A Way Out Creator Weighs In On Xbox Game Pass Again, Says He's Not Sure About The Model

I imagine if you have a shorter game it also cost less to make... And if you are so worried about your precious money, don't put your games on gamepass

In other words, he hasn't talked with Microsoft himself to find out how their profit sharing system is with game pass and is just asking ignorant questions. Again, this is often why developers can be the wrong people to ask about consumer related questions, as they are often engulfed in development and are unaware of what's going on. They have other departments that handle that for them while they focus on making games.

This Joker again 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

Why do news sites keep interviewing Fares? Is there something special going on or something that I've missed out on? Because at this rate I'm starting to think that these people are literally just using Fares as an easy way to get clicks due to his open-minded nature. Like what's so special about his opinion? You can literally interview hundreds of other industry people but news sites are only choosing to interview this guy? What's going on here?

Shouldn't he know how payment works? A Way Out is on Game Pass through EA Play. Wouldn't EA have explained the payment model when his game was put on the service? Did he sign the contract without reading it?

@LtSarge currently it's due to him having a game coming out in march so standard lead developer doing interviews.. but he gets very easily taken off path

To answer his question some developer get paid a lump sum up. For x time in game pass others get paid for hours played it's how the deals are negotiated and microsoft had been very open about this.
My guess is he. Had only gone through ea for the last 6-8 years so he most likely hadn't had any reason to go to Microsoft's gdc conferences about this or there digital events for developers explaining all this

@Terrin Ah that makes sense, but it's like you say very weird how they keep veering him off the main path. How come both Polygon (this article) and Gaming Bolt (the other article) keep bringing up the topic of Game Pass? It just feels very intentional.

I’m sure Game Pass works for some developers and not for others, but given that he hasn’t had a conversation with MS about how they’d pay him for any of his games he’s not really the best person to be talking about it. Though his comments on how it could affect creativity may turn out to be true...Epic are in a similar position, offering free games on the Epic Store on PC every week, that they must be paying the devs for “lost sales”. But I love Game Pass due to giving me access to games I wouldn’t necessarily have paid for individually, such as Donut County (which was fairly short but I really enjoyed my time with it).

I'm guessing devs get paid for "copies"
Example, cyber shadow, $20. MS said here's $500k, to put it on GP, for a year. Equivalent to 25k copies sold. Then the devs either gamble a "for sure deal" versus them selling MORE than 25k copies that year, on xbo. Older games, like nier 2, MS pays $1m for a higher end/ known game, etc.
Who knows, pure speculation/excrement.

Given that he doesn't know how it works I'd say his opinion is rather worthless as its not really based on anything. Didn't The Medium launch on Gamepass as a short story driven game but has already been a huge success for the studio?

Am I stuck in Groundhog Day or what?

Have to stress my opinion again then. This clown should really keep his mouth shut ...

Give it a few more years then we shall see if it's sustainable by the quality of games and the amount of games being put on it

Consumer trends — including Game Pass — have driven the development of games released by major publishers — such as EA, the publisher of A Way Out — since day one. And there's a lot that can be said about the complex and subtle economic issues that influence consumer trends, but Microsoft aren't causing these issues, they're merely adapting to them as a business. In all the comments I've read from Josef Fares' on Game Pass he seems to be completely disconnected from these facts, and maybe even the wider gaming community overall.

@101Force What's worse, while complaining he admits he doesn't know how it works. So he's disconnected and uninformed. No right to complain from any front it seems.

@LtSarge because he usually has something outlandish to say and uses the word "f*ck" a lot. That's literally it.

@UltimateOtaku91 where have you been?

@mousieone been invested in ys 9 and atelier ryza 2 lol

18m people paying around $10 (maybe more with Ultimate) a month means $180m a month. An average AAA game costs about $45-50m (over 3-4yrs) so Game Pass can fund 3-4 AAA games a month. However, its not like that.

A studio will have a fixed monthly running costs (staff salaries, bills/rates, rent etc) and require additional money 'periodically' to make a game - those extra costs maybe Voice actors, MoCap actors, MoCap Studio hire etc. If Game Pass brings in enough income to run these studio's, the games are essentially paid for before they go on sale.

Its not as if they aren't on sale to those who aren't yet on Game Pass. Number of sales may well be reduced by Game Pass but they have already paid for the game in advance.

For an outside developer, they have to weigh up what's more important - engagement or game sale figures? Maybe that could also depend on how much the Publishers take too and any other investors the developer has made deals with. Maybe in his position, he can't see the big picture

Oh and on the Subject of affecting how developers make games - it can be quite liberating - not having to make a game that is 'purely' commercial - something that you hope either jumps on the current trend (like Battle Royale) or create the 'next' new trend...

If that doesn't matter - you can take more risks, make the games that you really want. Of course, they could make games that people want to keep playing to go for maximum engagement - but that's a 'good' thing because if people want to keep playing, you've done something right. BTW that means everyone of the Game Pass members have completed the game and all achievements - that's a relatively fair way to decide 'maximum' engagement as that is irrespective of game length but shows that someone was 'engaged' in that game enough to get 100% achievements.

I am sure developers can also use Game Pass to reinvigorate or even get people hooked on their games. Depending on when they arrive on Game Pass, they could be up for a couple of months, then removed so you have all those people who tried, but maybe not yet finished with buying your game. Do it later in the Games life, and you get a lot of people playing it, talking about it again which leads to an upsurge in sales - then when it goes again, they buy it.

Pro's and Con's no doubt but even if it does change for those under MS making games they know will launch on Game Pass too, there are still other Publishers telling their Studio's which Project they 'expect' to be commercially the best for them to make and the indie developer trying to sell their idea to a publisher and/or investors.

Keep your game off it and you won’t have to woory or concern yourself with how XGP works , while allowing you to STFU .

Not so sure about Game Pass Fares? Well, I’m still not so sure about video games that are less appealing, watered down versions of movies.

Ok, this guy already talk about Series' naming convention and now the business model ...

I'm not surprised if he end up talk some sh1t about the hardware next

Every time this guy come to say something like this I'm less and less inclined to buy his new game It takes two. It just bothers me that him, as someone from the industry, can't get the info straight from the source and keep complaining about things he doesn't know.

I never, ever thought I'd say this, but..... Maybe Fares should let EA do the talking for him about the business model that he's making profits from but doesn't understand how?

I think this guy is just scared that the narrative one-and-done style of game will become extinct with Game Pass.
For me, if you do get paid for how many people play your game or for how long, then that simply means you need to add replay value.
If you have a 10 hour campaign, then add reasons to play that again. Be it different endings, unlocking new weapons or abilities etc. Or worse case, add paid story DLC.

He just strikes me as the type that doesn't really get involved with the business aspects of games, and is also scared of the unknown and change.

@UltimateOtaku91 well that’s only going to get worse in a week.

@mousieone don't remind me, bravely default 2 and persona 5 strikers 😭😭

@UltimateOtaku91 I have P5S on pre-order too :/

@mousieone that's good news, where did you manage to get one from

@UltimateOtaku91 no I mean Persona 5 Strikers= P5S.

I mean PS5 isn’t off the table just not right now- nothing I have to play

@mousieone omg my brain read its as ps5 😂
Hopefully it's good, I know it's mostly got 8/10 from reviews

@UltimateOtaku91 yeah no worries. It’s not that it’s off the table just everything I want right now is ok Switch.

Anyhow I’ve looked a ton of reviews, and it looks fun

Edit: And now I’ll stop hijacking the thread

Content- Mike Rose has better take on this and he actually is directly involved in the contract. He spells out both the advantages and disadvantages. I think there is a news thread some where healer about that l.

I think it's great what Microsoft are trying with GP. Eventually the price will have to go up I feel and at that point it would probably be too expensive for me as a monthly sub.