Oh boy, here we go. American TV host and comedian Adam Conover has been going a bit viral overnight due to his thoughts on Microsoft's "monopolisation" of the games industry, claiming that's he's worried about the future.
In a video posted to Twitter and TikTok, Conover explained that he felt Microsoft's "massive cash advantage" meant the company could adopt the "Amazon strategy" of selling games at a loss by putting them all on Xbox Game Pass and "wiping out the competition" in the process. He called out PlayStation in particular as being in trouble.
You can watch the full video below — be warned that it contains some swearing:
If you'd rather we summarised the key part of the video rather than watching it all, here's what he had to say:
"Microsoft is able to lose money indefinitely. So indefinitely, that they can sell the damn console and Game Pass for just 25 dollars a month. Now that's an amazing deal, but it's one of those deals that we might later say, ooh — that deal was a little too good to be true, because it could mean that Microsoft wipes out all the competition in the video game space, and then is able to jack the prices up on us, and also, make games that are a lot worse.
"And let's not forget that all this consolidation naturally is going to lead to layoffs and worse conditions for workers. Microsoft isn't trying to be 'the Netflix of Games', they're trying to be the Amazon of games, they want to use their massive cash advantage to undercut and dominate the entire game industry. That is bad for video game makers and video game players, and as someone who loves video games, I'm worried."
As you can imagine, Conover's strong thoughts have resulted in a variety of responses, some of which have taken his side on the matter, and others who have acknowledged his points, but identified some flaws:
"There are reasons to be concerned about subscription services like Xbox Game Pass, but the basic idea that Microsoft doesn’t need to worry about being profitable with its gaming business is [confusing]..."
"Adam basically said Xbox is a monopoly and you should be scared! Before saying that Nintendo is fine. Didn't mention Tencent who will be fine. Amazon games will be fine. But Sony who's been breaking records for several years is 'f**ked'."
"Sometimes I think we try too hard to find something wrong. Do I think Microsoft is secretly looking to undercut and drive the competition out of business? Nope. Do I think they are pushing Game Pass to be their primary way of delivering content across multiple platforms? Yup."
What are your thoughts on what Conover had to say? Let us know down in the comments below.
Comments 106
I didn't know ot was possible to say so many dumb things at once, but Adam did.
Tencent, Amazon, Sony, Nintendo, TakeTwo, Embracer Group, Square-enix....
There are so many publishers and big studios on the marker that it makes this "concern" look stupid.
If Microsoft is undercutting the market, what Embracer group and Tencent are doing?!
It looks like to me he is just salty microsoft is doing well.
Salt salt everywhere salt
What a load of bunk.
I love how attempting to buy 3rd party timed exclusivity and exclusive additional gameplay content for major 3rd party releases never had these guys crawling out claiming it’s bad for gamers and the games industry.
I love that they’re completely silent when patents are placed on gameplay mechanics as ‘playing games during loading screens’; ‘Nemesis systems’, and most recent ‘stranding’, these guys never come out claiming that’s bad for gamers and the games industry.
And most of all I love that not once do they ever EVER take into account that nobody is forcing these publishers/studios to sell. It’s clearly better for the industry if studios are shut down. Right?
Game pass is good for games included in it. They get money from Microsoft and exposure.
It doesn’t have much impact on AAA if a game has more hype and anything you haven’t already played on game pass. Most people would buy The hyped game anyway even if they have a subscription offering less desirable games.
The game’s is it hurts AA and indie game is not on game pass. People are unlikely to buy something to play because they’re bored. If there’s something they’re equally interested in on game pass and they subscribe to it. They don’t buy it because it looks like a game pass game. But the Microsoft executives don’t like it either so it never is.
He's not wrong. But most people prefer to be blinded by fanboyism. At least I have a reason to keep Game Pass.
A search on his Twitter history shows he's a PS gamer and not an Xbox gamer... I'm sure that in no way colours his views on this matter 😉
This guy has basically become the Donald Trump of the gaming industry. People have been upset with current circumstances in the industry but until now they've lacked a figurehead to represent them and now they have this guy.
The impression I get from reading his arguments is that he doesn't know enough about Microsoft and their Xbox division to pass fair judgement. He's an outsider, someone who sees a foreign threat and responds accordingly with hostility.
The problem with a lot of these people is that they simply haven't cared about Microsoft or Xbox until now. For a long time now, Xbox hasn't been a significant competitor in the gaming market since the 2013 fiasco. Now that they're making a comeback, all of a sudden everyone thinks they're a threat. But if you've been following Microsoft and Xbox all this time, you'll have formed a fair opinion about them:
I can provide more arguments (like how they are the only company of the big three who actually cares about game preservation by having backwards compatibility and a universal system that they will keep in mind when creating their next console) but the point is that you gain a much better understanding of companies if you're actually paying attention to their work throughout the years. And this is coming from someone who actively follows Nintendo, PlayStation and Xbox.
Correct me if I am wrong but even with the ActiBliz purchase Sony are still on the top of the pile in terms of games revenue. This will push Microsoft above Tencent but still behind Sony. A monopoly from second place hmmm.
Or at least that was what I recall when I looked into this with a bit of basic googlefu when the acquisition story broke.
What the future holds no idea and it can take care of itself in its own time. Me I am going back to the much more important business of playing games and enjoying what is in front of me right now.
What complete nonsense. He completely dismisses PlayStation’s excellent roster of exclusives which will never appear on GamePass.
Destin did a great video response to this paranoid, fear mongering, ridiculous rant that contradicts itself...
Well worth checking out. In fact its better to support Destin's video than to try and seek Adams video and supporting him by watching it...
@Medic_Alert
Library based subscription services are getting more pervasive though. For an independent developer not participating in the services it’s probably easier to beat PlayStation Now than game pass. To be honest the best of the Nintendo switch online Expansion Pack subscription looks like N64 games and so they’re probably not much of a threat.
All three companies have been in the industry for more than a couple of decades. I'm sure Sony and Nintendo will survive just fine.
Xbox is now 3rd in market share after these purchases. Nothing to say about CCP owned
Tencent being 1st nor Sony being 2nd? And Game Pass has been said to be something that can be/is profitable by outside analysts. As usual, Adam has no idea what he's talking about...
@oconnoclast "rather than spending an extra $500 because it has like three games I really want to play but can't get elsewhere." Only three games? Not much of a problem for you then. Welcome to gaming in general. Not like your Nintendo doesn't have multiple exclusive games. Same with Sony. Where's my Splatoon on Xbox!? No fair!!....
I will definitely get my business insider information about this topic from a guy on TikTok...
Social media, and it's social mediocrity knows no bounds. Listening to people on those platforms, is no different than listening to the crazy dude scream "END TIMES, ARE NIGH!" Sensationalizing nonsense just to stay relevant or go viral.
Let’s take a look at this shall we? Firstly yes, the acquisition of Activision/Blizzard was massive and the sums involved crazy. They are paying more than Nintendo’s net worth - let that sink in. BUT.. GamePass and Xcloud means that those on tighter budgets can play games day one that they would not ordinarily be able to afford. How is that bad for gamers? It is not bad for gamers. It makes gaming more inclusive. It’s not a cheap hobby by any means but Microsoft are making one that anyone can have access to. Xcloud isn’t perfect. It’s not even that good yet tbh and Xbox gaming on the go isn’t really a thing because without decent wi fi or 5G - in the UK forget it unless you live in one of the big cities - it’s just not good enough.
But at home you can play without a console. Play on your iPad. And there are hundreds of games to go at.
For parents on a budget they can try Xcloud at home and see if the kids really want an Xbox. It’s a great way in for so many people.
As long as all companies do what they do and continue to do it well then I see no problem at all. Nintendo will stick to Switch and ensure that you can only play their games on their systems. It works so why change it? They won’t.
The idea that PlayStation is suddenly in some sort of major trouble is so laughable and wide of the mark it makes me think that some ‘analysts’ have been taking something too strong and should lay off the hard stuff!
Xbox is an eco system and of course they want it on as many systems as possible but it won’t stop people wanting a PlayStation 5. The PS5 will still beat Xbox sales wise this generation and by some margin. And that is not bad for any player. It gives everyone an opportunity to have access to even more games all of the time. Imagine if Sony bring a GamePass style service to us. That would be phenomenal. Imagine if for the cost of 2 controllers and 2 subscriptions you could have access to a crazy amount of games. How on Earth would that be bad? And fans of Nintendo will still enjoy those games and Nintendo will still be absolutely fine.
Analysts need to stop analysing nothing and just accept that gaming has never been better.
I mean, I don’t disagree with his logic in some aspects. I like Xbox and think the Activision and studio buyouts, however, are because Xbox realized they didn’t really have the studios Sony or Nintendo has at their disposal. It’s not a bad thing to build your first party line-up. However, the problem has been, since the acquisitions, that Microsoft has not generated the good will yet from the acquisitions in the form of excellent new titles. Gamepass has gotten great press, sure, but “the exclusives though” has been the argument for a while. If Xbox wants to dispel this logic, they simply need to have a catalog of strong first party titles this year and show that they want to play nice with Sony and Nintendo.
I really do feel too, that it should be noted that Activision wanted to be bought by Facebook originally. Would that have been a better alternative? Definitely not. Let Microsoft have them. The alternatives are worse. Sony and Nintendo definitely aren’t leveraging for Activision.
That guy looks like a kook. I’m not watching that.
@oconnoclast What is your solution to this? Product exclusivity can be frustrating, but it's also nothing new. And I get the uneasiness of these companies getting gobbled up by bigger ones. I appreciate that you are equally frustrated with Sony and Nintendo on it as well. I think one thing to note is that consumers are kind of creating this themselves. We participate in console war behavior and demand exclusives, so we can rub it in to others. We also expect consoles to be sold to us at a loss. We can't demand that without the exclusives that are needed to offset the loss. Look at the PC market. It's a much more open market. However, the financial barrier to entry is significantly higher than the console market.
This guy probably has an Amazon Prime subscription, nullifying every point he’s trying to make. I’d put money on it.
A lot of game “journalists” are showing there true colors after the activision/blizzard deal like this guy and Jason schreier. I get it it’s a threat to Sony. But these sane “journalists” praise when Sony does things that try to drive other out of business like they did with sega so please spare me the melodrama on how it’s “bad for the industry” No it’s bad for Sony and it’s legion of fanboys not for the industry.
@Gr81 That's actually something that I've wanted to point out as well, i.e. Sony literally drove out Sega and now they're not a console manufacturer anymore, much less developing games as they used to (I'm talking about their in-house teams, not studios like Atlus, Relic and so on). As much as people want to talk about how Microsoft is ruining Sony, how about the fact that Sony has ALREADY ruined another company.
And you know what the reason for that was? Because PlayStation appealed to a lot more people than Sega. And guess what, Microsoft is looking to appeal to a lot more people with Xbox compared to Sony. That's just how businesses are, either you get with the times or you're left behind. Ultimately, PlayStation turned out to be good for the gaming industry and so will Xbox.
@Trmn8r
Product exclusivity is bad for consumers. I know it is a norm but it is also bad for consumers. And in the end it hurts the console vendors because all three have separate R&D to make , manufacture and build an OS/Firmware for the consoles they sell.
And exclusives don't pay for the selling of consoles at a loss. Royalties from all software sold on the console, plus services and subscriptions recoup their money. Exclusives helps drive volume of consoles sold which indirectly drives where the money is made just like selling cheap consoles drives the volume.
The world would be much better if there was only one console platform and everyone developed for it. The costs of having three + iOS + Windows + Android is just really expensive for development studios and publishers.
Weird, I expected all these comments to agree with him. Haha.
Cod Microsoft do what he saying, probably yes. Are they doing that, I don’t know and neither does anyone outside of MS.
I've never heard of this guy. But now his name is out there. Congrats for the attention dude.
@Clankylad seems to me.like ..Career going nowhere lets rant so ppl will b talking about me ...... He just seems like a ps fanboy blaming Microsoft for everything wrong in the world
Someone give this bloke a series X and 6 month game pass he will soon flip the other way ....game pass is amazing and saving the games industry
Destin SEVERELY oversimplified the guy's thoughts. Microsoft is in a position to do what Adam says. HOWEVER, because at least at this current time Sony makes (let's be honest for a second) MUCH better games than does Microsoft, that's there ace in the hole. Gamers will still willingly pay for great games, so as long as Sony creates high-quality games they will survive. Also, if the games Microsoft produces AREN'T of high quality, their strategy won't work anyway, in the long term.
@Medic_Alert Whilst I will agree with you about 'costs' and potential income these services could be bringing in a month, you have to look at the evidence and what the 'company' are revealing in their Annual reports.
If you go back to July 2020, Aaron Greenberg himself stated that the Profit margin wasn't 'great' but it was still 'profitable'. In April, they had announced over 10m Subscribers and 15m by Sept 2020. Since then, they have more than doubled the number of Subs.
This is what Aaron Greenberg said:
“It’s a different mindset, because if you do optimise for profit… you can either say, “How do we get as much profit out of each customer?’ Or, do you pivot that [to its] opposite and say, ‘How do we add as much value to our fans, how can we actually over-deliver on value? And if you do that, you build fans for life.”
“Ultimately, we think long term that’s the right thing for the business, and will have long-term benefits for us. But, in the short term, yeah, it’s not a big profit play.”
Also if you look at MS, whilst they may not release a 'breakdown' of their finances with regards to gaming specifically let alone Game Pass, they are announcing year on year growth which, if Game Pass was a 'loss' maker, as more and more jump to the 'best' value instead of buying games etc as per usual, then you risk losing even more money - which hasn't been the case.
Of course MS doesn't get $10 from everyone of those 25m+ Subscribers every month, some may well be having a 'free' month (thanks to rewards or deals) whilst others could be paying more for Ultimate. I pay £11 a month for Ultimate, but thanks to 'rewards' from MS, I buy 2, get 1 free - so only pay £88 a year instead of £132. It's just 'easier' to illustrate that 'income' by keeping it 'simple' rather than try and complicate it with %ages of people on Ultimate paying more vs those paying less through deals to be more 'accurate'. Its easier to illustrate by taking a rounded 'down' number - like 25m (despite the fact it was 'over' 25m) and the 'base' price for GP in the US ($10 - but some may pay 'more' due to exchange rates and those opting for Ultimate) to give a 'general' idea of how much money that is coming into MS ($250m a month/$3bn a year). Whether that's 'exactly' what they receive or not is irrelevant, its illustrative of the potential of the service - long term, those who are on introductory deals $1 for 1 month are happy to pay their $10-$15 a month to 'keep' Game Pass too - so those on 'special' lower price deals are generally those who joined recently, not the long term 20m+ that joined a year or more ago.
@NeoRatt "The world would be much better if there was only one console platform and everyone developed for it." I'd be careful what you wish for with that. I think you are missing the mark on how competition creates an environment for innovation. If we all just had a Playstation and nothing else, what motivation would Sony have to ever innovate? If you wouldn't want EA to make all videogames, why would you want one company as the sole provider of a console? Nintendo is a prime example, time and time again, of how having an alternative console option and competition can allow innovation in gaming. And with Xbox and Sony now adopting PC standards for programming, as well as software tools for porting to the Switch, it's becoming easier and easier for developers to port their games to all devices.
Once sony and nintendo have been ran out of the console business due to Microsoft throwing their money over the place then il comeback to this article and agree with the guy.
As it stands right now Microsoft are still catching up to sony, playstation plus has more way more subscribers than gamepass subs and games with gold subs combined, even double the subscribers of gamepass, makes (in general opinion) better exclusives and its games sell a lot more in retail and digital, has won the last three console generations in terms of hardware and software sold, has more third party exclusives than xbox, has bigger Japanese support, has VR gaming support, have produced handhelds, currently leading this console generation in sales, playstation now will grow substantially once they sort it out.
So yes all these Microsoft purchases make sense as they want to catch up and then be on top so in a way I agree with this guy that Microsoft are using their pockets to doing anything to achieve that, which is perfectly fine as sony done it when they first joined the gaming scene to wipe out sega and get on top of nintendo
But, the day will come when Microsoft are on top due to their money, and then it's from there if its to be seen if Microsoft are going to ruin gaming by buying out the competition further. There's a difference from being on top to just annihilating the competition and making them submit.
Imagine a scenario in 20-30 years time where Microsoft own EA, Ubisoft, Bethesda, Activision, 2K, Warner Bros and a couple big Japanese devs, would you all still say the same things you are now?
If that scenario ever happens and Microsoft are the only one left in the console gaming business then they can do whatever they want and you will have to accept it, they could put the gamepass price up to £30 per month and you would have to accept it or never play games again.
Microsoft have enough in their arsenal now to be on top by the end of this gen with the gamepass, Bethesda and Activision, they have taken enough ip's away from playstation and nintendo to be on top in terms of software quantity, they are just behind in the revenue department which will change, so Microsoft need to stop with the buying of massive third party devs/publishers and concentrate on making the most with what they have now
This is all *****. Movies can be watched on all brands of TV since forever. Just make a big cloud already and end the console war.
Even if it transforms in an subscription war then, but at least people don't have to get multiple plastic chunks crammed in their living room.
The “Microsoft is evil” narrative at its finest.
Just a bitter Sony Pony..
@NeoRatt I agree with everything you said.
I think the real core concern is actually that with the recent moves MS has made with Xbox, that Sony and PS will actually be challenged and maybe even overtaken by Xbox. That's it. But that's enough to scare the fanboyish in to this hyperbolic language.
That's why there's never any concerns about Nintendo or Tencent brought up. It's a way of turning people against against Xbox because saying "Hey, join team PS!" wouldn't work.
These sorts of arguments, where one uses a more scary, more convincing argument against a thing, because the real reason is a joke, are used in politics all the time.
@Royalblues I agree they are , if sony had purchased activison it would a different story it would be its best for the Industry and f u Xbox u can't play this game ( spider man ) blah blah just like sony purchasing exclusives that's a great thing ...Microsoft do it oh no thats wrong
Edit ,destiny 2 weeks ago it was just a rubbish shooter that's from the creators of that crap halo ....now it's oh they produce the greatest shooters
@Richnj Sony should b worried that they are gonna lose their crown they have sat on there backsides way too long thinking they can't b touched and have got very arrogant with it in my opinion
You can tell this guy has grown up with PS dominating the market.
Did he forget how Sony forced Sega out of the console market?
Did he forget when Sony bought all the studios they have today?
Did he forget when Sony buys up timed exclusives?
Did he forget when Sony need killed off Xbox?
Man is either dumb and believes what he's saying or is it smart and is making some content thats getting him a ton of views and is really giving him a lot of publicity for his own benefit.....is HE trying to undercut Pegasus Nation for HIS own benefit??
So my seems to be chasing their massive cinematic games that CV are highly regarded and turning them into movies/shows. They chasing that GAAS microtransaction revenue as well as the PC market...they looking to do a SEGA but on their own terms i think. Making hardware is expensive...they will just be making content in the future is my guess for all platforms. Definitely no PS7....PS6.... perhaps but not sure about that also
@blinx01 Sega still hurts me, the Dreamcast is GOAT. Oh well, Xbox still carries its soul.
@Krzzystuff that's an interesting take about sony having no future consoles which would only happen if they had a dominate subscription service, Sony could create a subscription based service which includes their games (first party and third) and day one exclusives etc, their movies and TV series under the sony universal label and others they can get, their music platform, their anime platforms crunchyroll and funimation combined and also include discord integration. And then add gamepass as an extra add on along with ubisoft+ and EA access.
They have all the right tools and platforms to make them the leader in the subscription market but fail to see it
There are no "American Comedians" any more. Just embittered wokesters trying to squelch anyone's attempt to enjoy any fun or humor in their lives.
Removed - flaming/arguing
As long as Game Pass never has a 'Game Pass only' game, it's never going to achieve Netflix-like numbers. GamePass is nice But ultimately a luxury and unnecessary. If the competition wants to fight it, think of options that don't compete with it directly. All this talk about Microsoft dominating and all I see is them playing with the hand they were dealt
-remove subscription only games and make them purchasable
-remove online playing restrictions
-add more backwards compatibility with your own library
-create better titles
I mean people are right; Tencent is what we should be worried about, not Microsoft.
not only with games but they're Chinese, they love censorshop and buying shares in companies to do the censorship
@Richnj Xbox and Sony are after different things. Sony want to sell the most consoles, which they will.
Xbox want to have as many people playing their games on as many different platforms as they can - which they do.
Nintendo do their own thing.
And everyone will be just fine.
This Adam guy is just scaremongering and clearly had nothing better to do with his day.
Removed - unconstructive feedback
@UltimateOtaku91 MS isn’t chasing Sony or Nintendo. They have no desire to run either out of business. They would rather work with both of them. Perfect evidence is how well they are working with Nintendo now.
Saudi Arabia just invested in Capcom. Do you see where MS’s concern really is?
MS would rather put content on PlayStation and Nintendo consoles than see either out of business.
Playstation and Nintendo aren't going anywhere, anytime soon.
Relax, bro.
This dudes face is all over twitter so I'm thinking he did it for the attention.
@mousieone Saudi Arabia also had a stake in Activision which Microsoft bought, so this isn't stopping capcom from being able to be purchased or effect thier games in terms of quantity or quality.
He's normally right about stuff. If Xbox takes over then I'm glad I have a Series S.
@UltimateOtaku91 my first point was that a lot of companies and groups are involved in gaming that aren’t gaming companies. And I’m not sure you can say that Saudi Arabia didn’t have didn’t have an effect on Activision, but Tencent did unless imagined the Blitzchung incident. It’s not an issue until it is.
My other point about MS not trying to run Sony/Nintendo was also ignored
Oh, this clown. Yeah, I remember him. This was the guy who does revisionist history segments, lying about history to show social justice in a more positive light or something. He's a weirdo. Pathetic, laughable garbage.
@Beasley2K yeah it's obvious what Microsofts strategy is , alot of people on here seem to have taken this one guys opinion personally
lets not forget he blamed AT&T for his show being cancelled due to their merger i think he has a bias
@romando is your pic from Evil Quest that XBL indie game?
I have no idea who this person is or why his opinion (a misguided one judging by this article) is one I should consider.
It’s really weird to see people predicting a MS dominated future when they’re so very far away from that. Their competition is very strong and entrenched in the market. Yet this concern comes along at a time when we finally have three strong Console manufacturers with very different strategies, which is a really healthy position for Consumers.
Is it possible what we’re seeing is really concern trolling from Sony fans troubled that they have competition? I don’t remember this fretting about the state of the industry when Nintendo completely dominated in the late 80s, or the PS2 sold 3X Xbox and Gamecube combined.
It just doesn’t add up.
I imagine this guy must be a big Sony fan.
Xbox is 3rd. There is healthy competition. Not a monopoly.
I just ordered a Series S and can’t wait to jump into GamePass Ultimate. Such a great value with a ton of games I’ve never had the chance to play before!
@Medic_Alert this isn't a fanboy argument. Sony has a FAR deeper well of established,bankable franchises. It isn't close. It is what it is. Microsoft may get there, depending on what ORIGINAL games eventually come down the pipe from their new studios, but we'll have to see.
If you don’t want to get an Xbox or Gamepass, you can get a PlayStation, PS Plus, Nintendo Switch, EA All Access, Ubisoft version, Steam, Epic Games, GOG, Stadia, GeForce Now, Apple Arcade, Google Play version.
I don’t think we’re lacking in competition and alternative options.
Embrace, expand and extinguish. Wasn't that Microsoft's motto back in the day?
@Trmn8r
Are you talking about game innovation or platform innovation?
for game innovation there are plenty of developers and publishers competing to create innovation. Literally there are 1000's of games coming out each year.
If you are talking about platform innovation, I don't see a lot of innovation there. Both Sony and MS release consoles made of PC components. The OS/Firmware's are similar. A single OS/firmware with a console spec would continue to innovate, just like Windows, iOS, and Android continue to innovate to keep from falling behind with each other. CD, DVD, and blu-ray players didn't lack innovation even though they were standards. A standard OS/Firmware with a hardware spec would not kill platform innovation.
"American TV host and comedian Adam Conover"
Who?
To this day I can’t understand the rage and hatred for Xbox.
@Microbius
nah,I think it's more of a side effect, he seems confused…
While I understand what this guy's saying, I don't particularly agree with him, just because MS are trying to build gamepass up, it doesn't mean we are going to completely become one system.. Microsoft know they can not control everything, fair trade wouldn't allow it either. I genuinely believe Spencer wants people to be able to play all the games they want and how they want, anywhere in the world. His hopeing it will be such a great deal, that people will eventually subscribe even as a secondary console/gaming subscription. He doesn't want people to leave Nintendo and playstation, he wants us to have gamepass as an extra monthly sub. For me, I primarily play on the ps5 now, but I still love Xbox games in general, so my one X is ready to be booted as and when for gamepass. That's what they want.
For those who don't know, this is what this guy does. He has a show called "Adam ruins Everything." You can check it out on YouTube and it judges stuff throughout society in a rather negative light. Probably shouldn't take what he is saying seriously. It's just the character he portrays.
I already have so many games, I probably not live enough to play them all. Don't like new games so...Go Xbox Go !!
I don't know who this guy is and I don't care. He is completely irrelevant to me and my huge back catalogue of games I'm working through on gamepass.
This guy is a r*t*rd
@TheGrizMan It largely stems from the fact that MS is huge and huge company = bad mentality. Of course MS ain't a saint, but I'd say they are the least evil of the big five.
Atleast it's actually fun to work there, according to the employees that is.
His arguments are so weak that I don't know if he's being serious or just trying to deceive people to get more views. He should make a video about Tencent and its scary business practices or about Sony that it's still second and charges consumers upgrade fees and developers for Store inclusion and cross-platform play ripping off not just consumers but developers as well. Sony pays for timed exclusivity just to keep third-party games from Xbox for as long as possible, on top of their own exclusives. I'm sure that a video about Tencent or Sony would be much more interesting. This video is just a childish reaction from a biased Sony fanboy.
@Medic_Alert I think you and @LtSarge both have excellent, mostly balanced takes. I agree there are some positive things to be excited about.
Adam Conover's view is the most hyperbolic, tin foil hat wearing, fearmongering take it shouldn't be taken seriously as is. But there are shreds of genuine concern in there it's just put exceedingly poorly. As Tom Warren rightly said "There are reasons to be concerned about subscription services like Xbox Game Pass..." and there are.
Not least consolidation. In the last few generations, since the CD systems era, most games have appeared on all major platforms with a HANDFUL of exclusives. Before that many games only appeared on one or we had situations like Aladdin on SNES/MD/etc. where each system got a completely different game.
The current future looks more like a return to those old days where each system has a far larger percentage of games that may only appear on their platform. This isn't good for gamers, or gaming in general. Having the barrier to entry being another console or another service is only going to further fragment gamers. Imagine you could only listen to [insert favourite musician]'s new album if you had an Android or iPhone (we had this with Minidisc briefly, it wasn't good). I agree Microsoft is lowering those barriers with streaming, but it's still yet another subscriptions service.
We currently have this with television where people talk about a show that you may want to watch but it's on Paramount+ / Sky Go / Hulu / Virgin Media / BT / Disney+ / Netflix / Amazon Prime / or many others, and you aren't subscribed to that particular one. It's a real shame for gaming to follow this model and become even more fragmented.
You also talked about not liking the speculation and assumptions on finances etc. and that is fair to a point, but as long as Microsoft don't release any broken down figures that's all we have. It's also important to note this isn't pure guesswork. Game Pass isn't a new idea, it's just new to the medium. We have a wealth of other subscription services which all operate under the same basic model i.e. Get heavy investment to offer a "too good" offer initially, operating at a loss, then once you have captured the users slowly change that value offer and increase prices, so you can start turning a profit. Game Pass will be exactly the same. That's not just speculation unless Microsoft have somehow re-invented the wheel and solved the business model. Very, very unlikely.
We've already seen services like Uber and Netflix put prices up significantly, lowering the value or service quality, once they hit a certain ubiquity. I'd be amazed if this isn't Microsoft's long term strategy too. I can't think of one successful and profitable service that hasn't run like this. No one with a half a brain is suggesting they take a loss forever but they want to corner the market, or at least a significant portion of it first.
Anyway i've rambled long enough. I really liked your posts here and agree with 90% of it, just playing devils advocate really, and pointing out a few obvious concerns. Obviously for people like me that has access to all the main consoles it isn't a personal concern, but it is a concern I have for the wider industry and other fellow gamers.
He's on point on what MS wants to do, but it won't work at all.
PlayStation and Nintendo have so much good will with its fans that people will keep supporting them.
Anyone who thinks Phil Spencer doesn't want to wall PlayStation and Nintendo in their niche wall of only exclusives should really reconsider their thoughts. Jimbo is a big fat liar, so is Phil Spencer and a lot of people think Xbox is really pro consumer when they're not. He looks like a nice guy. Remember where he works at.
Is surprising how much defense for this there is from both sides, but we know both communities blindly defend both companies. They're not paying us and we're doing their work, lol.
Watch Sony get somebody like Capcom and/or Square Enix, a few key studios like FromSoftware, Kojima, Arcsystems or whatever and people will stop saying this nonsense. They will change their mindset to Playstation is beating Xbox once again real quick. Sony can counter this and it's why it won't happen.
Plus Gamepass won't even hit a good fraction of subs compared to what Netflix has. This Gamepass thing won't skyrocket to undercut other competitors. Watch if Gamepass stops dropping increasing numbers or current subs and the narrative dies. Either way, Xbox would just stop making their exclusives day 1 worst case scenario.
@Bleachedsmiles Exactly. If Xbox didn't buy Bethesda, Sony was going to bury them yet again. Sony's biggest studios numbers are making 2-3 projects now, plus timed exclusives (since Gamepass helps third party get convinced to make timed exclusives with Sony), and maybe a few studios bought here and there, Sony would've buried Xbox to 50m sales again. I mean look at the 2018 studios Xbox bought. 4 Years later and still we're not seeing the fruits of those.
@themightyant I want to point out two things. First, the situation we have today in the gaming industry is much worse. The fact that you have to fork out €500 (and even more given scalpers) just to have access to Nintendo's or Sony's games is absurd. It makes much more sense if the big three offered subscription services on PC, mobile devices, smart TVs and so on so that you can avoid this huge upfront cost, not to mention how much you have to pay for each game individually. Gaming is a very expensive hobby, but it doesn't have to be.
Second, TV subscription services are just as fragmented as the gaming business. If you want to play Mario, you have to buy a Switch. If you want to play Uncharted, you have to buy a PlayStation. If you want to play Halo, you have to buy an Xbox or subscribe to Game Pass. Not to mention PC and smartphone exclusives. And the thing is, even if the big three decide to go all in with subscription services, the fragmentation will still remain. That's never going to change, if you want people to choose your product or service, you have to give them incentives. It just makes business sense because it increases the competition and ultimately gives us better products/services.
Yes, Netflix has increased their price and put out less shows. But guess what, I got a mail last year from HBO that they've lowered the price for HBO Max and are also adding more content. Now Netflix will have to do something to counteract that, otherwise they'll lose subscribers not only to HBO but to other companies as well. Houston, we got competition.
@BAMozzy Man
Screw Destin. I hate people that aren't man enough to admit when they're wrong. Haven't seen the video, but in the past he has been a joke. I like the Ryan guy or whatever he's name is better.
@Medic_Alert I don't like PC (plus it's expensive) and I would never stream games. Ever. Streaming won't become a viable almost as good as the console until years and years so this affects people NOW.
So is the Xbox ecosystem really that open? I'm a console only gamer and even tho I have no problem buying two consoles, it may force others that can only afford one, to buy another. The point is, that it has an effect, even if they're options people don't like in the first place.
But I think the real issue is people crying that they have to buy two consoles now lol. I don't believe for a second that if you can get a ps5, you can't save up for an xbox a few years later. Buy games on sale so they can save up.
I think Adam Conover needs to be a little more informed on how big the game industry is. Some of his “information” isn’t exactly correct. He has some valid concerns, but overall, it sounds like he’s just rambling on about a topic he knows very little about. Maybe needs to educate himself on the topics he’s about to talk about before using the platform he has to spread his misinformation.
@Richnj Playstation guys have never felt how it's like to be in last place, and that scares them off lmao.
@Krzzystuff Why do people keep saying PS5 is selling at a lost? Sony already announced ps5 disc version (not digital) was no longer selling at a loss. They're actually making money for each console sold, even if it's $5. Xbox is the one that hasn't mentioned that I think.
@Medic_Alert Some people just want to have a PS and that's it. Either way, Since Bethesda, Sony has been making a lot of moves and now they'll make even more with Activision.
We'll see, but I hope people keep the same energy when Capcom gets bought.
@Medic_Alert I only care about the Japanese publishers. I don't think Xbox will manage them well.
Yeah. I want competition. It will force Sony and Xbox to make new Ips to fight the Ips the other team has. For example, Deviation is now working on a single player with multiplayer FPS to go against COD. Firewalk is also another shooter studio partnered with Sony and now they have Bungie. They should get Crytek and that's enough shooty shooty studios.
Sony still needs a couple of fighting and RPG studios tho, and it's why I think Capcom is the perfect westernized but still global fit
@LtSarge some fair points. But I’ll push back a little.
I agree that Microsoft is opening things up to an extent by making things available to stream, I made that point in my original post, but it’s still locked behind a subscription that will need to be paid for months and years, that £500+ is just split into smaller payments rather than being upfront. Anyone suggesting it’s just £9.99 is fooling themselves.
“TV subscription services are just as fragmented as the gaming business.” Not yet. Currently there’s 4 main big players and the vast majority of games come out on 3 of those (PC, XB, PS). If you own any one of those 3 you get to play the vast majority of games. That isn’t the same as TV where there are literally a dozen odd services and more and more content is becoming exclusive to each platform. When friends recommend tv shows and you have to check if you have access first. Sadly gaming is going the same way imho.
Those Mario, Halo, Uncharted's are currently the rare exceptions, if you have just one system you only miss out on a small proportion of games. But in the future it seems most platforms will have a much larger proportion of unique titles, that to me is a shame, it’s regressive, and people will be forced more than ever to have multiple systems/subscriptions. (Fine for us enthusiasts that already do it, not so for everyone else)
Why did HBO cut fees? Because their currently ‘only’ around 75 million subscribers and with other players entering the market they need to compete, they’re less than a third of Netflix and growth is slower than Disney+. Yes competition can be good to occasionally keep prices down on an individual service but if you have to subscribe to yet another service to get the same content you used to then that individual saving on HBO Max is worthless.
My concern for gaming in 10 years is you will need to sub to 5 or more gaming services to get the same diversity of games you used to be able to with just one or two consoles. That’s before we even start thinking that larger publishers like EA or Ubisoft want a slice of the pie, just like Paramount+, Peacock etc.
My stance on all the third party take overs are bad. I haven’t changed my mind on this.
It’s a shame so many of you are triggered by this.
@themightyant You're referring to their All-access plan, which is one of the many options given to you on how you want to play on Xbox. If you already have a PC or any computer really, you don't need to buy more hardware. In fact, you can just pay €15 and play through your web browser. It's that simple.
I see your point, but at the same time there are tons of TV shows and movies available on numerous services. For example, The Walking Dead is available on HBO Max, Disney+, Netflix in some countries and probably other services as well. Also, if you're the type of person who subscribes to a service one month at a time, then you can easily subscribe to e.g. Netflix one month, then HBO Max the next month, then Disney+ the month after that and so on. All subscription services cost around the same amount anyway (€10) so why wouldn't you be able to just switch services from month to month if you really wanted to watch everything?
And that brings me back to my point about how gaming is more fragmented because if you want to play PlayStation games, you have to fork out at least €500 for the hardware. Then maybe you don't want to play on PS anymore and instead want to play on Nintendo. Then you'll have to cough up €400 just to play Switch games. It's literally cheaper and more convenient with subscription services because they're available on multiple platforms that you already own and they cost about the same each month anyway. Then you get to watch everything you want, that's literally what I'm doing right now. Last year I subscribed to HBO Max and watched through the entire Game of Thrones series. Then I subscribed to Disney+ and watched all the MCU movies. And now I'm subscribed to Netflix and catching up on shows like The Witcher. It's genuinely a great and flexible method to consume media. You have Disney, Marvel and Star Wars in one place; DC, Warner Bros etc. in one place and Netflix and their shows in one place. It can't get more convenient than that.
Regarding your third paragraph, you don't need to be subscribed to multiple services at the same time. One month could be spent on Xbox Game Pass, the next on PlayStation Game Pass and the one after on Nintendo Game Pass.
Regarding your fourth paragraph, I'm kinda confused now. Here you're saying that services share the same content, yet in your second paragraph you argue that there are so much exclusive content on each service. And that's kinda the point, there is enough exclusive content on each service that it makes sense to switch between them every month, even if they share a lot of the same content.
To your last point, do you not think about how much money we spend on video games today? €500 at a minimum for PS5/Series X and €400 for a Switch, almost €1000 for two consoles. Then factor in all the games you pay for individually, ranging from €10 to €60 each. We're spending so much money on video games when we could be paying €10 every month for access to hundreds of titles. €10 each month means that I get to play games for almost four years instead of having to buy a new console for that exact price (€500/€10 per month = 50 months = roughly 4 years). I'll happily subscribe to one of five services each month rather than having to buy multiple consoles and paying for each game individually. Like I said, it's cheaper and more convenient.
Give it a rest man it needed to happen the same old same old was going nowhere Don Phil will not break in your home and steal your toys !
@mousieone we all need each other
1. Tale a recent news involving a celeb, an organization or a group of people 2. Say “he/they are doing something that will hurt you and you are not fully aware of it and in the end they’re building a trap around you be careful!!! “ 3. Add the most monochromatic analysis you can think of 4. Let it go viral. Now everybody is talking about you. Well done!!!
@Medic_Alert Xbox' current problem os the question of 'when?' They've done a great job of announcing a bunch of things, but outside of Bethesdas new game, they really need to start giving us an idea of when exactly some of the MANY games they've announced will actually come out. Every time you turn around Sony has another game dropping. Announcements need to become street dates.
@LtSarge Again some fair points. But we seem to be going in circles confusing each other.
I wasn't talking about their all access plan. I'm talking about the cost of subscriptions services over the course of a generation. People love to claim "just pay £/€/$15" and compare that to the price of a console but that's not really a fair apples to apples comparison.
A console generation lasts around 7 years. That £450 console cost, while paid upfront, is spread over that time. Meanwhile during a console generation those subscription fees add up. Game Pass Ultimate for 7 years is £1,260. It we're going to compare numbers lets make it fair. But even that £1,260 doesn't get you the games YOU want to play, only a pre-set selection. There's more to pay on top of that for the games you actually want to buy/play.
My point about fragmentation is where we are going, not where we are right now. CURRENTLY most games are available on most platforms. But the industry is being consolidated and more games are becoming exclusive to one platform or another. Additionally more and more subscription subscription services are appearing. Hence in future you will need more than one subscription to get the same content you can currently get on just one platform now. That is fragmentation. Lots of different subscription services each with their own unique exclusives. To get access to the same content we currently have on one platform will in future take multiple subscriptions, this will add up quickly and isn't convenient.
You are right you don't HAVE to be subscribed to them all at once. But i'd guess that you are an exception and most people DON'T drop their subscriptions month to month. Not least the business model starts to fail if everyone is doing this. To counter that many games subscriptions also punish you for not going annual by charging you a large premium for a single months subscription. e.g. EA Play Pro is £14.99pm or £89.99pa, twice the cost per month. PS+, PS now and others are all similar, Game Pass is more of the exception.
Additionally while subbing in and out may work for YOU, data suggests most people don't subscribe to TV like this. Not least consuming longform media and entertainment simply doesn't fit into neat 1 month time chunks. Unlike TV people play together online, subbing in and out doesn't work conveniently with that. The average gamer wants to dip into Halo with some friends then have a go on FIFA, COD and Fortnite not be like "sorry this isn't my Halo/Game Pass month I'll be back in a few months." Most have more than 1 tv subscription on the go at any time and it will be the same for games.
@themightyant "A console generation lasts around 7 years. That £450 console cost, while paid upfront, is spread over that time."
That's just your assumption though and not how everyone sees it. I paid €400 for my Xbox One in 2015 and I definitely wouldn't say that I got my return on investment. I barely used it after all, it wasn't until 2020 when I started using Game Pass on it when I finally felt that my purchase was worth it. But there are plenty of other people who spend €500 on a console and only play a few games throughout its life cycle. The advantage with a subscription service is that you're given a very cheap entry point into a gaming ecosystem and from there you can decide what to do next. Keep paying to use it, use another service or just stop subscribing altogether. It's a much more affordable and flexible option than what we have today.
Your comparison isn't exactly fair either. For starters, you're using the most expensive tier of Game Pass as an example instead of the cheapest one. Regular Game Pass is €10, €120 a year and €840 for 7 years.
Let's say that it costs €1200 in total for 10 years. How much have you spent on gaming for the past decade? I highly doubt you've spent only €1200 considering you're a Nintendo, Xbox and PlayStation gamer, which means you've bought their systems and their games. Personally, I'd say for the past decade that I've probably spent over €10,000 on gaming, including video games, consoles and accessories. Basically, if I'd only been subscribed to Game Pass during these ten years, I would've only spent 10% of that amount.
"But i'd guess that you are an exception and most people DON'T drop their subscriptions month to month. Not least the business model starts to fail if everyone is doing this."
You do realise that people are subscribing and unsubscribing all the time, which means that those 100 million subscribed to e.g. Netflix this month aren't exactly the same 100 million from last month.
But okay, let's say that you subscribe to 2-3 different services at the same time. Or rather, let's say that you're subscribed to Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo Game Pass and you're paying €10 a month to each of their services, i.e. €30 each month. That means you're paying €360 per year. How much do you spend on gaming per year? Because I can definitely tell you that I'm spending a lot more than €360 per year since I play on Xbox, PlayStation and Nintendo. In other words, it's much cheaper for me to be subscribed to the big three's services than constantly buying their consoles and games individually. Because that's the key difference, with subscription services, consumers will pay LESS and companies will earn MORE because the services will reach more people on multiple platforms instead of one single platform. That's the whole appeal of the subscription model for companies.
No matter how you twist and turn this argument, it's still much cheaper to subscribe to multiple services than paying for consoles and individual games, both in the short run and in the long run.
@LtSarge I agree I made many assumptions, as have you, to prevent this becoming a dissertation. There are so many different factors and we're all coming at it from different places.
I agree subscription services give you a cheap ENTRY into each gaming ecosystem but if things go the same way as TV that isn't necessarily going to be cheap over the life of the system.
YOUR assumption is that ALL the games you want to play are included on Game Pass and the equivalents. What about games like Resident Evil Village, THPS 1&2 Assassins Cred, Far Cry etc. Many games don't come to these services. That subscription fee is just the start of it. Unless you're happy playing a smaller sub-section of games.
Yes I took the most expensive Game pass option as playing online is a key feature for many players. I was also accounting for an expected price hike in future.
"No matter how you twist and turn this argument, it's still much cheaper to subscribe to multiple services than paying for consoles and individual games, both in the short run and in the long run." Hard disagree. Maybe for enthusiast gamers like you or me that actually make use of the service and play a wide variety of games but the average player doesn't and will want to play a lot of games outside it.
Still if I have to sub to services like Game pass for all 3 major consoles manufacturers and several other publishers just to access the games I want to play and can access now then it may not be cheaper in the long run.
@K1LLEGAL Yes it is! But I played it on Steam.
@themightyant "YOUR assumption is that ALL the games you want to play are included on Game Pass and the equivalents. What about games like Resident Evil Village, THPS 1&2 Assassins Cred, Far Cry etc. Many games don't come to these services."
Are we not talking about the future here? Or did I miss something? Because I'm pretty sure we're talking about how services will be like in the future and if consoles are going away, then where the hell would you be playing these games otherwise?
"Hard disagree. Maybe for enthusiast gamers like you or me that actually make use of the service and play a wide variety of games but the average player doesn't and will want to play a lot of games outside it."
We're talking from a comparative standpoint here. If one person only plays one game on one console today, then the equivalent would be one person playing one game on one service in the future. If I'm playing on Nintendo, Xbox and PlayStation consoles today, then my equivalent would be Nintendo, Xbox and PlayStation services in the future. Therefore, if I'm spending let's say €1000 this year on Nintendo, Xbox and PlayStation games, then the future equivalent would be €10 per service per month, €30 for all three services per month and €360 in total per year. How's that not cheaper? Even if each service was €15 or €20, that would still be cheaper than paying for games the traditional way today (€540 and €720 respectively).
If one person bought a PS5 for a minimum of €500 today and one game per year, let's say FIFA, which is €70 for a PS5 game, that's €570 for the first year and €120 per year in terms of Game Pass. Next year they buy FIFA again for another €70, so the total becomes €640 for console plus games and €240 for Game Pass. Third year €710 and €360 respectively. Fourth year €780 and €480 respectively. Fifth year €850 and €600 respectively. Sixth year €920 and €720 respectively. Seventh year €990 and €840 respectively. Eighth year €1060 and €960 respectively. Ninth year €1130 and €1080 respectively. Tenth year €1200 and €1200 respectively. It will have taken a full decade before that person would reach break-even point. And guess what, 5-6 years after he bought a PS5, PS6 would've come out and that would've added another €500 to his total on top of the yearly fixed cost of €70 per game.
I've given you two examples, one where an enthusiast like us and one where a casual gamer are buying games and consoles today versus subscribing to a service in the future. So yes, it will be cheaper both in the short run and in the long run to pay for subscriptions than for consoles and games if you're looking at it from a comparative standpoint.
Sony fanboys are absolutely pooping their pants and crying about this right now.
"Are we not talking about the future here? Or did I miss something? Because I'm pretty sure we're talking about how services will be like in the future and if consoles are going away, then where the hell would you be playing these games otherwise?"
I don't think ALL games are going to be day 1 on services for a long time yet, but there will be a lot of exclusives. Some are still going to be buy to own, that is the extra expense you haven't accounted for here. Where is Resident Evil Village, Witcher 4 or similar going to fit into all this? As I said at the top the subscription fee is only the start of it. It's not £10pm (£20pm, £30pm) and you're done.
I really like your optimism for the future, but I just don't think it's going to be the cheaper rosier future you imagine. Though I sincerely hope i'm wrong and you're right.
Looks like this is a controversial topic. I have to agree that MS does seem to be taking a very aggressive strategy of acquisitions and pricing to get a bigger chunk of the market share this generation as they fell behind and want to close the gap.
While the worry that this'll lead to a monopoly seems to discount the other massive players in the industry having massive companies buying up market share rather than growing organically isn't a good thing.
First of all, Adam who? I've never heard of this guy. At all. What does he even host?
Second, why is a comedian suddenly an expert in recurring payment business models? Or is that the punchline?
Third, I'm curious what network this guy works for and if that network obtains part or all of its revenue stream via recurring payment business models (hint: There's almost zero chance they don't.....)
EDIT: So I answered a few of my questions with a Wikipedia search. The guy started out with a Youtube show (partially funded by Youtube Red/Premium subscriptions), then moved on to voice characters and bit parts for Netflix shows. NETFLIX. Also had a role on a Nickelodeon/CBS-Viacom cable subscription channel show.
So this guy basically puts food on the table with revenues from subscription services......is ranting about how subscription services are a money losing proposition that doom a free industry.
</America>
Tap here to load 106 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...