I think, the pre $30 usd prices for ultimate were when they were in their growth loss leader strategy and they were always going to hit a higher price than $20. But gp has several tiers across different prices so stepping down is always an option. Premium at $15/mo still seems like a good deal to me. Or cancelling and go another route.
No idea how to get market share from tik tok. maybe it is way bigger than I realize but people get bored with most things like that eventually.
I donât think Day One games works out for them financially without the high asking price anymore. They could get rid of it entirely but thatâs premium where you get first party games a year later. They want to keep what GP was originally sold on (day one), but they own too much now. I donât even think itâs just COD. When day one started Xbox had a handful of studios and was doing like a game or two a year. Now they have nearly 40 and drop several AAA games a year. I donât think they want everyone to sub to Ultimate, but thatâs what everyone looks to to gauge affordability. Even though essential and especially premium are really good and like half the price of Ultimate.
with declining sales, itâll be hard for all 3 console makers. Nintendo is better positioned though as most of their devs are in Japan where itâs still much cheaper to make games. So by not chasing the power crown, I feel like theyâve delayed the problem quite a it. It obviously helps that their games sell really well though. But considering Pokemon ZA was cheaper to make than the cost of their superbowl commercial, you can see how easy it is for Nintendo compared to the rest to make profit.
For MS, some form of revenue sharing with Netflix might be their best best though for subscriptions as it could help them reach hundreds of millions of customers. Although how many of those users is interested in gaming, that is the question!
There is a rumor that I saw today on Resetera about mined data, that showed that Sony had a label created similar to the [PS5/PS4]. But with PC instead of PS5, I donât know what happened to the post but the discussion around it was the old idea if the PC store.
Which goes a against Schreierâs reporting, so I have to wonder if cutting back on PC. Is just them deciding to do make their owm store and keep their games from Steam.
One of the post mentioned that the PC and PS5 symbols were seperate, after checking when claiming otherwise. The current symbol resembles the one used as an example for the PS5 and PS4 crossbuy.
Itâs super easy for Nintendo to make a profit but on top of that theyâre just okay with being overall smaller than the behemoth Microsoft Gaming wants to be. So I think that helps them keep their scopes in line.
I remember a while ago there being a rumor Playstation would make their own store and introduce some version of Xbox Play Anywhere. Those all seemed to fizzle out though. The reasonings weâve seen for not wanting to do PC ports wonât change whether they have their own store or not. Like they didnât say the problem was Valveâs 30% cut or Epicâs 12%. If itâs worries over PC games cutting into console sales and depriotizing the prestige of the console then if anything their own store (which might have some version of play anywhere) will do so even more.
Agreed. Once I have Project Helix and PlayStation 5 Pro runs itâs course, there will truly be no reason to buy and own a PlayStation 6. While I like and enjoy Sonyâs games for the most part, spending over $1000 for one or two games a year if im lucky simply isnât worth it.
Netflix has their own gaming service. Not sure how big or successful it is (mostly mobile games,) but theyâre probably unlikely to push their users towards a third-party service. Plus âeveryoneâ already has Netflix, so a cooperation wouldnât do much for their subscriber numbers.
Disney, Paramount or HBO might be an interesting option. (Amazon and Apple already have their own gaming services as well.)
I donât think Netflix knows how successful their gaming service is. They can do engagement hours but thatâs it. Thatâs the problem when every single financial metric is tied to the one subscription price. Theyâre just desperate to do whatever to push for new subscribers and keep people subscribed
Yeah, Amazon also has their own video subscription service and so does Apple, but both are also platforms that gladly host and advertise ârivalâ services and their originals because it benefits them to offer as many different services as possible. Something that we might see with Helix (if thereâs less pressure on forcing everyone to stay locked within Xbox services). Nvidia GFN is already accessible through the Xbox PC app and Microsoft web store (though that is also a service where youâd need to either buy a game on the MS store or subscribe to GP to be able to use it). I wouldnât be wildly surprised if at least Amazon Luna showed up alongside Nvidia GFN on Helix as an app to download in the Microsoft Store. Especially if Xbox makes it so they get a cut of the cost of the subscription if users buy it through their (like any digital purchase). Especially since in theory gamers that really wanted those services can even now just go to the Edge app and access them through the website.
It all depends on how good a exclusive game is & if one got money.
That said they are very few exclusives like GT on the PS1, Mario 64 on the N64 or Halo on the Xbox that basically make you want to buy the system just for that game.
Well good news is in Japan, PS5 digital sold the most, thanks to Japanese language only version. Bad news, the other ones sold a lot less. Less than 1,000 each and they used to do over 2,000. Price hike, everyone.