LogFAQs > #895289224

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	A Microsoft shareholder grilled them about their lack of Xbox exclusives
Frolex 02/02/18 12:01:24 AM #53:	Darmik posted... But I'm saying there is no longer an 'initial purchase' It's a constant subscription. A guaranteed $10 a month that could potentially last for years. I really doubt the people who'd pay $30 a month would overtake the people who would pay $10 a month. $30 a month doesn't sound like a bargain. The people who'd pay that much on games would probably just buy games for full price anyway. There'd be no point. Individual games could still have microtransactions and DLC yes. But the goal for Microsoft here would be to keep you subscribed for $10 a month. The whole reason Microsoft has lasted this long is because of the people who pay for Xbox Live Gold. Microsoft love subscriptions and I doubt they'd mess with a good thing. When EA announced EA Access people were predicting all sorts of doomsday scenarios and nothing has happened. Subscription services are good, predictable money. It's everything the $60 retail game isn't. You're not talking about sales figures. You're talking about subscribers and Monthly Active Users. Which coincidentally is exactly what Microsoft talks about in their financial meetings now. And once a significant portion of the consumer base have been converted to the subscription service, the potential impacts of turning away users with diminishes, and the potential to exponentially increase revenue from additional montetization grows. You may not think a significant portion of the audience would buy into that, but they would. At some point, i wouldn't have thought a significant portion of players would shell out $100+ on release day just to access all of a games' content, but they do. I wouldn't have thought players would be spending two, three, four even five figure sums on microtransactions, but they do. Consumer dissatisfaction means little when you're essentially using your customers to print money by charging players for basic features and content that was once included in the price of entry. It means even less when every game in town is pulling the same tricks. Subscription services make up a meager portion of the market now, but there's no reason to believe publishers won't leverage it to their maximum ability the exact instant they can get away with it. They have done so with literally every monetization method that's existed so far. --- http://i.imgur.com/HOLHd4k.gif http://i.imgur.com/six2WTN.gif <cite>Frolex posted [p:895289224] in A Microsof... [t:76271670]...</cite> <quote><cite>Darmik posted...</cite> <quote>But I'm saying there is no longer an 'initial purchase' It's a constant subscription. A guaranteed $10 a month that could potentially last for years. I really doubt the people who'd pay $30 a month would overtake the people who would pay $10 a month. $30 a month doesn't sound like a bargain. The people who'd pay that much on games would probably just buy games for full price anyway. There'd be no point. Individual games could still have microtransactions and DLC yes. But the goal for Microsoft here would be to keep you subscribed for $10 a month. The whole reason Microsoft has lasted this long is because of the people who pay for Xbox Live Gold. Microsoft love subscriptions and I doubt they'd mess with a good thing. When EA announced EA Access people were predicting all sorts of doomsday scenarios and nothing has happened. Subscription services are good, predictable money. It's everything the $60 retail game isn't. You're not talking about sales figures. You're talking about subscribers and Monthly Active Users. Which coincidentally is exactly what Microsoft talks about in their financial meetings now.</quote> And once a significant portion of the consumer base have been converted to the subscription service, the potential impacts of turning away users with diminishes, and the potential to exponentially increase revenue from additional montetization grows. You may not think a significant portion of the audience would buy into that, but they would. At some point, i wouldn't have thought a significant portion of players would shell out $100+ on release day just to access all of a games' content, but they do. I wouldn't have thought players would be spending two, three, four even five figure sums on microtransactions, but they do. Consumer dissatisfaction means little when you're essentially using your customers to print money by charging players for basic features and content that was once included in the price of entry. It means even less when every game in town is pulling the same tricks. Subscription services make up a meager portion of the market now, but there's no reason to believe publishers won't leverage it to their maximum ability the exact instant they can get away with it. They have done so with literally every monetization method that's existed so far. --- http://i.imgur.com/HOLHd4k.gif http://i.imgur.com/six2WTN.gif</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1