The article also mentions phasing out marketing for the consoles.
What marketing?
You can't kill something that doesn't exist.
What marketing?
You can't kill something that doesn't exist.
Xbox Business Update Podcast | Xbox Everywhere Direction Discussion
- Thread starter iroboto
- Start date
I struggle to untangle MS's naming. I'm just going by the current names on MS's own website:
The lower tier, whatever it was called, used to include Day one games, hence the news story about that changing.
cheapchips
Veteran
Core was the lower tier, and it didn't. The standard ones with Day One on Gamepass were called Xbox Gamepass and Gamepass for PC. I've no idea why anyone finds this confusing.
Core what? Xbox Live Core? We're talking about Game Pass, not Live.Core was the lower tier, and it didn't. The standard ones with Day One on Gamepass were called Xbox Gamepass and Gamepass for PC. I've no idea why anyone finds this confusing.
Whatever, the middle tier then! Whatever tier it was, whatever it was called, there was an £8 per month option to get Day one games, and now that options is only on the £15 a month tier!
I understand the confusion
Before this week, there were 4 gamepass tiers:
Gamepass core: before it was Xbox live, grants you access to online multiplayer and a rotation of 25 games. No day one games. 7 moni a month.
Gamepass: day one games and a library of 300-400 games. It used to cost, depending on your region, around 8 to 13 moni.
Gamepass ultimate: game pass + cloud gaming and PC game pass access. 14 to 20 moni depending on your region.
Gamepass PC: like game pass but some games didn't launch on it. Around 9 moni.
To be fair, Xbox used to have good marketing in Europe. Not anymore. I think its a case of killing something that has potential and then saying it didnt stand a chance.
We are talking about the 360 times, the last time I saw marketing for a Microsoft console in Italy.
One and series have been non existent on tv or in billboards-general ads.
Sometimes you see some marketing for game pass on YouTube, but other than that, nothing.
Phase 2: double again gamepass' price to double revenues
Phase 3: kill gamepass because nobody is buying it
Phase 4: layoff anyone because the division is no more profitable
Phase 5: wonder why they are not selling anymore
It's a long game, we must only buy nintendo' stocks and wait that phil complete his job
kinda surprising but not so surprising. Except for the USA, they've only been gamepass for years now elsewhere
Surely MS will need the Activision acquisition to result in a larger revenue overall than was happening prior to XB and AB being discrete publishers.
MS gaming is going to see 'growth' from the extra AB income, but how far below that $21 billion combined revenue constitutes a win? For example, if MS gaming increases from $10 billion to $15 billion, that would be a huge loss of total earnings from the theoretical. I feel like any drop below that $21 billion figure would be attributable to GP subscriptions and give an idea what the spending difference the service creates.
MS gaming is going to see 'growth' from the extra AB income, but how far below that $21 billion combined revenue constitutes a win? For example, if MS gaming increases from $10 billion to $15 billion, that would be a huge loss of total earnings from the theoretical. I feel like any drop below that $21 billion figure would be attributable to GP subscriptions and give an idea what the spending difference the service creates.
Not if they cut costs. And they've already taken steps to do that, by closing some studios and laying off redundant positions.
In terms of economics, sure, but in terms of maximising returns on AB's IPs, I don't think that works. That is, AB made 10 billion/year selling their games before getting bought by MS. If that drops to $8 billion, even if MS's trims fat and makes good bank, that'd still indicate subs makes less money than sales.
For subs to be proven as the better way to make money, revenue should be higher now than when games were just being sold. Of course, if MS change operations such as keeping all the IP platform exclusive, it's a different story, but if they go all-out multiplatform to the same platforms AB did before, the change in revenue should be a nice indicator of whether subs make more money or less. Well, I say 'nice' but it'll need fenurgling to factor in different product releases and ongoing service revenues and whatnot.
Last edited:
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
If they're still advertising Xbox in the US then I doubt it. It's interesting to see how little MS advertises Xbox in Europe though, I'd no idea, and I'm not sure anyone at Microsoft ever has either
.Maybe there's a reason Sony and Nintendo have beat the pants off Xbox multiple generations in a row.
The AB games are staying on other platforms.
So the question is what is the actual turn rate of a person who buys cod on Xbox and will now buy game pass and what works out best money wise for MS. If you get them to pop into game pass ultimate for cod this year you could have them stay on cod for years if not ever
For other platforms if you can get a customer to go out and buy an xbox and game pass to play COD instead of just buying a copy for the pc/ps5/whatever isn't that a larger win for ms ?
AB Doesn't really make many single player games but I am sure a few smaller games that might come out of AB can be short term or fully exclusive for awhile without really changing much for them financially. I don't even really remember the last single player activision game that came out.
Announcement at the game awards and launch in fall of 2025 right in time for GTA 6 , Gears ED , Fable.
I've seen more Sony Playstation ads in the US than anything Xbox related. Barely see any Xbox physical ads in the real world.If they're still advertising Xbox in the US then I doubt it. It's interesting to see how little MS advertises Xbox in Europe though, I'd no idea, and I'm not sure anyone at Microsoft ever has either
Maybe there's a reason Sony and Nintendo have beat the pants off Xbox multiple generations in a row.
Not sure they said they were launching a new console. I think they were just stating that in the next gen they will have an even better console. Whats clear in all this is consoles are going to be niche in the MS gaming ecosystem. As well, if they are not meeting sales expectations on Series consoles why launch another console so soon.
Right. Which would reflect in more revenue for MS than just selling those games. But if the sub rate doesn't increase above AB's independent earnings, we can see that's not what happens with subs, to the degree it makes more money than selling games direct.
I'm just wanting to test the business model of subscriptions via the AB acquisition. I think it will provide insight on whether subs generate more or less money from games. Do you think reasoning valid, that if subs generate more money than selling direct. MS's revenue should exceed the combined pre-merger revenue from MS+AB?
Wait a minute.
https://www.eurogamer.net/call-of-duty-black-ops-6-wont-be-locked-behind-a-new-xbox-game-pass-tier
I mean, that's true, it's not locked behind a new tier I guess, but.
"Upon launch, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 will be playable on Xbox and PC for Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, PC Game Pass, and Xbox Game Pass for Console members," a Microsoft spokesperson told Eurogamer earlier today.
Xbox game pass for console members.
Well that statement spoiled as quickly as milk.
https://www.eurogamer.net/call-of-duty-black-ops-6-wont-be-locked-behind-a-new-xbox-game-pass-tier
I mean, that's true, it's not locked behind a new tier I guess, but.
"Upon launch, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 will be playable on Xbox and PC for Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, PC Game Pass, and Xbox Game Pass for Console members," a Microsoft spokesperson told Eurogamer earlier today.
Xbox game pass for console members.
Well that statement spoiled as quickly as milk.
Similar threads
