Why not just call it Game Pass Gold like some gold ticket to @willardjuice's chiplet factory.
I'm going to bed
I'm going to bed
MHW is maybe the only game I’d play come the 18th.
I did some ESO.So of all the things.
MHW - something feels very off about the UI. Think I'll drop it.
RE5 - making me motion sick. deleted.
I just created an ESO account/character so uh... I guess that's that.
-------
https://majornelson.com/2019/04/30/coming soon-to xbox-game pass-wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus-wargroove-and-more/
Already finished with Wolf II on PC.
Might try Black Desert again, but the beta didn't really click at the time.
The Surge - may give it a spin.
Tacoma and Surviving Mars seem neat.
oho really?Skyrim but online.
Matt Booty, head of Microsoft's Xbox Game Studios, has said that his team is aiming to release a first-party Xbox game about every three months.
Speaking to IGN's Ryan McCaffrey, Booty was asked if there was any goal or cadence at which Microsoft wished to release its first-party games.
Booty responded that Xbox Game Pass is "the main driver" for a release schedule as Microsoft wants to ensure there is a "steady stream of games" coming into the subscription service for both PC and console.
For Booty and Microsoft, "every three months feels about right."
"I think about like how long you spend with a game and just sort of the cadence of discovery there," Booty explained. "So if you can do a game every three months, and if a game takes somewhere between two years and four years, I mean, just think about things that have come out recently, you know, things like Red Dead and God of War need to be getting into five, six years. Right? But let's just say for the sorts of studios, like a Ninja theory or a double fine that two, three years starts to be the cadence, right?
"So, then if you've got a game a quarter and you're taking two to three years." Booty continued. "You can kind of back into the math and say, well wow, you probably need somewhere between 10 and 12 studios. But... making games is not yet a perfect science, right? There's no creative endeavor that is. So there's going to be things that take longer. There's going to be some things that we start and say, hey, great idea, but it just isn't, you know, the Jello doesn't want to set. Right. Um, and so I think we need some, some buffer in there, right? So the first, that's kind of my basic answers. We'd love to be feeding a high quality game into game pass about every three months."
yup, ever since I tried it on PC I can see the potential and this could be the second coming of Christ. do you have a link?So, this is interesting. Ezekiel III, one of Twitch's paid E3 presenters who interviewed tons of developers at E3, asked every developer he came across what they thought of Game Pass. And pretty much all of the ones on Game Pass say that they love it and have had a great developer experience with it. They also mentioned that other developers that they talk to also have had a great experience with being on Game Pass and love it.
He asked them all of this off camera and off the record so that they wouldn't feel obligated to say good things.
He talked about it a little on today's Dropped Frames.
This is important, because if developers aren't happy about being on Game Pass, you'll see games dry up for it. But if developers love it, then there might be a lot of developers trying to get onto the service.
Since Game Pass is a curated service, this also means that it's easier for MS to ensure that only quality games make it onto the service if a lot of developers are trying to get their games onto the service.
Regards,
SB
So, this is interesting. Ezekiel III, one of Twitch's paid E3 presenters who interviewed tons of developers at E3, asked every developer he came across what they thought of Game Pass. And pretty much all of the ones on Game Pass say that they love it and have had a great developer experience with it. They also mentioned that other developers that they talk to also have had a great experience with being on Game Pass and love it.
He asked them all of this off camera and off the record so that they wouldn't feel obligated to say good things.
He talked about it a little on today's Dropped Frames.
This is important, because if developers aren't happy about being on Game Pass, you'll see games dry up for it. But if developers love it, then there might be a lot of developers trying to get onto the service.
Since Game Pass is a curated service, this also means that it's easier for MS to ensure that only quality games make it onto the service if a lot of developers are trying to get their games onto the service.
Regards,
SB
yup, ever since I tried it on PC I can see the potential and this could be the second coming of Christ. do you have a link?
yes, that's the kind of model that could work, plus it is more egalitarian for developers. We gamers tend to be conservative, buy what usually works, games from the series we love or developers we like at full price --or nearly. Leaving gems aside. I am discovering jewels like Tyranny Gold Edition, but in 2016 bought Doom for the XB1 at full price, then bought it again for PC to complete it and while I did, it wasn't that fun. Now I feel bad that I didnt even know that Tyranny existed, til PC Gamepass.I am sure the prospect of a good amount of money the first few months and then some money ever month for many years if not decades is a better prospect than a larger amount up front and then nothing after a few months
The other thing that I would add as [Xbox subscription service] Game Pass continues to grow, it’s been an interesting way to watch our whole dynamic of, ‘What does it mean to engage customers with that game?’ Sea of Thieves is a good example. At launch, and I read all the same feedback everybody else did, was: ‘Where’s the other half of the game?’ But I would also say it’s a game where what it is today wouldn’t be what it is if we had just waited another year and kept it to ourselves. It is a game that was literally created with the feedback of the community, and how you manage that through the traditional lens of how people think about what a game launch means is interesting for all of us.
It has Flight Simulator, the single-player Blair Witch horror adventure, and the side-scrolling Battletoads beat-’em-up. That’s on top of its traditional blockbuster projects like Halo Infinite and Gears 5. And that doesn’t include the online multiplayer battler Bleeding Edge from Ninja Theory, or whatever studios like Obsidian, InXile, and Double Fine end up making when they finish their projects they were already working on with other publishers.
These games no longer have to convince players to spend $50-to-$60 in a couple of weeks to end up as successes. Instead, they just need to contribute to the reason a certain group of people continue to subscribe to Game Pass.
That’s why Flight Simulator makes sense again. As a standalone product, the game is a tough sale to that broader audience. Xbox Game Studios could try to change it to appeal to more people. Or it could try to add aggressive monetization to generate more revenue from a smaller audience. Or it could just stop making those games.
But on Game Pass, Flight Simulator isn’t trying to win your $60 away from something else. It’s additive to the experience of subscribing to the service. You didn’t buy Flight Simulator instead of Halo — you subscribed to Game Pass, so now you get Flight Simulator and Halo and Sea of Thieves and dozens of others.
And the list of games that keep people subscribing is going to look different for each person. That’s the point. Microsoft can afford to look a little bit deeper down into our individual tastes. Maybe Halo, Sea of Thieves, and Flight Simulator is enough to keep me paying $15 a month. For you, however, maybe the list is Halo, Fallout 4, and Outer Wilds.
This completely flips the thinking when it comes to funding games. Instead of making a singular product that appeals to as many people as possible, Microsoft needs to release games to build a library that appeals to as many people as possible.