Descenders Publisher Shoots Down Claims That 'Xbox Game Pass Is Bad For Devs'

I think we have seen enough stories from devs on both sides of the argument to confirm that GP works well for some, not for others. This dev is clearly happy with the deal but then there's stories like Outriders where being GP was not enough to make that game profitable which I would imagine is part of the point of GP from a developer perspective. Get an upfront payment for your game to ensure it will at least make some profit.

Sure there's different budgets for different games to consider but at the very least it's not a perfect system but then what is? If you don't release on GP then you need to convince customers your product is worth the money the dev is asking for which isn't easy. There are pros and cons to GP like any other service.

Knowing you are getting ALL your development costs paid and already in profit before it even gets played is definitely great for developers and sets them up nicely to start work on their 'next' project without worrying about finances.

I know People can Fly (Outriders) may not be 'happy' but that is more down to Square Enix (publisher) and the arrangements they had under them. If they had to 'sell' 8m copies to get 'bonuses' and then Square Enix negotiated with MS to put Outriders in GP, keep it in GP for over a year, to limit sales and keep the money themselves, insuring they don't pay the devs because the actual sales aren't high enough.

Every 'developer' - whether MS owned or Independent has had positive things to say about GP. The ones that haven't, are those that are employed by Publishers and don't negotiate or deal with MS themselves. They are at the mercy of their own deals with their Publisher - but generally 'happy' to reach so many people, even if they don't 'know' or 'feel' financially rewarded because their Publisher doesn't reward them and can actually work against them if their Publisher is unscrupulous...

At the moment, for some small devs who don't want the risk, taking MS money is giving them some certainty that is very valuable. If MS were actually trying to make money I'm not sure it would work, but whilst they are prepared to run GP at a loss I absolutely get that it helps such devs.
I still don't think its good for the longer term interests of software development and companies like this will simply scale back the quality and scope of their games if MS payments shrink in the future, which would be a worry. But for now we are all riding the wave of free MS money and wandering where and when it will land....

@Titntin Who knows what the future holds for services like Game Pass and their effect on games and studios, but as for your point about MS running it at a loss, Phil Spencer stated at the end of last year that GP is already sustainable https://www.axios.com/2021/11/15/xbox-chief-phil-spencer-interview-20-years

@Spaceman-Spiff
Sustainable is not the same as profitable. It simply means they are prepared to pay what it costs to buy market share, something only MS have the pockets for. Sooner or later (I'm betting later), they will need to start showing a profit, and that's where we will see the real affects of this business model.

The people that constantly state that Games Pass is bad for Developers are mostly (if not entirely) those that wish to see the service (and Xbox) fail. They are best ignored, because even when faced with the facts, provided by those that are actually in the know, they will continue to say the same things in the hope that one day, they may be proven right.

Of course, were their chosen platform to undertake the same kind of service, then such a service would be the best thing since sliced bread...

I think what these devs are trying to say (but failing at) is that Game pass is only good for developers that get accepted into game pass. Games that aren't on game pass (particularly indies) seem to do much worse (at least financially). In a way, it makes Microsoft the gatekeeper on which indies thrive and which ones sink.

What isn't clear is whether or not the indie market as a whole is better or worse because of game pass.

The other thing about Gamepass is if a player gets used to having the game around and then it goes, they are likely to purchase it at full price.

Whilst it is unlikely Halo Infinite or Sea of Thieves will ever disappear, licencing issues prevent Forza Horizon 4/5 staying around forever so you buy a copy to make sure you can still play it like I did with the first 3.

3rd party titles are not on there perpetually and will eventually migrate to other platforms or just continue being sold.

Honestly as a consumer I don't really care either way to be brutally honest.

In a broad sense I want everyone to get a good deal but that is all on devs, publishers etc to negotiate for themselves. Its not something I lie in bed at night worrying about

What I do know as said consumer is right now gamepass is still good enough value for me to use. Even with the current trickle of big name first party content there is still value there from my consumer perspective.

To me it often seems folks can get too caught up with worrying about stuff out of their control or what might or might not change in the future they forget to enjoy what is in front of them right now.

@Titntin gp may not be profitable yet but once ppl are in the Microsoft camp they make money on games /dlc/hardware , even pc hardware like the wireless dongle sell more thanks to gamepass
For the amount of games that appear on game pass I'd say it's gd for mostly all companies , they all could say no but don't so that says a lot
Games like Jurassic world Evo 2 for example it's only been out 6 months then it's on GP then the games like back 4 blood /sniper elite 5 day one , these aren't small indie companies that need the money badly or games that won't sell

@Korgon GP isn't the reason Outriders hasn't seen profit. It's a hard type of game to make money, as it requires a large amount to build and maintain, and it's a difficult genre to tap into. GP doesn't guarantee success for every developer. The game still has to deliver. Can't just blame the system for that.

@Trmn8r
I know there were other contributing factors as to why Outriders hasn't turned a profit but that wasnt the point I'm trying to make. You said it yourself GP doesn't guarantee success. That's the point I'm trying to get across. I'm not trying to attack GP. I'm just saying there have been enough stories related to GP (and Playstation Plus free monthly games as well) to tell us that the upfront payment MS or Playstation offer with these services isn't as full proof of a deal as some folks think is all.

Cool story. As we’ve read here many times the Descenders dev did a very very good deal and they are certainly most vocal of how good it is. Like others have said. Right now MS is happy to throw money it at. When they decide to balance the books, close the 99p upgrade and make some money from GPU I think the whole argument changes…. But it’s good and healthy right now. Long term I’m not sold it will be good. I see so many online saying they don’t buy games as they might be on GPU next month. I don’t see how that’s good long term.

@Korgon Right, but it isn't exactly a problem with the system GP has in place though is my point. You still have to deliver on the product. But, for most devs who have talked about it, it has been a great experience for them. Especially, with indie devs who are bleeding cash at the end of their dev cycle, that can get a big boost right away to help them support their game, get a much larger marketing footprint, and feed their family. You were making it sound like its 50/50 good/bad, when from all the devs we've heard from, it's much higher.

@Trmn8r
Hmm from what I've seen 50/50 seems appropriate. It has felt like every month there has been a report of a dev being happy with these deals and then the next month a dev not being happy with these deals. We also need to keep in mind that some devs might simply not want to speak ill of theses services so they don't burn any bridges with these big publishers.

Bottom line though if it works for the dev then great! If not...well not so great! 😄

@Martsmall
I agree with your first point completely, and thats why MS are happy to effectively buy market share right now. Its a good move and we all benefit.
Games that don't perform are often offered to sub services quickly. A publisher can see from the first 3 months what kind of return they are likely to get. If its smaller than they wanted, then releasing to GP quickly is way to raise some cash and at least recoup dev costs or make a small profit.
For games with mtx that rely on footfall, getting the title to as many people as poss is obviously always a good thing.
If the game is performant, and MS wish to have it as a great title for us on GP, then sometimes it worth taking the GP offer after only 6 months as you will had %80 of total sales by then anyway, and MS money can be nice profit without waiting for the sales.

There are lots of ways that subscription service money can be useful for all sorts of devs and help them with their business - so its no surprise at all that many will look to such services to max their returns. That's not necessarily a vote for the future of GP or Xbox, but devs need money and will take it where they find it. GP is a good option right now.

It would be much weirder if you showed a story about a dev who would NOT take money offered. 'Devs take free money' is not that surprising to me!

Nobody has a crystal ball and we will ultimately need to see where this ends up, but there are a lot of people on xbox now who would never buy a full price game again because of what they get from GP (I'm one of them), and ultimately I think it devalues the very medium I value so highly. That may be a worry for me, but I'm still making out fine now, and I'm no longer a dev, so my wages don't rely on it anymore either.

@Korgon Well, you can say it's that. But, there simply hasn't been the reports to back it up. Many more have praised it than criticized it and it isn't even close.

@Titntin I'm the opposite ,I buy more now because of gamepass there are plenty of games I've loved and purchased the dlc and if a sequal comes out that is not on gamepass I'll buy it day one and even purchased games that have gone from game pass because I haven't finished them

A prime example is sniper elite 4 I purchased the season pass and completed all the dlc ready for sniper 5 ,that's money that wouldn't have gotten from me

But the downside for me is I buy games anyway and alot have appeared on game pass AFTER I've purchased but not a Biggie as I enjoyed the games anyway

Oh and another downside .... my backlog is massive I need to live till I'm 150 to play all the games I want to play lol

@Martsmall
Well that's heartening to hear! If everyone is like you then my concerns are ill founded
I still buy a lot of games too - I buy on PS5 and steam, but on xbox I just play GP.

Yeah I have a huge backlog too, I play series X , PS5, PC and switch and I'm GP ultimate and been on PS Now for years too.
I'm never short of something to look at:)

Concerns about the future aside, I've never had so much wonderful content to enjoy across so many systems, and I've seen every single gen since the start! Its a good time to play games

@Titntin same here with the systems apart from the switch but plan on getting later down the line ( Zelda calling me )