Xbox Reportedly Paid '$5-10 Million' For Guardians Of The Galaxy On Game Pass

@Kooky_Daisuke
Yes I agree. Hoping for a Spring Showcase in May to highlight some titles before e3.

It's a quality game, worked my way up to chapter 11 over the weekend. Enjoying the story and performances more than the movies. And I'm a big fan of the movies.

Considering the monthly revenue Game Pass probably generates to microsoft, with 25 million subscribers, this is not expensive.

MS has stated they have various options open to them - a single upfront cost, paying for (or at least contributing to) development costs, paying a sum for each 'individual' download through GP etc etc.

It may well of been a 'fixed' sum for everyone that downloads the game. With over 25m subs, if MS paid 50c for 'every' person that downloads it, 10-20m downloads would give $5-10m in revenue....

I know it seems like a 'lot' of money, but the reality is that 25m people are paying in around a quarter of a 'billion' every month and that $5-10m equates to 25m GP subscribers paying about 20c-40c each out of that '$10' a month cost for MS to add GotG

It's very believable but at the same time quite vague, after all $5-10 mill is a very big spread.

@BAMozzy yeah my guess for square games specifcally is they always take the upfront money but you are right we know that some companies games are even based on hours played after a smaller upfront amount (paradox is the one we know has this deal)

Not sure why this analyst says not many publishers would take this type of deal. The game is out of its first quarter were majorty of sales are, the game was considered a disappointment. So why not recoup some cash and maybe with some talking about how great it is. Make a few extra sales in the process

@raftos Right? Microsoft is pulling in roughly $250M a month from Gamepass and they paid $5-10M for a game that is on there for multiple months. Doesn't seem like a bad deal at all.

@Terrin And on top of that, you have reached significantly 'higher' numbers and some of those GP players will end making the game a part of their permanent collection. Then when they make GotG2, the 'initial' sales may well be better.

Square Enix seem to be a 'difficult' publisher to work for. The only 'dev' who doesn't know how 'good/bad' GP has been for them is 'People can Fly' who made Outriders. And, like Outriders, GotG had 'disappointing' sales according to SE and may of affected developer bonuses.

I can see SE using Sub services to screw 'devs'. If they have a 'bonus' on reaching say 10m sales in the first year, they get 'money' from MS and don't/can't count them as 'sales'. As we know, some devs may well prefer a 'fixed' upfront fee, a guaranteed figure regardless. Others may well want money to make and release the game, others may want a fixed 'fee' for every person that 'trys' the game whilst others may have a 'different' fee based on percentage complete - after all, a SP game isn't as likely to be 'sold' if finished when it departs GP where as Live Service games may well trigger a 'digital' purchase as people want to keep playing - and more likely to have its own 'store' too for extra content/MTX's etc.

There is a LOT of different options and as MS state, its about the 'best' option for that 'project', for the developer/publisher. If they think its 'better' for them to have a fixed upfront fee, then that's the route they'll go. For us, the gamer, it makes 'no' difference because we still get to play the 'full' version of the basic game. It doesn't change the access so MS are still offering a 'great' value service that the Consumer loves.

As I said, $5-10m, however that fee was 'generated' (one off up front charge, per download etc), it works out at about 20-40c of the $10 charge from 25m subscribers went to SE for GotG. With 10m subs, that 'fee' would still only be about 50c-$1 of the $10 and with 50m subs, that would be 10c-20c each paid....

With 25m+, 20-40c out of that $10 a month isn't really a lot to pay for access to an award winning AAA game in my opinion and don't really care too much about the 'costs' as long as I see 'value' in the service and that the devs are 'happy' with it too.

@Kooky_Daisuke your joking right, this year we have Redfall, Stalker 2, Starfield, Scorn, Tunic(awesome game), Ark 2, and a Warhammer game... thats the ones i know about that should launch this year and thats before any surprises that may come down the line that i dont know of.

@RedShirtRod you genuinely believe the majority of people are paying 10.99????

I paid £3.40 a month for 3 years. I know people that paid as little as £2…. The Gold upgrade is a legit way to get GPU. I’d wager barely anyone is paying 10.99….. with third party sellers selling gold off cheap on the regular I would wager even MS themselves don’t know what the average people are paying for gold. I paid MS £1 direct for three years.

Surely people here aren’t paying 10.99 a month. When Xbox are offering a far better deal themselves?

They overpaid imo🤣🤣🤣🤣 well ripped off

Finished the game in 2 weeks and loved every minute of it. Pretty much I paid the month of game pass just for this game

At $30, that comes out to 167-334k($5-10m) units sold. Could GotG sold that many copies, without the gamepass deal?

Again I'm going to say people need to heed caution and be realistic, not buying into this, ohhhhhh game pass best deal in video games.

The business model is simply not sustainable at $15 unless you want to play those terrible 8 bit NES games that vast majority of game pass is.

If people are going to continue to look and hope for the new AAA titles, well, get ready spend $40 or $50 month. That is the realistic outlook. Microsoft is doing the street corner dealer business model. Hey, buddy. Try this. First one free. Then next one will be......

$5-10m on top of any additional purchases that goes on to deliver. Its better than 'NO/little' money coming in from 'sales' of the 'discounted' game that even though discounted, isn't really selling anymore with people spending money on Elden Ring and/or any of the new releases.

Those people who now get to play it via GwG may also go on to buy the game to 'keep' it permanently and/or be more interested in buying their 'next' game.

Point is, its $5-10m more than they would of gotten as most who would of bought, would likely of already purchased as its been discounted and on sale too. Long term too, they could get more 'sales' as GP subs opt to buy - I purchased on Disc during the Black Friday sales but playing it now through GP so I don't 'need' to keep swapping discs - but others may well make a purchase as a result of 'trying' the game first.

If the game is an enjoyable one for the player, they are more likely to be interested in the devs next project, especially a sequel. So building a fanbase around the Franchise and/or developer will help long term...

I already bought GOTG as it’s a fantastic game. I’m glad it’s getting a chance to shine on GamePass.

@RedShirtRod that's assuming that everyone pays for Gamepass, when I got my Series S I got 3 months free with the console and I've redeemed another 3 months through MS Rewards, I've not paid a penny for it in the 6 months I've been back on Xbox.

@BartoxTharglod they said a while back it had under performed but they probably looked at how well Spiderman did on PS4 and thought they couldn't fail. I played GOTG on PS4 last year and I loved it I highly recommend it

@PhhhCough and that's assuming all the money of that '$30' price is going to Square Enix. Around 30% (normally) of the cost goes to the retailer for its costs, overheads and 'profitability'. Physical media costs money to produce and distribute globally and no doubt, they had advertising costs to cover and studio's to run from their 'limited' income generated from each 'individual' sale.

The reality is that it would likely take a LOT more sales at $30, taking into consideration how much of that $30 the Publisher actually sees, to reach $5-10m. A game that's been on 'sale' since about a month after release is not exactly flying off shelves months later.

The other option of course 'could' be drop the price further and hope to sell 'more' to offset the lower profit margin. Maybe that would 'sell' more but probably not enough to get $5-10m instantly.

From what I can research, GotG sold about 4m copies in 5months and no doubt, the majority of those were in the first few months. I bought the game for £30 in November - a month after release and I doubt those that 'didn't' buy before it went to Game Pass despite it being discounted to £/$30, are going to purchase it in March to generate $5-10m for SE.

5 to 10 million, So actually he does not know and is a guess. Maybe it does not even work that way. Oh and this is off someone one Twitter ok so that makes it fact. Has anyone even verified this guy is even who he claims he is?

@Kopite @Stocksy It's impossible to know for certain. Monthly service fees are always more popular than yearly ones and while there are always going to be people who go looking for deals, the $10 price is the low end, not the high end. Ultimate is $15 a month, which is why I assumed it offset those getting discount deals.

Once again, everything we have to go off is assumptions but I highly doubt the majority of players are going through the hassle of getting discounts. Forums like these are going to have a larger number of them because that's the kind of people we are. If the larger public knew about the deals (like the EA pass awhile back) Microsoft would just stop offering them.

@Stocksy almost everyone I know pays full price. The general public is way to lazy to look for deals sure alot converted from gold to ultimate but after that expires (most didn't do a build up of a gold prior) they just let it charge monthly. And I'll be honest once my 2 years of gamepass ultimate lapses (from all access purchase) I'll probably do the same of just a standard monthly fee

Its a lot of money, and it makes no economic sense to me, but its not a lot to microsoft, who will continue to throw money and effort into growing the user base.
I continue to have my doubts about it being good for the industry to get used to a model that is unsustainable for anyone without the magic money trees, but all the time they are giving, I'm gonna be right here taking. Be rude not too!

@GuyinPA75 Sony fanboy go to comment is worrying about how subscription services (particularly gamepass, of course) are not sustainable. And every time I read it it always leaves me with the same question… so?
Gamepass is benefitting the gamer right now, that’s undeniable in the value it’s offering the gamer right now. I’m one of the gamers it’s benefitting. I have no shares in Microsoft. I don’t care how much money they’re making from gamepass. I don’t spend my days worrying if the publishers or devs on it are making money. My only concern is if I’m benefitting from subscribing to it.
See, what you will all come to realise when you look back is that this, RIGHT NOW, is us gamers having it never better. And before it gets worse, and prices do ultimately go up, there’s going to be more services fighting over us. These are the good days. Why the hell do so many of you waste them by worrying about if it’s ‘sustainable’? If ms are making money from these deals? By the time you get your answer you’ll have wasted just how good you had it.
Seriously, wake up - take advantage of this.

@Bleachedsmiles Typical. Sony fanboy? Do not own a Playstation because utterly despise their controllers. Been with Xbox since launch day of console, beta tested Xbox Live and been continuous member of Live from the start (almost 19 years now), Xbox Alpha Insider (over 6 years), owned every console since launch, several Xbox special edition consoles, several Elite Controllers v1, several Elite Controllers v2. I can go on and on. Basically huge Xbox fan most likely before you were even born and I've forgotten more about Xbox than you've known.

Attempt to flame all you want. But what I'm saying will happen. Another example of what I'm taking about (another example before you were born, probably). Netflix used to primarily be a disc service. Then they introduced streaming as part of the plan. For FREE at that. One disc out a time unlimited WITH streaming $9.99 month. Then what happen? They separated streaming from disc. Needed a plan just for streaming, if you wanted that. This was before streaming was even big. Discs were very, very, much part of people's media consumption. But what happen? They cut people out or had to pay more to keep it. The corner dealer business model, of hey, this one is free....

This is the road Game Pass is going down. They will try to mask it by saying Xbox Live is part of the plan (as they do now) but have you tried buy just a year of Xbox Live by itself lately? Game Pass will skyrocket in price within next few years. Unless as shared above in my "Sony fanboy" post you enjoy the 8 bit indie games that the service is riddled with.

@GuyinPA75 calm down dear. I didn’t say you was a Sony fanboy did I? If it makes you feel any better I’ll rephrase… 99.9% of the time I read about ‘gamepass not sustainable’ is concern from those that don’t even use gamepass in the first place.
And the point still stands…why are you wasting your time caring right now instead of simply taking advantage of the fact and enjoying?
Netflix used to offer discs? And offer streaming free?…so? Technology grows and becomes more accessible and cheaper. I can’t think of one single person with a Netflix account who is currently complaining that they have to stream content and no longer get to wait for a disc in the post. I’ve never once watched Netflix, prime, now tv, Disney +… and thought to myself “man, I miss lovefilm”…have you? Nor have I ever watched a movie on those and thought “what a shame I can’t own the physical disc of this”. The options still there…and when the options not something else will be there - I’ve never once gone into a store and thought “damn, I wish I could get this on VHS” … I don’t get what you’re concerning yourself about. You get cut out of something you either adapt and catch up, or vote with your wallet. Money will always go with the majority…Netflix stopped offering discs why?
Game subs will get to the point where streaming content will become more favourable than downloading it. And yes, maybe they’ll create another tier on gamepass where cloud streaming is separate if that’s what’s concerning you? But why the hell are you worrying about it today?
Technology always moves forward. You can’t control progress. It’s not a bad thing.

Xbox live is archaic and has served its purpose. It shouldn’t be charged for at all at this point. 2022 with cross play games and the biggest games being f2p shouldn’t have mp locked behind paywalls for console gamers…particularly on Xbox where those exact same games are also released on platforms without paywalls offering the same experience. So if they do drop it from gamepass ultimate and replace it with cloud beta that you currently get anyway it’s no bad thing. You’re not losing the ability to play online.

If gamepass sky rockets in price then guess what…you have an option to vote with your wallet and not pay for it. Again, look at Netflix…you’re not under a contract there, you can pick it and put it down whenever you like. And there’s plenty other subscriptions offering you deals to try them in the mean time. If Netflix had no competition there would be cause for concern. But their pricing will always be held to compete with other streaming services…and you’ll see the same with gaming.

@Kooky_Daisuke $5-10m is nothing though. Games be costing $100m (big ones). Cyberpunk was $300m.

@Bleachedsmiles What was so wrong with buying games? It worked (except for some publishers that basically tried to scam like EA).

I want to be clear. It's mostly AAA day 1 games I have an issue with. Indies, double A and old AAA games are fine.

We didn't need services and you're not getting the big picture. It may look like a good deal (honeymoon phase), but once they don't reach their goal and can't sustain it, they'll nickle and dime you every day of the year for the AAA games that will cost $100m or more. They'll make grinding worse and prices higher. Give you less content. You'll take it because it's "free" or at no extra cost to play one extra game.

I don't give a damn about MS or Sony's money, but if somehow that affects the quality of the product, that's where I take interest.

We don't want mtx and less content in our games. That's it.

@RevGaming who are you? And where have I said it’s bad or wrong to buy games?

The big picture? The big picture is change is inevitable. Streaming games will one day become the norm…that’s just how it is.
Just like the vast majority of us now purchase digital games (to the point where both Sony and ms releases dedicated hardware for digital sales day 1 this gen) one day we’ll simply preference streaming…just like the vast majority of us do now with our movie/music media.
Of course this can come with negatives. But also positives. Right this second MS and Sony charge hundreds for storage space. The need for storage is no longer an issue. The need to wait for downloads of games or updates becomes no longer an issue. The need for £450/500 machines will one day no longer be an issue. The sale of mid gen upgrades are gone. The need to compromise graphics over performance will no longer be an issue.
It all depends on how you look at it.
Your fears of them nickel and dime every day of the year holds no water. Name me one subscription service that has increased in price every day of the year? That’s just an absurd fear for a hypothetical service that not even the most apologetic hardcore fan would put up with.
‘They’ll make grinding worse and prices higher and give less content’ - maybe so. But we’ve literally just seen that with physical right now where Sony charges £70 for gt7 (a £10 increase over rrp last gen). Increased the amount of grinding it takes to earn credits. Offered less content. And added more mtx. This is a physical game that’s outside any current subscriptions. So…
Outside of subscriptions we’re also constantly seeing broken unfinished games released…games that require an always online connection…games filled with loot boxes…games with locked content…games that require day 1 patches as now considered normal.
So yeah we’ll probably see similar shinanigans with games on subscription services going forward…but given we’re already seeing them now you may as well enjoy the honeymoon.
The big changes I can see are probably shorter games (but then the vast majority of people only play around 20% of most games they pick up anyway…and that’s probably being generous). And the real possible concerning one of intrusive adds in our subscriptions - Nowtv is a good example, where you pay a subscription for the service but before your selected program starts they’ll often play an advert you’re unable to skip. I can see this happening one day for gaming.

@GuyinPA75 I would like to turn your attention to a service called Netflix spending millions upon millions on creating content on some 10$ per month membership. The model seems sustainable enough.

@Bleachedsmiles Where did I say that you said it was wrong? lol.

Meh. I won't be gaming via streaming only. Never. You can kiss goodbye hundreds of millions of gamers that care about pin point actions. People who don't stream will always have the advantage. Always. Good for you if you want an inferior way to game.

Please don't put digital and streaming together. Completely separate things. Please don't put gaming and movies/tv together. We consume both things different and it still baffles me comments like yours.

What's so bad about downloads lol? If you have internet to stream, you have enough to download lots of games per day. Storage is fine. Anyone who needs more than 1 TB is lying to himself.

Well whatever dude. If you want to take it with absurd time sinks to get anything, go ahead. Enjoy THAT kind of gaming. Rather pay $70 upfront. I got a life and don't want to be a money whale to fully experience the game. Yes. Gt7 patch was horrible. It would be x10 worse if it was "free" on a service.

@RevGaming You asked what’s wrong with buying games? Suggesting I had suggested it was? …or were you just asking yourself within a message to me? 🤷🏻

There’s still options to buy physical/digital media with movies/music. I can’t see that changing with gaming any time soon…so you’re golden.

Which console even has 1tb of storage to play with?

The comments of comparing gaming to movie/music concerning how entertainment is adopted as technology moves forward and the reasons why baffles you because you probably don’t understand the point being made. You’re making two vital mistakes. 1) You’re viewing streaming from a lens of today. 2) You’re neglecting that the vast majority of PlayStation/Nintendo/Xbox install base are casual gamers.

I’m not sure what the ‘absurd time sinks’ is referring to?

Games like GT7 being 10x worse if it was released day 1 on a subscription service depends on the publisher surely? I mean we’ve already seen racing games by different publishers release on subscriptions that aren’t 10x worse with mtx and grinding. Maybe a like for like game like the next Forza will be 10x worse…I don’t think that’s a particularly safe bet though.

@Bleachedsmiles Exactly. I didn't say you said it was wrong, lol.
Nope. Stop assuming stuff. It was a normal question. Many people think there's always a cocky intention.

You get my point of the 1TB. Stop being technical hehe.

Those casual gamers actually care having the advantage. Don't they play battle royale and want to win? They don't want to be held up. Again. Don't compare movies and gaming because of the interactivity. The interactivity part changes things a lot. It's why some of us prefer games over movies and why it's harder to make games over movies. It's why spend more time on a particular game vs a movie. It's why we pay $70 for a game but not for a movie.

Wasting 20 hours to unlock a character in a game. Example: Siege, and that one costs $60. Imagine if it was "free". It would be 100 hours. I don't enjoy that type of gaming.

Nope. Depends on the money they will make. Like I said above. 20 to 100 hours is a huge difference. It's a made up number but you get the point. Day 1? Only Forza. Simulators that uses most of the assets aren't good examples of high budget games. When you look at gears it did happen from 4 to 5. We'll see, by november 2023 I will have a conclusion.