Official Thread Pillow Fight that nobody wins with MOAR Jackie Chan and guys comfortable with STRETCHING their sexuality!

Status
Not open for further replies.
JinCA said:
Colin's rant was based on wanting clicks and taking too much stock in the concern trolling on forums, just a day or two after his "rant" it was announced that even with a pandemic and shortages PS5 holds a record for unit and dollar sales in the US for the first 5 months, imagine if there wasn't a shortage? People are bored and want s*** to talk about because there is a bit of a lull right now.
Click to expand...

Imagine if there wasn't an Xbox shortage as well. Xbox is also having record Xbox sales according to MS, and that is with this pandemic shortage.

JinCA said:
Games starting on a subscription service may be ok for indie games or AA games but AAA will suffer big time, the more games you release the deeper in the hole you get, you'll never get enough subscribers to make up a couple of $100-$200 million dollar games a year in addition to all of the 3rd party stuff that you have to pay for as well as just running the service.
Click to expand...

According to Microsoft, the ones that have the books, Game Pass subscription services works great for AAA games, as well as AA, and no "suffering", just "sustaining a profit". You seem to know how Game Pass works better than Microsoft or the developers that are making bank from their games being on Game Pass.

JinCA said:
Right now they have 18 million subs combined through console and PC, they will need to get that service on any device that will have it and raise the price to make it viable long term.
Click to expand...

Not according to Microsoft. They said the way Game Pass is now, it is sustainable. And they are not doing a bait and switch to increase the price.

www.nme.com

Xbox Game Pass is “completely sustainable”, says Phil Spencer

Xbox chief Phil Spencer has stated that Xbox Game Pass is “completely sustainable” and will stay at its current price.
www.nme.com www.nme.com

“I’ll be honest, there are developers that have some concerns, and my inbox is there, and I have conversations with a lot of those developers asking what are our real long-term goals?” Spencer admitted. “You know we get questions about ‘hey, is this just some kind of go secure a bunch of players and then rack the price up to a new level?’ “I say there’s no plan for us to do anything like that. We like the value that Game Pass is today and from a business model it’s completely sustainable the way it is and I mean that,” Phil Spencer
Click to expand...

So you can stop making up BS. Maybe your thoughts (fake concern) about being successful with a subscription model should be directed at Sony?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: TeKPhaN
yankeessuck said:
You know I don't really disagree with any of this but I do know you were talking up Microsoft's direction and poopooing Sony's in a very similar way at the early parts of the last gen too. So its a bit hard to take seriously.
Click to expand...

I'm talking industry trends and how they're approaching them. Sony is being more conservative thus far in terms of their approach. As I said before, they'll be fine. They aren't trying to remain the market leader in overall gaming revenue. They aren't in the same weight class financially to establish a new market paradigm head to head against a 2 trillion dollar corporation who could end up spending around 40 billion on gaming related things over a 5 year span. They aren't spending as much and therefore from a business standpoint, don't need to lead in terms of revenue to remain healthy and profitable. It's only among console warriors that "leading" is "winning" is the end all be all. That's not how it works in real life business. In their board room, "winning" is meeting their financial goals and those goals don't change just because someone else is doing something much more aggressive to expand the market.

The traditional model and traditional console business is a stagnant market. That's not a subjective opinion. Data supports that. As long as that's where you're focusing most of your revenue, you're limited in terms of upside. Doesn't mean that they won't hit their goals and remain healthy.
 
I don't buy consoles based on the company, sales, revenue, profit, the subscriptions or whether someone tells me what I should or shouldn't like. I buy them for the games they have. Microsoft's Xbox has always had more games on the system that I like. They appeal to me more than PS does. And now even more so, as MS has doubled down on AAA studios and AAA games on top of awesome AA indies. That is what is important to me. Games from these developers are what is making me moist. It's why I enjoy Xbox.

AAdYEwAABt9d.jpg

AAcSSNAABbXP.jpg

Xbox is all about great AAA games, and those games appeal to me. So while Uncharted might sell 50 million games to consumers, I will enjoy Halo more, even if it sells to HALF the consumers. The quantity it sells isn't important to me. It's the game that is important to me and whether I enjoy it.

Nobody will tell me what I can and cannot enjoy.
 
OneBadMutha said:
I'm talking industry trends and how they're approaching them. Sony is being more conservative thus far in terms of their approach. As I said before, they'll be fine. They aren't trying to remain the market leader in overall gaming revenue. They aren't in the same weight class financially to establish a new market paradigm head to head against a 2 trillion dollar corporation who could end up spending around 40 billion on gaming related things over a 5 year span. They aren't spending as much and therefore from a business standpoint, don't need to lead in terms of revenue to remain healthy and profitable. It's only among console warriors that "leading" is "winning" is the end all be all. That's not how it works in real life business. In their board room, "winning" is meeting their financial goals and those goals don't change just because someone else is doing something much more aggressive to expand the market.

The traditional model and traditional console business is a stagnant market. That's not a subjective opinion. Data supports that. As long as that's where you're focusing most of your revenue, you're limited in terms of upside. Doesn't mean that they won't hit their goals and remain healthy.
Click to expand...

So you flip flop to whatever argument makes Microsoft look good? Why should we care about Microsoft's board room?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TeKPhaN
yankeessuck said:
So you flip flop to whatever argument makes Microsoft look good? Why should we care about Microsoft's board room?
Click to expand...
I enjoy talking the business of gaming. New paradigm shifts excite me. I don't care if my preferred platform is #1 (which should be evident by the fact I've had Xbox as my preferred platform since 2001). Those things can all co-exist.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: TeKPhaN and yankeessuck
Recently, we notified players that PlayStation Store for PS3 and PS Vita devices was planned to end this summer.

Upon further reflection, however, it’s clear that we made the wrong decision here. So today I’m happy to say that we will be keeping the PlayStation Store operational for PS3 and PS Vita devices. PSP commerce functionality will retire on July 2, 2021 as planned.

When we initially came to the decision to end purchasing support for PS3 and PS Vita, it was born out of a number of factors, including commerce support challenges for older devices and the ability for us to focus more of our resources on newer devices where a majority of our gamers are playing on. We see now that many of you are incredibly passionate about being able to continue purchasing classic games on PS3 and PS Vita for the foreseeable future, so I’m glad we were able to find a solution to continue operations.

I’m glad that we can keep this piece of our history alive for gamers to enjoy, while we continue to create cutting-edge new game worlds for PS4, PS5, and the next generation of VR.

Thank you for sharing your feedback with us – we’re always listening and appreciate the support from our PlayStation community.
 
To be clear, Sony's mindshare is still much higher than Xbox today. Both consoles are selling out however you can determine demand by the going prices on the secondary market. Right now scalped PS5's are worth a lot more than scalped Xbox Series X's. Sony would likely be out-selling Xbox 2 to 1 today if they both had stock. They should've been running up the score in the first two years of this generation and have gotten a raw deal due to chip shortages that are likely to last 1.5 years of this generation. Everything else I'm talking about is predictions based on market research, trends and what impact I believe Microsoft's insane investment will equate to long term.
 
OneBadMutha said:
Making a lot of assumptions and false equivalencies. Where Game Pass relates to Netflix is as a market disrupting, paradigm shifting way for consumers to engage in content. Netflix doesn't own the servers. TV doesn't have nearly the same monetization opportunities as gaming once an IP has established mass market appeal. There isn't the opportunity to sell additional content within the ecosystem for Netflix....yet they are still valued at a quarter of a trillion market cap in spite of that. Amazon didn't make money for a long time too. With growth products, they take a bath up front knowing that once they reach scale, the profits wipe out the debt pretty quick.

Scale off-sets margin. AAA games drive people to platforms. Lowering quality of those types of games doesn't make sense and goes against the facts today. Every AAA team at Microsoft and Bethesda is increasing size and budget.

18 million subs don't exist in a vacuum. It's one point on the trend line. Currently the trend line is ahead of schedule. They are pacing to be at 50 million subs by the end of 2022. At that point, it will have reached mainstream mindshare. Hence why I say 2022 is when the tipping point of mindshare will skew heavily towards Microsoft's gaming solutions if Sony continues to be conservative.
Click to expand...
18 million subs will grow over time but it won't come near 100 or 200 million even if MS gets GP on every smart tv through xcloud etc it just won't. MS has already said they'll be doing more AA games you can't ignore that and you have NO idea if Bethesda is going to increase in size, it wouldn't make sense being that most of their games will only be made for xbox and PC now, they won't need people to work on the PlayStation versions of games.

How much do you think people are going to pay for mictrotransactions? what kinds of games are they going to focus on so those kinds of things can be added in? They won't be doing a lot of big budget story driven single player games because that doesn't lead to subscriber retention, the people who keep pushing for Sony to do a GP service don't seem to understand that.

As far as backend monetization I pointed that out years ago and some here were like "oh that's not what's going to happen" and now that MS has brought up things like microtransactions it's all of the sudden a positive thing lol. Clearly they are going to need to bring in money from the games outside of the subscription fee, we'll see how that goes.
 
JinCA said:
How much do you think people are going to pay for mictrotransactions? what kinds of games are they going to focus on so those kinds of things can be added in? They won't be doing a lot of big budget story driven single player games because that doesn't lead to subscriber retention, the people who keep pushing for Sony to do a GP service don't seem to understand that.
Click to expand...

I don't agree but time will tell. Well before the Bethesda deal was even a thing MSFT purchased Obsidian Entertainment. And I distinctly remember MSFT saying this was to shore up single player, story driven games of which they know there is a large market for. I assume its one of the reasons why Obsidian is working on their next larger budget game, (reported to be larger in scope to Outer Worlds) Avowed.

This seems to be an effort by MSFT to have a diverse catalog of games to help lure in an equally diverse crowd of gamers. So, I don't think GamePass will be a service that caters to one type of game or gamer. Instead MSFT wants as many subscribers as they can get and to accomplish this goal will need a diverse catalog for wider appeal.
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: hrudey and Two Pennys Worth
Hedon said:
I doubt that. Xbox released in double the countries this time. If both had ample supply, it would probably be closer to a 20% advantage to Sony.

OneBadMutha what is more important to you, games or sales?
Click to expand...
You could be right. It's hard to prove. Sony did have a ton of momentum in 2020 and a better start to exclusives. Either way, this was supposed to be their opportunity to run up the score early in the gen. Game Pass will become a greater disrupted as the gen progresses.

What's important to me is the things I like the most continue to exist. That would be Halo and Game Pass. Not worried about either.
JinCA said:
18 million subs will grow over time but it won't come near 100 or 200 million even if MS gets GP on every smart tv through xcloud etc it just won't. MS has already said they'll be doing more AA games you can't ignore that and you have NO idea if Bethesda is going to increase in size, it wouldn't make sense being that most of their games will only be made for xbox and PC now, they won't need people to work on the PlayStation versions of games.

How much do you think people are going to pay for mictrotransactions? what kinds of games are they going to focus on so those kinds of things can be added in? They won't be doing a lot of big budget story driven single player games because that doesn't lead to subscriber retention, the people who keep pushing for Sony to do a GP service don't seem to understand that.

As far as backend monetization I pointed that out years ago and some here were like "oh that's not what's going to happen" and now that MS has brought up things like microtransactions it's all of the sudden a positive thing lol. Clearly they are going to need to bring in money from the games outside of the subscription fee, we'll see how that goes.
Click to expand...
We're both speculating on Game Pass potential but Nadella and co. wouldn't be investing billions if they didn't think they were going to hit 100 million+ subs. When Nadella says Netflix of Games, he's referring to scope. Not exact business model. It's a long game. Not something that will happen in a couple years. It took Netflix over a decade once they were available through streaming to hit those numbers. Shouldn't take Xbox as long...but it's a long term play.

Bethesda is increasing in size. Xbox had about 600 job postings recently. Bethesda Softworks is about 4x the size they were for Fallout 4s development. They have a lot of open positions for all their studios.

I don't understand the thinking that they'll spend billions on studios and IP to turn out dollar menu games. It's like buying 5 Star Hotels and turning them into Motel 6's because it'll cut cost. It's not about margin. It's about sub growth. People are taking the things Booty said 2 years ago out of context. Also some things changed. They're investing in massive games for Game Pass day 1. 1st, 2nd and 3rd party. Their 2nd party budget is significantly larger than it was during the early years of the 360 when they funded Gears, Mass Effect and Lost Odyssey. They don't need to create a lot of AA stuff anymore. They're getting that for relatively cheap from 3rd party.

Disney, Netflix, HBO, Amazon....they all invest in really expensive shows that have shorter engagement cycles than a Sony narrative driven game. 90% of the game is getting people to subscribe for the free or cheap trial.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Kvally
BUSTERMAN said:
I don't agree but time will tell. Well before the Bethesda deal was even a thing MSFT purchased Obsidian Entertainment. And I distinctly remember MSFT saying this was to shore up single player, story driven games of which they know there is a large market for. I assume its one of the reasons why Obsidian is working on their next larger budget game, (reported to be larger in scope to Outer Worlds) Avowed.

This seems to be an effort by MSFT to have a diverse catalog of games to help lure in an equally diverse crowd of gamers. So, I don't think GamePass will be a service that caters to one type of game or gamer. Instead MSFT wants as many subscribers as they can get and to accomplish this goal will need a diverse catalog for wider appeal.
Click to expand...
Microsoft has more AAA single player games in development than any publisher. Just not many that are the 3rd person, over the should, narrative driven action adventure games. Sony certainly has that lane mastered with very little competition.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: TeKPhaN and Kvally
OneBadMutha said:
You could be right. It's hard to prove. Sony did have a ton of momentum in 2020 and a better start to exclusives. Either way, this was supposed to be their opportunity to run up the score early in the gen. Game Pass will become a greater disrupted as the gen progresses.

What's important to me is the things I like the most continue to exist. That would be Halo and Game Pass. Not worried about either.

We're both speculating on Game Pass potential but Nadella and co. wouldn't be investing billions if they didn't think they were going to hit 100 million+ subs. When Nadella says Netflix of Games, he's referring to scope. Not exact business model. It's a long game. Not something that will happen in a couple years. It took Netflix over a decade once they were available through streaming to hit those numbers. Shouldn't take Xbox as long...but it's a long term play.

Bethesda is increasing in size. Xbox had about 600 job postings recently. Bethesda Softworks is about 4x the size they were for Fallout 4s development. They have a lot of open positions for all their studios.

I don't understand the thinking that they'll spend billions on studios and IP to turn out dollar menu games. It's like buying 5 Star Hotels and turning them into Motel 6's because it'll cut cost. It's not about margin. It's about sub growth. People are taking the things Booty said 2 years ago out of context. Also some things changed. They're investing in massive games for Game Pass day 1. 1st, 2nd and 3rd party. Their 2nd party budget is significantly larger than it was during the early years of the 360 when they funded Gears, Mass Effect and Lost Odyssey. They don't need to create a lot of AA stuff anymore. They're getting that for relatively cheap from 3rd party.

Disney, Netflix, HBO, Amazon....they all invest in really expensive shows that have shorter engagement cycles than a Sony narrative driven game. 90% of the game is getting people to subscribe for the free or cheap trial.
Click to expand...
I have a hard time believing they'll hit 100+ subscribers. But who knows, especially if gamepass is added to Steam.
 
OneBadMutha said:
Microsoft has more AAA single player games in development than any publisher. Just not many that are the 3rd person, over the should, narrative driven action adventure games. Sony certainly has that lane mastered with very little competition.
Click to expand...
All Sony games are the same spin

Danger 5 Laughing GIF


Most of their games have trees in them too!
 
OneBadMutha said:
You could be right. It's hard to prove. Sony did have a ton of momentum in 2020 and a better start to exclusives. Either way, this was supposed to be their opportunity to run up the score early in the gen. Game Pass will become a greater disrupted as the gen progresses.

What's important to me is the things I like the most continue to exist. That would be Halo and Game Pass. Not worried about either.

We're both speculating on Game Pass potential but Nadella and co. wouldn't be investing billions if they didn't think they were going to hit 100 million+ subs. When Nadella says Netflix of Games, he's referring to scope. Not exact business model. It's a long game. Not something that will happen in a couple years. It took Netflix over a decade once they were available through streaming to hit those numbers. Shouldn't take Xbox as long...but it's a long term play.

Bethesda is increasing in size. Xbox had about 600 job postings recently. Bethesda Softworks is about 4x the size they were for Fallout 4s development. They have a lot of open positions for all their studios.

I don't understand the thinking that they'll spend billions on studios and IP to turn out dollar menu games. It's like buying 5 Star Hotels and turning them into Motel 6's because it'll cut cost. It's not about margin. It's about sub growth. People are taking the things Booty said 2 years ago out of context. Also some things changed. They're investing in massive games for Game Pass day 1. 1st, 2nd and 3rd party. Their 2nd party budget is significantly larger than it was during the early years of the 360 when they funded Gears, Mass Effect and Lost Odyssey. They don't need to create a lot of AA stuff anymore. They're getting that for relatively cheap from 3rd party.

Disney, Netflix, HBO, Amazon....they all invest in really expensive shows that have shorter engagement cycles than a Sony narrative driven game. 90% of the game is getting people to subscribe for the free or cheap trial.
Click to expand...
The reason I say that is one Booty said they were do mostly AA games with most of the studios they bought in 2019 and secondly games take too long to make, a subscription service needs fresh content added on a consistent basis for it to work, most of the studios they bought in 2019 were AA types of studios, smaller teams, again I said most not all. They are going to need to release at least 4-5 games a year or continue to buy day one 3rd party games which is going to be very expensive. You can release smaller AA types of games faster than you can a release a constant stream of AAA titles. Disney only invests in a few shows right now,

Netflix had to go deep into debt to fund the shows they make now and a good chunk of them get cancelled after the 3rd season when costs go up, HBO doesn't have much at all right now and if it weren't for the movies releasing on Day 1 through 2021 their subscriber count would probably be lower and Amazon does make a lot of stuff that nobody watches, I don't think most prime members even know about the video service but that's a different discussion. The point about them making shows though is before covid most of them would have a new seasy every 12-15 months, you can't have that kind of output from a game studio unless it's small episodic stuff that would be made with a subscription model in mind.
 
Last edited:
JinCA said:
The reason I say that is one Booty said they were do mostly AA games with most of the studios they bought in 2019 and secondly games take too long to make, a subscription service needs fresh content added on a consistent basis for it to work, most of the studios they bought in 2019 were AA types of studios, smaller teams, again I said most not all. They are going to need to release at least 4-5 games a year or continue to buy day one 3rd party games which is going to be very expensive. You can release smaller AA types of games faster than you can a release a constant stream of AAA titles.
Click to expand...
Fresh content on a consistent basis is coming from 3rd party studios already. They need tentpole IPs that draw the attention of the masses. Netflix didn't have it's best growth from shovelware. Netflix's growth rate exploded once their Original content started winning awards. Nadella is on record saying they need IP. His bonus related to gaming this year has nothing to do with managing costs, revenue or income. It's all related to the number of subs. The head of a 2 trillion dollar company doesn't use "IP" to refer to mid tier stuff. You'll see AAA games regularly by the end of this year onwards. If it's not in their pipeline, they'll spend the money on 3rd party games. Again forget what was taken out of context in 2019.

Netflix is worth a quarter of a trillion dollars. More than double the entire worth of Sony. Gaming has more monetary upside than a TV streaming platform. The investment on the front end alone debunks cost controls for AAA content. It wouldn't make any sense. High level AAA games cost around 100 million+. Some of that cost per project could reduce due to the tools advancements and ML. They won't spend billions on the front end and then cheapen out before the payoff of AAA games.
Dtwice said:
I have a hard time believing they'll hit 100+ subscribers. But who knows, especially if gamepass is added to Steam.
Click to expand...
You would've had a hard time believing Netflix could've ever achieved those numbers a few years into the era of TV streaming too. The market will be there in about 5 years. Just have to offer a great product. 100 million isn't a lot once 5G is mainstream. 400 million consumers buy consoles or gaming PCs and then spend another $60 to play games. In some markets, the going rate is extremely high compared to the US. The barriers for entry will be much lower with subs. Multiple platforms will hit that number in the next 10 years. Microsoft just wants to be the first and to go beyond that.
 
JinCA said:
The reason I say that is one Booty said they were do mostly AA games with most of the studios they bought in 2019 and secondly games take too long to make, a subscription service needs fresh content added on a consistent basis for it to work, most of the studios they bought in 2019 were AA types of studios, smaller teams, again I said most not all. They are going to need to release at least 4-5 games a year or continue to buy day one 3rd party games which is going to be very expensive. You can release smaller AA types of games faster than you can a release a constant stream of AAA titles. Disney only invests in a few shows right now,

Netflix had to go deep into debt to fund the shows they make now and a good chunk of them get cancelled after the 3rd season when costs go up, HBO doesn't have much at all right now and if it weren't for the movies releasing on Day 1 through 2021 their subscriber count would probably be lower and Amazon does make a lot of stuff that nobody watches, I don't think most prime members even know about the video service but that's a different discussion. The point about them making shows though is before covid most of them would have a new seasy every 12-15 months, you can't have that kind of output from a game studio unless it's small episodic stuff that would be made with a subscription model in mind.
Click to expand...

There are quite a few AA games coming but I wouldn't say most of these studios are working on AA games. Maybe Compulsion. Undead Labs? Some of these studios have grown since Booty said that.
 
OneBadMutha said:
Worldwide PC is bigger than console and growing fast while console has stagnated. The market is more important to Microsoft long term than console. I'd argue that it's important to Sony too but they have to tiptoe into it due to the enthusiasts. Even though I'm a console guy, the data backs you up.
Click to expand...
Pffft....have you not heard of a device called a mobile phone. Some people but then yearly at the price of a the top shelf graphics cards
 
www.forbes.com

Utter PS5 Sales Dominance Is The Only Narrative That Matters To Sony Right Now

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, even though Microsoft has had a strong start to this generation, full of big, splashy headlines like them buying Bethesda or adding this or that game to Xbox Game Pass, Sony has been quiet because…they can be.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

These articles flip flopping as much as multiplatform comparisons this gen so far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JinCA
VGTech tests latest Mortal Shell patch for PS5 which introduces dynamic 1800p instead of the previous constant 1800p.

Performance goes back to 99.96% at 60 fps. Great fix.

 
Can a system like gamepass exceed 100million subs. Sure. But can game pass by a company that entrenches in 2nd-3rd place for sales over 3 generations gain 100millions+? That's a better question.

Also, people ignore other (possibly more popular) company can have the same gamepass system as well. In the end its a app, like Spotify & apple music.
 
Last edited:
starseeker said:
Can a system like gamepass exceed 100million subs. Sure. But can game pass by a company that entrenches in 2nd-3rd place for sales over 3 generations gain 100millions+? That's a better question.

Also, people ignore other (possibly more popular) company can have the same gamepass system as well. In the end its a app, like Spotify & apple music.
Click to expand...
But they do have one, a competitor, it’s called PS Now, and they have a much bigger list of games.

www.playstation.com

PlayStation®Plus | Hundreds of games to download and play, PlayStation classics, game trials and more

Join PlayStation Plus on an Essential, Extra or Premium membership plan and get hundreds of PS4 and PS5 games, online multiplayer, classics catalog, exclusive discounts and more.
www.playstation.com www.playstation.com
 
OneBadMutha said:
Game Pass is the exclusive. If you believe that customers are so price elastic that $50 off of hardware and a pack-in game would make a dent in sales, what do you think walking out of a store with next gen hardware and new AAA games with no money down will do?
Click to expand...
Yes I do think a less appealing product gets more appealing by including more at a lower price.

To the latter... most that a payment plan option would work for don't have good enough credit to walk out with it.
 
OneBadMutha said:
They run you. Speak only for yourself.

Accessibility and convenience run these markets. Cost is a significant aspect of accessibility. The reason for the projected massive growth in gaming is due to how technology and subscriptions will transform it like they have music and movies. I've yet to see any research or data to contradict it.
Click to expand...
Growth is due to new HARDWARE releasing during covid.

Casuals don't talk about subscription services(don't even know what gamepass is)
They talk Playstation and Switch with the PS5 being the most sought for gaming device in the world. Heck probably the hottest item as well.
 
Hedon said:
Almost ZERO Microsoft's Xbox Zenimax games are coming to PS. Only two, Ghostwire and Deathloop. The rest are Xbox exclusive. Confirmed by Phil Spencer and Microsoft. Microsoft releases first party games on the Xbox ecosystem. Xbox, Microsoft Windows PC, xCloud and Game Pass.
Click to expand...
We will see
 
OneBadMutha said:
Making a lot of assumptions and false equivalencies. Where Game Pass relates to Netflix is as a market disrupting, paradigm shifting way for consumers to engage in content. Netflix doesn't own the servers. TV doesn't have nearly the same monetization opportunities as gaming once an IP has established mass market appeal. There isn't the opportunity to sell additional content within the ecosystem for Netflix....yet they are still valued at a quarter of a trillion market cap in spite of that. Amazon didn't make money for a long time too. With growth products, they take a bath up front knowing that once they reach scale, the profits wipe out the debt pretty quick.

Scale off-sets margin. AAA games drive people to platforms. Lowering quality of those types of games doesn't make sense and goes against the facts today. Every AAA team at Microsoft and Bethesda is increasing size and budget.

18 million subs don't exist in a vacuum. It's one point on the trend line. Currently the trend line is ahead of schedule. They are pacing to be at 50 million subs by the end of 2022. At that point, it will have reached mainstream mindshare. Hence why I say 2022 is when the tipping point of mindshare will skew heavily towards Microsoft's gaming solutions if Sony continues to be conservative.
Click to expand...
IF and that's a strong if GP were to become successful it would have to be on EVERY gaming device especially the popular Playstation platform.
The current platforms it's on and a cloud gaming version on Switch will not be enough.

Netflix works because it has the goods and is on every device.
Gamepass has neither.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back