them 22% of their revenue, talk about overkill.

Eddie you worry too much just let Phil handle the finances.

 

[The Alien]

The level of scrutiny GamePass faces from people who don't use the service we is astounding.

Meanwhile people who do use game pass aren't starting worthless 'concern threads'....they're too busy gaming.

 

[Kimahri]

Making a big deal about 600 000 for a company like Microsoft...

It's like some people aren't attached to reality. Gsme pass is gold for Microsoft. Spending money on it is gold. They make so much money every day, tjat if they don't spend it it's just sitting there doing nothing. Better to invest it in possible future payoff.

And 600 000? To MS it's lint. It's the remains of that post it note you forgot to remove from your pocket before putting your jeans in the washer.

It is, nothing. To the devs though? Huge.

 

[phil_t98]

Am sure Sony is throwing this kinda money around to , after all they want games on their service and no Dev is gonna do that for free

 

[Markio128]

I’m currently developing gamepass simulator. Do you think they might give me $600,000 worth of cheese?

 

[SoloKingRobert]

Not sustainable.

How is it unsustainable?

Say if Game Pass subscribers pays the full amount..

7.5 million gamers pay the full amount per months priced at £7.99

That's £60 million per month.

 

[Pedro Motta]

That's 600.000 1 dollar Gamepass subs..

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Eddie you worry too much just let Phil handle the finances.

Making a big deal about 600 000 for a company like Microsoft...

But we are seeing Streaming video companies start to feel the hurt and are either raising prices or coming up with Ad-tier models to support the streaming future.

Look at these people who didn't read through the thread. Which the bottom bumped to pretend Gamepass is unsustainable.

MS is making with just 10 million gamepass subs, and if even a third of that by games they like, at $50, the combined revenue of the sub and the games, and an average $80 spend on DLC for half of 10 million subs is over $400 million, now, game Pass was at 25 million subs long ago, the amount they are making must be close to a billion by now assuming they passed 30 million subs. I don't see how that's unsustainable.

If anything the service sustains itself.

 

[bender]

 

[ChiefDada]

Look at these people who didn't read through the thread. Which the bottom bumped to pretend Gamepass is unsustainable.

MS is making with just 10 million gamepass subs, and if even a third of that by games they like, at $50, the combined revenue of the sub and the games, and an average $80 spend on DLC for half of 10 million subs is over $400 million, now, game Pass was at 25 million subs long ago, the amount they are making must be close to a billion by now assuming they passed 30 million subs. I don't see how that's unsustainable.

If anything the service sustains itself.

It's hard to keep track of all the hypotheticals in your comment, let alone find the fundamental reasoning behind them, so let's take it from the top:

MS is making with just 10 million gamepass subs

How much are they making with a 10 million subscriber base you proposed? For whatever number you come up with (hopefully with evidence or well founded assumption) are you referring to gross revenue generated or gross profits?

and if even a third of that by games they like,

Why did you choose 33% to represent portion of GP subscribers who choose to purchase games outright? Your wording suggests you believe this is a conservative estimate, but I hope you understand why someone would ask for evidence to support the idea of 1 out of every 3 subscriber choosing to purchase when they can presumably access the game for no additional cost in excess of their GP subscription fee.

average $80 spend on DLC for half of 10 million subs

Is this $80 per year generated from 1st party games where Microsoft is entitled to keep all of it? Or is it primarily from 3rd party games where Microsoft would receive a minority portion (~30%), if anything at all (see Epic v. Apple)?

Why 50% of your proposed 10 million subscribers; what's the reasoning behind this?

I don't see how that's unsustainable.

You don't see it because you neglected to take into account the related operating costs associated with running GamePass, which Microsoft has chosen not to disclose.

 

[In Cold Blood]

Good. Hopefully this gives them a big kick start and helps them grow their studio.
Gamepass kicking goals again.

 

[Negotiator101]

It's hard to keep track of all the hypotheticals in your comment, let alone find the fundamental reasoning behind them, so let's take it from the top:



How much are they making with a 10 million subscriber base you proposed? For whatever number you come up with (hopefully with evidence or well founded assumption) are you referring to gross revenue generated or gross profits?



Why did you choose 33% to represent portion of GP subscribers who choose to purchase games outright? Your wording suggests you believe this is a conservative estimate, but I hope you understand why someone would ask for evidence to support the idea of 1 out of every 3 subscriber choosing to purchase when they can presumably access the game for no additional cost in excess of their GP subscription fee.



Is this $80 per year generated from 1st party games where Microsoft is entitled to keep all of it? Or is it primarily from 3rd party games where Microsoft would receive a minority portion (~30%), if anything at all (see Epic v. Apple)?

Why 50% of your proposed 10 million subscribers; what's the reasoning behind this?



You don't see it because you neglected to take into account the related operating costs associated with running GamePass, which Microsoft has chosen not to disclose.

While I agree with your assessment in that OP hasn't quite got the stats to back up his claims. This sustainability of GP is starting to get silly, until we know hard cold facts we have to take what Spencer said as the truth, that it is sustainable and growing.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Game costs £1.79 on the Switch right now. I don’t get it.

Wow! Why would anyone download that? The only thing is being a streamer and wanna laugh or for your little son/daughter to watch and laugh.

Fucking Haaland.

 

[Banjo64]

Wow! Why would anyone download that? The only thing is being a streamer and wanna laugh or for your little son/daughter to watch and laugh.

I think you’re right re: it being for Streamers to be honest Bo. That type of game (goat simulator etc) are Streamer fodder.

Fucking Haaland.

I’ve got a ticket to the derby in October mate

 

[Edgelord79]

I assume $600,000 is not really a lot for MS. Second, they will have metrics on these types of games in their ecosystem that shows them people play them.

I’m one of those people that like to relax with simulators.

 

[JohnnyFootball]

I assume $600,000 is not really a lot for MS. Second, they will have metrics on these types of games in their ecosystem that shows them people play them.

I’m one of those people that like to relax with simulators.

You assume? What would give you that idea? Maybe the $50+ billion to acquire Activision....