Microsoft’s Game Pass gets cheaper, loses launch day Call of Duty access
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Perhaps too little too late as their (Microsoft) reputation is tanking in general.
Upvote
44
(54
/
-10)
From a purely selfish perspective, this is good news. I don't play CoD, and I subscribe to Game Pass Ultimate - through which I played Expedition 33, Harry Potter, and Star Wars Outlaws so far this year. Along with A Game About Digging a Hole^, Pacific Drive, and Dredge. It is an absolute no-brainer subscription for the way I consume video games.
That said, I feel for the people who bought in based to any significant extent on day one access to CoD titles. I suspect dropping the monthly price by $7 won't make up for the loss of a key feature. And given where new AAA game prices are going, the $84 annualized saving might not even cover buying the next CoD title.
^ Which, incidentally, is a delightful little snack of a game.
That said, I feel for the people who bought in based to any significant extent on day one access to CoD titles. I suspect dropping the monthly price by $7 won't make up for the loss of a key feature. And given where new AAA game prices are going, the $84 annualized saving might not even cover buying the next CoD title.
^ Which, incidentally, is a delightful little snack of a game.
Upvote
70
(75
/
-5)
2 months of gamepass is cost of "owning" a game. Are people really blasting through a new title that frequently? Even during my peak gaming era it usually was the exact same like 3-4 titles on rotation for years.
The last games I've touched in 2 years that were new is Death Stranding 2, High on Life 2 and Flight Sim. Everything else was free like Battlefield 6's multiplayer etc.. so thats $190 vs $537 for Gamepass PC.
The last games I've touched in 2 years that were new is Death Stranding 2, High on Life 2 and Flight Sim. Everything else was free like Battlefield 6's multiplayer etc.. so thats $190 vs $537 for Gamepass PC.
Upvote
4
(22
/
-18)
Game pass was like the last amazing thing MS had in my opinion. It's not out of spite that I'm not going back... more out of the realization that I don't really need it. I wonder how many other previous customers just will be indifferent to the new offering. I also wonder how big of a deal the lack of CoD will be.
MS has been striking out hard for over a year now. It's crazy.
MS has been striking out hard for over a year now. It's crazy.
Upvote
38
(42
/
-4)
This feels like they found the price people weren't willing to pay, similar to the recent stories of PepsiCo with Doritos.
I had Ultimate and dropped to Core after this price increase. Don't think I'll be going back now that it's cheaper again.
I had Ultimate and dropped to Core after this price increase. Don't think I'll be going back now that it's cheaper again.
Upvote
53
(54
/
-1)
$7 a month is $84 a year, which should more than cover the individual purchase of a single $70 Call of Duty game every year, right?
What am I missing?
Upvote
87
(89
/
-2)
I remember playing the hell out of the original MW1 and MW2 on Xbox 360. My son was showing me Call of Duty nowadays, and it looks a lot like Fortnite. I could not be less interested to get back into CoD.
Upvote
23
(26
/
-3)
Upvote
30
(30
/
0)
Two things - I don't trust that a title with the fanbase and sales numbers of CoD will stay at $70 when it's no longer competing with Game Pass for Windows sales. It's possible I'm just cynical.
But the second thing isn't cynicism, it's human nature. A person saving $7/month almost certainly doesn't set that $7/month aside to spend on a specific thing. It ends up sort vanishing into the monthly household budget. Meaning that psychologically, the person who was getting day one CoD included with Game Pass has gone from getting it "for free" to getting it "for $70," which is not a great feeling.
Upvote
-8
(15
/
-23)
Other than the misconception of the general public's view on math? Those 1/3 Pound burgers are smaller than 1/4 Pound.. Somehow.
They over estimated the long term CoD player base would stick to console once they pushed Crossplay. Crossplay is ultimately was the shot in the foot for them. Microsoft didn't care as long as it was a Windows computer doing this even if it stole Xbox and potentially Playstation users. And they just let Xbox rot.
Upvote
-11
(5
/
-16)
Mungus the Unhyphenated
Ars Tribunus Militum
- Add bookmark
- Featured
- #15
This seems like a step in the right direction. CoD has a dedicated audience, but it's only a fraction of the of the greater GamePass audience. Honestly, I don't think having CoD is a make-or-break deal for GamePass, or ever was. It seemed more like appeasing Activision as part of the acquisition deal. I'm happy if it's all in the rearview mirror now, and maybe XBox can get back to business on a more even keel.
There's more to XBox/Microsoft Games than Activision and CoD -- They should be able to stand on their own two feet without needing the additional promotion. And if they can't, then that's a whole other discussion, and not necessarily something to prop up at the expense of the rest of GamePass.
There's more to XBox/Microsoft Games than Activision and CoD -- They should be able to stand on their own two feet without needing the additional promotion. And if they can't, then that's a whole other discussion, and not necessarily something to prop up at the expense of the rest of GamePass.
Upvote
44
(44
/
0)
Two things: first, yes. Back in the day, I'd easily burn through a new game a month. That's not as guaranteed today as it was then, but I have already played Expedition 33, Hogwarts, and Star Wars Outlaws this year, via Game Pass.
But second, it's not reasonable to compare your playing behavior when each game is an individual purchase to your playing behavior when each game is part of a monthly subscription, having a marginal cost of $0.
I also used to have 3-4 games on rotation for years - when I was a kid living on my parents' budget with a secondhand NES. That was not a predictor for my behavior when my finances changed, nor would it have been a good predictor for my behavior if (say) my parents' cable bill included unlimited game rentals.
And as sort of an addendum to that point (so I guess it was three things), it is important to note that the monthly subscription model makes the marginal cost of trying out a game you're not sure of $0. $70 is a lot to ask for a title about which I'm dubious, but if I can just give it a try? No problem.
Which, in my case, means I played Expedition 33, which now ranks as among the all-time greats of my gaming career. If I'd had to pay retail for it, I simply wouldn't have no matter how well it was reviewed or respected; I hate JRPGs. When it didn't cost me anything extra, though, it was easy enough to say "I should probably see what all the fuss is about, and when I stop playing after a few hours I've lost almost nothing."
And come to think of it, if Rocket League hadn't been free via PS+ way back when, I would never have picked that game up. And over the years, I've put thousands of hours into that game. Ditto Tower of Guns, though that can't be more than a couple hundred hours total.
None of which is to say that a Game Pass sub is a good idea for you, of course. But I don't think it should be difficult to understand that for some - perhaps many - gamers, it is unquestionably worth it.
Upvote
48
(49
/
-1)
I recognize this is enshittification while at the same time being happy about it because I don't care about CoD. Frankly I'd be happy if there was a $10/month option that only included games at least two years old.
Upvote
-17
(4
/
-21)
Was just talking with friends last night about gamepass having gotten too expensive. Once I got my steam deck, I realized that $10/mo was two AAA games or 4-6 indies a year, way more than I play.
Upvote
3
(5
/
-2)
The value proposition for Game Pass is dead to me. for what I would pay for the annual cost of this I can simply buy games on steam, claim games on Luna included with my Prime subscription, and claim free Epic games. I even get free games on steam fairly often.
This is only valuable if you have no backlog and you have never owned games before / only own a xbox console.
I hate it when a show I am in the middle of watching moves to another service. It is unacceptable when a game moves off of Game Pass before I am done playing it.
I would be more willing to use Gamepass if I had credits that I could own games in perpetuity. If you want to claim a brand new game its a lot more credits than the back catalogue.
I am sick and tired of being bled dry by subscriptions. This isnt enough value with this price drop. Will they just jack it back up in a year if the subscriber base returns?
This is only valuable if you have no backlog and you have never owned games before / only own a xbox console.
I hate it when a show I am in the middle of watching moves to another service. It is unacceptable when a game moves off of Game Pass before I am done playing it.
I would be more willing to use Gamepass if I had credits that I could own games in perpetuity. If you want to claim a brand new game its a lot more credits than the back catalogue.
I am sick and tired of being bled dry by subscriptions. This isnt enough value with this price drop. Will they just jack it back up in a year if the subscriber base returns?
Upvote
-13
(9
/
-22)
Good but feels like too late. Game Pass used to be cheap enough that sporadic usage was enough to keep it. Then they raised the price to where I had to think about it and cancelled. Don’t think I’ll be going back.
And that’s before you factor in MS’ self-immolation of the Xbox brand. Think I’ll just move on.
And that’s before you factor in MS’ self-immolation of the Xbox brand. Think I’ll just move on.
Upvote
21
(24
/
-3)
Yes. The meta today is absolutely binging on the game, not unlike what people do with Netflix. Get those 100 hours in, finish it, and never play it again.
Upvote
-6
(3
/
-9)
Gamepass basically replaced the video rental store, I think if more people seen it like that then it would be seen more favorably. I never used GameFly but I know that everyone who uses it uses the hell out of it, but I don't play games enough to make that worth it. But when the platform holder itself offers the services and they have every incentive to make it desirable in the short term to lock you in long term, then it's an obvious conflict of interest.
Upvote
14
(14
/
0)
The difference is, you're not just playing CoD...are you? You're surely playing other titles that were once all inclusive.
Upvote
-18
(2
/
-20)
I'm tired of not owning the stuff I pay for - I don't have the time to play all the stuff a subscription gives me. Hell, I'm spending most of my time on DRM-free games that have long-lasting value like Factorio or Mechwarrior 5 Mercenaries more than I am playing anything new lately. My life is too busy for any subscription price, especially if whatever I play is just sand through my fingers that I may not be able to enjoy again if they embrace subscription-exclusive content like streaming providers are doing.
Nah, my subscription fatigue has already reached a limit and I would rather buy a Steam Box and on GOG.com than let the console platforms continue to try to squeeze me. I'm out.
Nah, my subscription fatigue has already reached a limit and I would rather buy a Steam Box and on GOG.com than let the console platforms continue to try to squeeze me. I'm out.
Upvote
0
(8
/
-8)
If you buy a game from Steam, play it once and then never play it again - then the subscription would have been more favorable.
Upvote
21
(21
/
0)
I and a couple of friends had PC Game Pass and cancelled when they jacked up the price in October. Still won’t bother going back. Destroying good will is a hard thing to undo.
Upvote
-3
(5
/
-8)
That’s where I am. I’m busy enough that I just don’t have time to game regularly so my backlog has grown to the point where I can’t justify spending more than $20 on a new to me game.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Upvote
1
(3
/
-2)
Upvote
-8
(4
/
-12)
Console multiplayer services that previously did not need any kind of subscription until Xbox itself brought "insert coins to play" to the living room.
[360 mic voice] Go fuck yourselves.
Upvote
-5
(5
/
-10)
This price reduction is long overdue. I know a lot of people who downgraded to the intermediate or lowest subscription levels (myself included). TBH I probably wouldn't even subscribe at all but for the fact I enjoy playing with friends and my son, and you can't do that on XBox without Live. If the servers for the on-line games I enjoy ever go dark (and some of them already have), it will be time to cut the losses even further.
Upvote
4
(5
/
-1)
If you play it once for less than 2 hours you can simply get your money back with Steam.
For me - I would rather have a game I played once and never touch again but have the option to than have many games in a subscription that I could lose access to at any moment. I have a ton of games on steam I paid for but havent played, I am still satisfied with my wasted money while I did not feel good about the money I paid into gamepass.
I prefer to have a library that I make decisions on when to pay additional money into versus having to continuously pay to have access.
The price is still too large for me to have it as a throw away rental service, maybe for some its worth it. It looks like enough people ditched gamepass that microslop is willing to adjust terms to be slightly more favorable to the customers that abandoned them. Steam continued to grow during the time Game Pass increased prices. It looks like more people are finding value in having a long term license that steam provides over subscription access.
This was a critical moment for Microsoft to try to lock in consumers, they increased prices too early. The xbox console is dead. I switched to Linux to game and gamepass is not supported outside of streaming which my home internet is not good enough for.
Linux might be a tiny share of overall gaming - but it used to be basically nothing. The trend is moving away from microsoft on console and PC.
Sony and Steam are providing value consumers are willing to pay for. If Microsoft can stop trying to force copilot into everything they could consider possibly maybe giving the consumer what they value. I dont think a price drop is going to be good enough to regain what was lost and more importantly grow their share of the gaming market.
Upvote
-10
(4
/
-14)
Who could have anticipated that the numbers wouldn't end up making sense when you are talking games with substantial essentially guaranteed day-1 sales vs. trying to make the subscription price attractive?
There's obviously nothing stopping you from just coming up with a subscription price whose net present value equals the sale price; but, to the degree there is any room for the subscription to be something other than a payment plan, it basically requires that there be uncertainty about the sales of the games in question for getting less money than a conventional sale at better odds than a conventional sale to be advantageous.
There's obviously nothing stopping you from just coming up with a subscription price whose net present value equals the sale price; but, to the degree there is any room for the subscription to be something other than a payment plan, it basically requires that there be uncertainty about the sales of the games in question for getting less money than a conventional sale at better odds than a conventional sale to be advantageous.
Upvote
2
(3
/
-1)
Maybe - but while it's absolutely paid for itself several times over every year I've subscribed, I don't know for what percentage of gamers that would true.
I think you're right that a reframing would help, but there will always be people for whom it would make zero sense to pay for such a thing, and they'll be mystified at how other people can see it as worthwhile. These people will then be very loud online.
Not that dissimilar to how I am mystified at people who can buy a console or gaming PC, and then only ever play one franchise on it. The idea of a "Madden Machine" or a "CoD Console" is utterly alien to me.
This, I'm not sure I follow. Game Pass feels, to me, like Netflix. I'm not offended by Netflix offering me the service while also offering products on the service to make it more valuable.
I'm guessing that there is some qualitative difference I'm not seeing - or that you and I simply disagree that the Netflix model is acceptable.
Upvote
9
(10
/
-1)
Human psychology aside, the $7 a month is fungible. If you save it on Game Pass and spend it on Call of Duty, you still end up ahead.
This remains true even if CoD goes up to $80 (price increases beyond that seem unlikely in the immediate term)
Upvote
12
(13
/
-1)
Yes. People are. Sounds like it isn't for you. I use it to try a lot of things as well. Things I would never buy. I find I end up playing more games because the barrier to try something is only my time.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
When you keep the price low, you keep it under the radar. People forget they are still subscribed to it and continue to let it auto-renew. Instead Microsoft raised the price and every noticed. I went from Game Pass Ultimate to the lower tier when I found a 1 year black Friday deal. Once it expires, I doubt I will stay with Xbox My household came to realize that we really didn't use it that much.
Upvote
-2
(2
/
-4)
In other words, Microsoft lied through their teeth.
There are going to be consequences for this, right?
..
There are going to be consequences for this, right?
Upvote
-18
(0
/
-18)