Xbox Live Gold not needed for Free-To-Play MP, No Price Changes [2021-01-22]

Guess we will see in the call next week

 

Doubtful. Again, and not to dismiss the important of Xbox, but Xbox is not currently a significant profit centre for Microsoft. Xbox is just part of the wider group which includes devices like Surface. This is always an issue when your business is dwarfed by more profitable areas. In Apple, the Mac was the product for decades until the iPhone. Now the Mac is a byline. It's a matter of perspective.

 

Not to get off the interesting aspect of what happened and how, but wanted to ponder what would have been "acceptable" or least not cause drastic outlash.

I think they could have managed a slight bump of MSRP of $10 for 12 months and $5 for 6 months. Maybe that is to give more leeway to brick and mortar stores to have more sales on them.

 

They could have made f2p multiplayer free for everyone then just merged xbox live gold into the basic tier of gamepass and called it a day. It would have been a very minor price increase of $1 per month but would affectively increase the annual price to what they were going to get with the new gold price, because game pass doesn't offer a discount when you purchase multiple months. That way at least you get something in return for getting your yearly xbox subscription literally doubled without any additional benefit.

 

I also thought about that. Merge GP with Gold, retire Gold, drop F2P and it would pass just fine. But not instead of gaining additional $ they lost some $.

 

Thats what is so puzzling about this, there are so many easy ways they could have handled this

 

Is it New Coke

Or 'Not Paying Attention Tax'?

 

This is part of the problem.
When they removed the yearly subscription in preparation for this.
There was no way to increase the yearly subscription by a reasonable amount.

They probably could've got away with $10 with people winging but not enough that MS couldn't ignore them as they have all the years people have complained about F2P pay wall.

But the price hike made the F2P really egregious at that point, that they couldn't ignore it by just walking the hike back.

 

I don't really think that free games are needed for GamePass anymore

They are already in Ultimate no?

I believe they want to push as many GPU as possible, so if the basic GamePass will have consoles, mobile and PC it will make people not to go after Ultimate (though I presume people go after Ultimate not for this things as XCloud & PC are limited for now)...Then again if Ultimate includes EA Play, then maybe it is a fair deal too.

They really need to rethink what should be included and where because with Gold right now everything that is not GamePass Ultimate is a mess.

 

That big 180 reminds me the always online gaming cancellation and Kinect removal in 2013.

I knew it!

 

That was really perplexing. Places such as BestBuy and Amazon were still selling the same old yearly subscriptions and still have them available today. Even in Digital. I don't know why Microsoft stopped offering it directly through their channels.

 

But free games are not the necessary the same that left the service or were on gamepass at all.

You said they needed to be merged with Ultimate, but the thing is they are already with ultimate no? And I agree that Gold should be eventually merged with GamePass Basic. But for Ultimate to be more attractive it should include something else because it already has Gold.

The weakest link here is GamePass PC because for obvious reason unless MS purchase Valve they cannot provide the same quality content on GamePass PC (though it all boils down to the moment they start producing games. So far everything is rather dry).

I for one expect it for a long time though, but it all depends whether EA Play are actually will work good for EA without GamePass - like whether it generates more income on its own. I full expect EA to appear on Luna though.

 

Gamepass isn't supposed to host every PC title under the sun, just a compelling selection to justify the subscription. You don't need Valve for that.

 

Oh, they idea to keep pre-selected titles while you are subscribed sounds nice.

Wait, Netflix allows to keep movies or series?

 

No. He was saying people sub to those services for a series or movie and then cancel the subscription after that month.

 

This is my biggest issue with game pass (outside the future concerns of costs vs quality), you have no idea when a game is going to leave and could be half-way through a big story game where you're then left with no option but to give up or pay up. Another example was the recent removal of PES - I was halfway through a season (which is some 50 odd games x 10 minutes!) - that's some significant game time which went up in smoke. Then they add the new PES and I'm thinking, better be careful and not get too 'involved' in and long-term game modes.

Also happens on Netflix, I was wanting to watch Train to Busan but waiting for the opportunity, when it came the film had been removed. Thanks Netflix! I don't care for 95% of your content and the thing I wanted to watch was removed before I had chance!!

Wouldn't it be great if these services worked like - say a blockbusters, where you have access to a full library but can only 'rent' a set number at any one time, similar to how many devices you can have registered...or how about a points system for how many months of service that be traded for games that are leaving.

I can see why GP is so popular, for people with endless game time they are ideal...but alas I don't have such luxuries.

 

Most of the games that rotate in and out are on the service for a full entire year. I think some titles may have been on it for only 6 months before they rotated out. So if you're concerned about a game possibly leaving soon, check how long its been on the service before hand.