Xbox Game Pass, Game Pass Ultimate now Includes EA Play! [XGP, GamePass]
- Thread starter Arnold Beckenbauer
- Start date
So now you are basicly forced to buy more expensive Ultimate for online multiplayer wanting games or not but games themselves can disappear from library anytime. Console price being more expensive than pc to boot. Microsoft truuuuly values their biggest fans like boiled frogs. And people believed cable style subscriptions are some kind of pro consumer revolution.
cheapchips
Veteran
Core is Gold multiplayer with an excellent rotating mini library instead of the mostly naff two games a month. Not sure what the complaint is here tbh.
Unless those 25 titles are also titles you don't want? Surely there's more chance of you wanting to play something from 100+ titles of accumulated giveaways than a library of 25 titles, unless the giveaways really have been lacking? Some people have massive libraries. Just checking, I have 361 titles on PSN. That includes PS4/PS5 duplicates and some apps and a few purchases, but I'm still looking at a library of 200ish PS+ titles that just keeps growing and with top-draw titles which, if you didn't buy them, gives a lot of value. Games like Crash Bandicoot 4, Yakuza, LEGO Harry Potter, SW:Jedi Fallen Order, Biomutant, Mass Effect, Alan Wake, Sackboy Adventure, GRID Legends, just from the last three pages of my library.
Looking back a couple of pages of this thread, it seems the content for GWG was a bit second-rate of late so not as sorely missed, I guess.
Really, this is more a return to the online fee without additional content. For new owners it's better to have 25 games than 2/3 a month, but over time for long-term XBoxers it's worse value for their subscription fee.
Except it's not at all clear that you have a choice between online and library and combined. More informative would be "Game Pass Online", "Game Pass Library", and "GPU". It's really a but of a stretch to put network services under the Game Pass banner as it's not at all focussed on game content which is what GP was about, separately from the network functionality. Prior to this, all GP options were a library of hundreds of games, whereas CORE isn't and is all about the network subscription fee.
I think it comes down to what the 25 games are versus what was being given away. If the free games were mostly naff, then this is a step up. On first glance though it doesn't seem a forward move since content was added to network subscriptions to improve the value of a questionable console networking fee.
That is, network had a price on XB that gave a good service. PS was free but lacking. When Sony added a fee, they also added content which has proven superb value. GWG did the same to add value to longer subscribers, building a personal library. This is changing the formula to a network fee plus small library - a lot of the value for long-term XBers will come down to what games are there and how they rotate. But someone who subs for 5 years will be no better off than someone who just joins; there's no long-term loyalty benefit as there used to be.
Nope, it's included with Core. Live just got renamed to Gamepass Core, with a change to Games With Gold from being 2 games a month to 25 games all at once in a rotating catalog. Given that Games With Gold have been pretty lackluster lately, especially with them removing 360 games, I can't see this as a negative.
What this means is that everyone who pays for Xbox multiplayer are going to have a shared library of games. So if you want to check out something like Grounded (shown in the trailer for the rebrand), you can do so with your friends at no additional cost. You know everyone has access to it.
Yep, that's what I said.
Last edited by a moderator:
There was a time when Gold also had good library and it was to keep not rotating. I don't see why, especially rotating library should encourage me given the precedent and some are already discussing about worse offering for GP than lets say two years ago. Satya "the subscripion" Nadella is happy for sure tough.
That's true. It hasn't been true in a while, but it was true in the past. And I do wish it was true now.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
I think I was paying about $6 for Live and $10 for GP. Now I'll just pay $16.99 for GPU. I kind of wanted access to Cloud anyway and maybe PC if I upgrade my PC.
GPU is ridiculous value now after the ABK acquisition. With any luck I'll be playing Diablo IV, Starfield, Lies of P, Forza Motorsport, Call of Duty, Persona 5 Tactica this Fall.
GPU is ridiculous value now after the ABK acquisition. With any luck I'll be playing Diablo IV, Starfield, Lies of P, Forza Motorsport, Call of Duty, Persona 5 Tactica this Fall.
No, you didn't. You made no mention of new users; you only mentioned it's better for those who don't want 2/3 mid titles a month.
I mean it says in the discription clear as day that the online multiplayer is in core or ultimate and not console or pc (which doesn't need it)
I'm trying to understand the discussion. I can't see where you said it was about new users. Now you're saying you weren't talking about new users, at whcih point I can't make sense of you saying., "that's what I said," in relation to me saying it's about new users.
Did you say it was good for new users and I misunderstood, or did you not say that, and so...why say you did??
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Some ABK games (COD, for example) can't appear on GP at least until 2025 due to existing contractual obligations with Sony that explicitly prevent those games from appearing Game Pass.
Not really an issue for ABK prior to the acquisition since they had no intention of putting any of their games on a subscription service anyway.
So, that was likely considered a freebie condition. However, it's probably a bit of an annoyance for Microsoft.It'd be interesting if part of the 10 year deal that MS just recently signed with Sony amended that so that titles could appear on GP. I'm willing to bet that Sony wouldn't be willing to amend that part of the previous contract, however.
Regards,
SB
Do we know that this is true for every COD game? Or is there a time frame after a game's release where it could be included in a multi-game subscription service. Also, do we know if the new deal that Sony signed doesn't remove any obligations from the previous deal? It's possible that older COD games get added immediately, and newer CODs get added after a year or two.
All of the Call of Duty games have quietly been put on sale on Xbox and Playstation until early August. The overpriced ($60) 360 version of Black Ops 2 is on sale for $15. It looks to me like they are trying to sell what they can before the games are available on Gamepass.
Could be quid pro quo.
Tear up the previous contracts and we'll let you mention that COD will be on PS from now on. Could easily have marketing where Sony not allowed to mention it, from next year.
I understand the logic behind PC and console being different price but still feels like paying extra for multiplayer, where they could've basically got away from that by making them same price.
It's one dollar difference.
Where could have the core that basically covers online play.
PC, console, could then be same price whether your a pc or console player like ultimate is.
Still having multiplayer in it at all is bad enough, but understandable from a 'incentivizing' people to have to subscribe to something.
Looks like a nice subscriptions levels otherwise though.
cheapchips
Veteran
