Microsoft Quietly Cancels $1 Xbox Game Pass Ultimate Subscription Offer

[Johnic]

Let's see how long it take until they cancel Gold to GPU conversion.

 

[Nhomnhom]

Let's see how long it takes until they cancel Gold to GPU conversion.

They tried to double the price of Xbox Live Gold once, a service that offered close to nothing at that point.

The nature of these services is to get a lot more expensive over time and for the quality to drastically drop once they are out of the growth period and start to try and make their money back.

 

[Alabtrosmyster]

They are supposed to release at least one AAA game this year.

This is probably why, same as not increasing the games prices to 70$ last year, they had none in the pipeline anyway.

 

[Old Gamer]

They are supposed to release at least one AAA game this year.

This is probably why, same as not increasing the games prices to 70$ last year, they had none in the pipeline anyway.

The best moment to stop the deal would have been a month or two after Starfield releases, not before. To make sure people are hooked and more willing to stay subscribed.

Unless they don't actually believe in the games quality and are banking on FOMO instead.

 

[voke]

I'm looking forward to the $30+/m increase. That's a lot more money than the avg consumer spends on games per year.

 

[Dabaus]

I predict it will go up to 20 a month for the ultimate and 15 a month for regular. Maybe hardware price spike in certain regions too.

 

[ksdixon]

Well we knew that was coming sooner or later. I just naturally assumed if they got ABK they'd used throwing their back catalogue on GamePass as the reason to remove it, but they did it earlier even.

Let's here people cheerlead GP now, when it's £15 a month or whatever now.

 

[Zzero]

As someone outside looking in, their services are complex bordering on paralysis by analysis. They really need to straighten shit out. This is a start (albeit one people hate) but they need to get rid of Gold too. Gamepass or nothing and no bullshit deals, just a straight, fair price with free months only once with purchase of a console.

 

[Deleted member 417]

It aint gonna be cheap or worth it unless you a TES and COD crackwhore.

Let's say TES comes out every 10 years and CoD comes out every year.

For ease of numbers, we will go ahead with the reports that CoD will not release next year.

That gives us 10 games in 10 years. At $15 (a month) x12 (12 months) gives us $180, x10 for the years = $1800/10 for the games = $180 per game.

And people are complaining that Sony is selling games at $70 each? Hmm. I thinks the general public suck at maffermatiks

 

[Zzero]

Let's say TES comes out every 10 years and CoD comes out every year.

For ease of numbers, we will go ahead with the reports that CoD will not release next year.

That gives us 10 games in 10 years. At $15 (a month) x12 (12 months) gives us $180, x10 for the years = $1800/10 for the games = $180 per game.

And people are complaining that Sony is selling games at $70 each? Hmm. I thinks the general public suck at maffermatiks

I think you just found out why companies like subscription services so much. They, in theory, get more money over time than regular sales. Everyone wants to be Netflix circa 2015 where they have maximum content and market penetration. Nobody wants to dig deeper, realize that Netflix got most of its content for pennies and had zero active competitors, and see that the model isn't really sustainable with high end products. Personally, I think the most likely "Netflix of games" to succeed is Apple Arcade. But thats because the content is cheap, mobile games are supposed to last forever and the iPhone is a walled garden. If dev cost/revenues earned over on the mobile end ever decreases to a similar level as AAA game design then Arcade might end up fucked. Well, I guess NSO/Nintendo Online, might have a future too, even though I and most everyone else I've talked to about it has open contempt for it.

 

[Deleted member 417]

I think you just found out why companies like subscription services so much. They, in theory, get more money over time than regular sales. Everyone wants to be Netflix circa 2015 where they have maximum content and market penetration. Nobody wants to dig deeper, realize that Netflix got most of its content for pennies and had zero active competitors, and see that the model isn't really sustainable with high end products. Personally, I think the most likely "Netflix of games" to succeed is Apple Arcade. But thats because the content is cheap, mobile games are supposed to last forever and the iPhone is a walled garden. If dev cost/revenues earned over on the mobile end ever decreases to a similar level as AAA game design then Arcade might end up fucked. Well, I guess NSO/Nintendo Online, might have a future too, even though I and most everyone else I've talked to about it has open contempt for it.

I agree with this 100%. It's the same way that 'free trials' make loads of money because most people can't be bothered to cancel the subscription after the free trial ends. That's not made up, that's real fact.

Those saps who are drained for money don't know or care that they are paying more for gaming, they are just consuming media. They cannot prop up an industry long term and the industry they do prop up in the short term, is a laughable one with poor quality.

Gamepass may be the netflix of games. But their actual games are the Mcdonalds of the culinary world. Cheap, forgettable, unhealthy.

 

[SLB1904]

Duh
They going to start release games soon. Someone has to pay for that

 

[SSfox]

Of course this thing wasn't going to last forever