Jump to content

Xbox Game Pass is getting MAJOR changes, with a new tier without day one games, and price increases worldwide


Recommended Posts

WWW.WINDOWSCENTRAL.COM

Xbox Game Pass is finally getting its long-awaited price increase.

 

 

Quote
  • Soon, Xbox Game Pass for Console will be shuttered for new users only. 
  • Users currently on Xbox Game Pass for Console will be allowed to maintain their subscription, as well as day one games, and the hundreds of titles in the back catalogue.  
  • New users on Xbox Game Pass in the near future will be greeted by a new Xbox Game Pass "Standard." This is more like EA Access, which includes Xbox's back catalogue, and doesn't include day one games. This will be priced at $14.99 per month, and will also include Xbox Live Gold for multiplayer (now known as Game Pass Core, confusingly). It doesn't include Xbox Cloud gaming. Game Pass Standard is supposedly launching in September. 
  • From September 12, 2024, Microsoft will only allow users to stack Xbox Game Pass for Console users for up to 13 months, using pre-paid cards and the like, which will continue to function. If you have more than 13 months stacked already, you won't be impacted. 
  • Xbox Game Pass Ultimate will not be changed, but it will get a price increase. It will still include PC Game Pass, day one games, and hundreds of back catalogue titles, as well as cloud gaming. But, it is getting a price increase. The new price will be $19.99 per month. 
  • PC Game Pass is also getting a price increase, from $9.99 per month to $11.99. 
  • PC Game Pass will also continue to get day one games. 
  • Xbox Game Pass Core (Xbox Live Gold multiplayer) gets an annual price increase to $74.99 from $59.99, but it will remain $9.99 per month.
  • The price increases are global. 
  • For users with recurring billing, the new prices will take effect on September 12, 2024, giving you time to cancel if you don't fancy it. 

 

  • Sad 1
  • Sicko Sherman 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WWW.VIDEOGAMESCHRONICLE.COM

It says a price rise “would be counter-productive as it would increase subscriber churn rates”…

 

Quote

However, in a newly published response to the CMA’s findings, Microsoft said it doesn’t plan to raise Game Pass prices due to the deal going through and claimed that doing so would be counter-productive because it would lead to a drop in subscribers.

 

“Game Pass prices will not increase as a result of the Merger, and certainly will not increase to a point that offsets the substantial benefits of Activision titles coming to Game Pass on a day and date basis,” it wrote. “This is especially so given Game Pass will continue to be constrained by B2P [buy to play].”

 

I guess the reasoning is that they said it wouldn't increase BECAUSE of the merger, so the reasoning must be something else!

 

But analysis of this seems to be with all the money Xbox spent, MS wants costs recouped, and raising sub prices is one way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The pricing differential between console and PC is absurd.

 

It always was on some level, and we could certainly guess why.  But still, that’s almost $100 a year extra for access to (most) all of the same games, including day one releases.  Sub for a few years on PC instead, and you could practically buy a whole new console or handheld with the savings.

 

It also tells me that if, for some miraculous reason, Games Pass on PC takes off, those prices are going up with it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know they still haven’t plugged the Xbox Ultimate stack 3yrs by converting Gold for super cheap hole so mebe a good time to do it if you haven’t recently. I still have two years of dirt cheap Ultimate. I’ve been paying so little for so long they’ll never win that money back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last Games Pass price hike was only a year ago, a few months before the Activision deal went through.  Put that and today’s price hike together, day one Games Pass releases are $60 more a year (on console) than it was previously.

 

Lots of fingers that could be pointed as to why, but it’d be naive to think CoD and the merger isn’t priced into these changes on some level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

The pricing differential between console and PC is absurd.

 

It always was on some level, and we could certainly guess why.  But still, that’s almost $100 a year extra for access to (most) all of the same games, including day one releases.  Sub for a few years on PC instead, and you could practically buy a whole new console or handheld with the savings.

 

That’s the console tax for no profit hardware, and includes the cost of online play. 
I suspect they have very few takers on PC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, stepee said:

All those billions for Activision aka COD is absolutely responsible for these hikes but on the plus side - if you wanted COD already it works out well!

This is me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

That’s the console tax for no profit hardware, and includes the cost of online play.

 

Yes surely, the cost of online play that PC developers are miraculously able to offer their audiences for free.  When can we expect Valve, EA, Ubisoft, Epic, etc to start charging?  Or dropping their PC SKUs of online games due to the cost?  When do we start paying for online play on the Deck?

 

The "console tax" angle is just as BS.  'No profit hardware’ / selling for a loss has long been a thing in the console space, long before the manufactures had (paywall) subscriptions to fall back on.  The bet has always been that royalties make up for it.  Even the production cost issues associated with hardware today are offset by a relative lack of official price cuts, significant markups on accessories, price hikes in many regions, and the subtle, sneaky increases we're seeing now with SKU replacements as manufacturing is further streamlined.

 

The simple truth is this: We wouldn't see such extreme markdowns on 1st party PS5 games, or initiatives like Games Pass get off the ground in the first place, if they weren't subsidized in large part by traditional PS+/Gold level subscriptions.  The cost of online play itself does not suck up $75 or $80 annually per paying console owner.  No need to pretend its anywhere close to that, or that it couldn't be offered for free.  They charge because they can.  And for Microsoft and Sony in particular, they prioritize these consistent subs over revenue in other areas.  (The exception being when they can upsell you on a higher tier)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sucks, but I don’t think that the current pricing was sustainable considering the amount of day 1 games provided. Essentially making people sub to Ultimate for day one releases is likely why the increase is $5/month and not $10. It’s certainly weird that PC GP is still getting day one games, though; I’m guessing the sub base for it is low or, possibly, not having the XBL features needed for PC saves MSFT a notable amount of money somehow…?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

possibly, not having the XBL features needed for PC saves MSFT a notable amount of money somehow…?

 

Or they know the service would be dead if PC gamers were paying for online access to a PC game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Spork3245 said:

Essentially making people sub to Ultimate for day one releases is likely why the increase is $5/month and not $10.


I’d be interested to know how many subbed to the “Console” tier and didn’t pay for multiplayer.  Is it really that much to offset a larger increase to Ultimate?  That tier was the (short lived) silver lining.  They do risk souring that crowd on their subs in general, but again, we have no idea how big it was.

 

It’s also just as likely that they wanted to spread out the sticker shock.  Sony similarly changed their pricing structure two years in a row to this effect.


 

More generally, I’m curious about day one indie releases.  Would these still be included in the standard tier?  Not all the time?  Never?  It really splits the messaging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Yes surely, the cost of online play that PC developers are miraculously able to offer their audiences for free.  When can we expect Valve, EA, Ubisoft, Epic, etc to start charging?  Or dropping their PC SKUs of online games due to the cost?  When do we start paying for online play on the Deck?

 

The "console tax" angle is just as BS.  'No profit hardware’ / selling for a loss has long been a thing in the console space, long before the manufactures had (paywall) subscriptions to fall back on.  The bet has always been that royalties make up for it.  Even the production cost issues associated with hardware today are offset by a relative lack of official price cuts, significant markups on accessories, price hikes in many regions, and the subtle, sneaky increases we're seeing now with SKU replacements as manufacturing is further streamlined.

 

The simple truth is this: We wouldn't see such extreme markdowns on 1st party PS5 games, or initiatives like Games Pass get off the ground in the first place, if they weren't subsidized in large part by traditional PS+/Gold level subscriptions.  The cost of online play itself does not suck up $75 or $80 annually per paying console owner.  No need to pretend its anywhere close to that, or that it couldn't be offered for free.  They charge because they can.  And for Microsoft and Sony in particular, they prioritize these consistent subs over revenue in other areas.  (The exception being when they can upsell you on a higher tier)

It's the annual fee you agree to if you decide to be a console player that wants to play online.  It has nothing to do with the cost of providing online services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

It's the annual fee you agree to if you decide to be a console player that wants to play online.  It has nothing to do with the cost of providing online services.

 

Switch Lite illustrates it truly has nothing to do with being a console player either.  You can bet whatever Microsoft handheld comes next wouldn’t drop the online fee either.  And that a hypothetical second attempt at a Steam Machine would lack one.

 

Its merely the companies that were traditionally in a position to charge that opt to.  Even if they’re competing with the Deck and such, they’ll still do it.  They’re addicted to that gravy train.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm assuming the "day one" thing refers to MS first party games and not whatever 3rd party games on games pass. I assume that is unaffected by this. Like if they come out and say you can't even play Flintlock or that Capcom game and all the others day one without ultimate, they might as well just close the Xbox division because nobody would fuck with that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Dodger said:

I'm assuming the "day one" thing refers to MS first party games and not whatever 3rd party games on games pass. I assume that is unaffected by this. 

 

Until proven otherwise, I genuinely believe that "day one" refers to all games, whether first-party or otherwise.

 

Microsoft really, really wants you to subscribe to the "Ultimate" tier, so this is pretty much the only real way to incentivize (if that word can even be applied) that action. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

Until proven otherwise, I genuinely believe that "day one" refers to all games, whether first-party or otherwise.

 

It wouldn't make sense in that context though. First party games are always on game pass but 3rd party games leave game pass. If you don't get to play the 3rd party games day one then are you going to get to play them 2 days before they get taken off? Hate to say it but @Dodger might be right for a change 🤔

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

It wouldn't make sense in that context though. First party games are always on game pass but 3rd party games leave game pass. If you don't get to play the 3rd party games day one then are you going to get to play them 2 days before they get taken off? Hate to say it but @Dodger might be right for a change 🤔

 

Sure - what you've articulated is definitely something in favor of the notion that "Day One" Ultimate exclusivity refers to first-party titles only, but that ambiguity kinda lends itself to where thing stand with the service itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...