Pete Hines (Bethesda): Indiana Jones is an Xbox exclusive and will be available Day One with Xbox Game Pass.
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
Was originally coming to PS5, but MS amended the contract with Disney and now it's a console exclusive.
Hope the judge was listening closely to that part! Cos we all know that MS wants to make them ABK games console exclusive too.
Hope the judge was listening closely to that part! Cos we all know that MS wants to make them ABK games console exclusive too.
Of COURSE Klobrille couldn't wait to post this. He doesn't even mention it like an actual person, but like an advertising AI RSS feed bot.
But hey, these are the people Xbox executives love to associate with
But hey, these are the people Xbox executives love to associate with
MS caught again. It's like they forget they're dealing with regulators with actual documents and not their twitter fanbase they can lie to through influencers.
OP
OP
They sometimes get an amount of money up front to put their games in the service but there can be diff ways.
The subscription service pays them in order to have the game be part of the service. How they are paid is between the two companies to agree on.
It might be a one time payment (“here is 30 million dollars, we would like your game on GamePass”).
It might be a periodic payment (“We will pay you 1 million dollars a month for your game to be on GamePass”)
But I suspect that a lot of the agreements are by hours played (“We will pay you 50 cents for every hour GamePass players spend playing your game”). This makes the most sense because
- The game maker earns an amount of money that is based on how much gamers like their game.
- The subscription service pays an amount of money that is based on how good of a job that game has done attracting gamers to the subscription service.
- Both of those numbers naturally adjust over time with the popularity of the game. So if a game continues to be popular, it keeps earning money for everyone. If the game is suddenly not popular anymore, then the subscription service is not stuck paying a flat amount for a game that is no longer drawing gamers to the service. If the price the service paid for the game wasn’t proportional, then games that fell off in popularity would just get dumped from the service. By having the payment be proportional, the service is more likely to leave the game available. This improves the benefit of the experience for subscribers (some people might still want to play that game) and also creates the opportunity for the game to become popular again.
OP
OP
This is AL response btw...
Game studios can make money through a subscription model like Xbox Games Pass in several ways. One way is through revenue sharing agreements with the platform provider, such as Microsoft, where the studio receives a percentage of the subscription revenue for each player who accesses their game through the service.
Another way is through in-game purchases or microtransactions, where players can purchase additional content or items within the game. This can include items such as new weapons, clothing, or other cosmetic items that can enhance the gameplay experience.
Additionally, some studios may also offer additional paid DLC (downloadable content) for their games, which players can purchase separately from the subscription.
That Microsoft asskisser (Klobrille=Toilet seat in German, so a very apt name and occupation combination) is seriously just out here shilling for Microsoft and celebrating it without the context that quote came from.
OP
OP