Gaming

15 readers

2 users here now

A community for informative and interesting gaming content and discussions.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

communick@level-up.zone

Does the prevalence of Game Passes disincentivise game studios to make great games? (alien.top)

submitted 11 months ago by fresh2112@alien.top to c/gaming@level-up.zone

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm interested in the economics of it, and I'm no expert so would be great for some insight.

In years gone by, the quality and popularity of a game would directly correlate to it's sales. Whereas for gamepass games, I assume that studios get a kick back percentage of revenue for installs, play hours, etc.

As the investment needed by a player to install is zero (barring a download and install, it's all sunk cost from already having a gamepass), their threshold to try a game is a lot lower, therefore the requirements for the studio to ensure high quality is much lower for a similar return on investment. (I.e. more speculative downloads with lower return than lower hard sales with higher return).

What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] KvotheG@alien.top 1 points 11 months ago

Not at all. Game devs still get paid. Microsoft pays a ton of money to get the license for these games on their platform. Game Pass is sold at a loss, but their goal right now is to maximize users on as many platforms as possible, and most definitely raise prices later on once people are hooked. They are eating the losses because Microsoft is rich.

The benefit of GamePass is that you have the chance to try any game you probably wouldn’t have even looked at twice in the past at no extra cost. Game devs get more exposure, and if you like the game, there’s always the option to buy the game and support the devs. Plus, aside from Xbox first party games, third party games aren’t permanently on the platform. Any player that wants to keep playing will have a reason to buy the game.