The campaign may as well have said, 'Why buy an Xbox when you can play on something else?', not as snappy, but the affect was the same. It effectively told everyone you do not need an Xbox, which whilst potentially true, will quite possibly have harmed sales. It was an idiotic idea from the outset...
I get exactly what you are saying, @Cakefish, but here's the thing (and the figures I use are entirely for illustrate purposes, and in now way meant to be regarded as accurate), if Game Pass is receiving day one first-party games and is losing 1 million pounds a year, and the bean-counters calculate that selling those first-party games for a year, before they go on Game Pass, will bring in 1 million, then that is a difference of 2 million.
In other words, if Microsoft calculate that completely changing the way Game Pass works to having first-party games only enter the service after 12 months will mean that they get more money because of the sales on Xbox, then that is what they should do. From a consumer perspective, it would not be so good, I absolutely agree. However, if Microsoft is using the funds from elsewhere (in this case sales on PlayStation) to prop up Game Pass, then they are effectively wasting money because those sales would still take place on PlayStation whether or not the games are on Game Pass, but instead of propping up Game Pass they could simply be pocketing the profits.
I know some people try to argue that Game Pass is profitable, but I find that hard to believe, and Microsoft are always very evasive on the subject.
The real question (and the gamble that Microsoft may well be forced to take), is how will fundamentally changing Game Pass affect the number of subscribers it has, and will selling their first-party games for a full year prior to putting them on Game Pass offset the revenue loss that people leaving Game Pass will inevitably cause?
Personally, I think Microsoft need to be crystal clear on what the future plans with Game Pass are. The new leadership and the Helix present the perfect opportunity to make the necessary changes, and we all know changes are incoming because of the need for free online access with the Helix, and also the fact that PC Game Pass is so much cheaper. Something has to change.
I would not want to be the one making these decisions, but I do believe that the continued existence of Game Pass is what we are talking about here because Microsoft (and Hood and Nadella in particular) will not like the idea of a loss making service. Yes, there would be some reputational damage in making these changes, but we all know that Microsoft is not adverse to making unpopular decision that they feel to be necessary regardless of what we, the consumer, might think of them...
I'm not so sure they will stop making Xbox versions of games, @Weebleman. Certainly not in the short-term. The reason I cannot see this is because right now 30-35 million people are gaming on a Series console, and who knows how many on generations prior to that.
I reckon that Helix will sell something like a million machines over the course of the first year, and then a further million over the next 2 years.
If they only make PC versions of games, they will be leaving behind easily 30 million Xbox gamers. I just cannot see it...
It sounds like another game that I would like to play, but that is better optimised for co-op play, which means that I'll probably have to give it a miss, which is a shame...
I absolutely agree that from a consumer perspective having day one first-party releases is fantastic value, @Cakefish, but that is the point, that is just from a consumer perspective. I would put money on it that Microsoft is leaving money on the table with each first-party game they have enter the service. Not only are they losing money in terms of sales (very obvious but true nonetheless), but I would strongly suggest that even with the addition of these games Game Pass is not bringing in the revenue required to sustain the service long term, hence the 50% increase last year, and what looks like a further 25% this September. Put simply, you don't keep raising prices on a product if it is turning in a profit because you risk people choosing to no longer buy your product. Microsoft have tried for years to obfuscate Game Pass revenue, but I think everyone knows that it is highly likely to be unprofitable, and indeed costing Microsoft money. Removing first-party day one games will hurt Game Pass in the short-term, but they literally have to do something with it. It may not be pre-consumer, but it cannot carry on as is...
That is the main bugbear I have with the likes of Digital Foundry. They benchtest a game during the initial launch period, condemn it if it's poorly optimised, but then rarely revisit a title when obvious improvements have been made. The result? The initial benchtest sticks in people's minds
This is my grievance with reviews of games generally, @Gemini53, and something that I have mentioned on here a few times. The obvious example is Cyberpunk 2077, for which the review scores reflected the issues on launch, yet we all know that the game is in a completely different state now, and were it to be reviewed now it would score far better. It is indeed fortunate for Cyberpunk that we all know this, but for many games that is not the case and the initial review scores together with the public perception does not reflect the quality of the game right now. Obviously this is the fault of the developers in the first instance, but I would love to see those big games revisited a year later and have a further review.
Starfield will be the next one to watch get reviewed after many updates and DLC, though it will only be for PlayStation, and could potentially face some bias for it being an Xbox game for that reason alone. There are some sites that will never forgive Microsoft for having 'taken' this exclusive from them!
Obviously reviewers are far too busy to return to games and review a game that they have already reviewed for a second time, but it is my habit to always put user reviews in date order and then concentrate on the most recent ones as they tend to reflect the current state of a game...
I think the issue is that sometimes you don't actually know exactly what the issue is, @Gemini53, which then makes researching the solution really tricky.
I do hope that Microsoft manage to sort someway of the Helix to auto-update in standby mode, much like the Series consoles do now. Right now, if you put your PC into Sleep mode, it won't download or install any upgrades, meaning that when you turn it on, it can slow the system quite considerably when it then begins to download an update. Then the whole PC becomes completely inaccessible whilst it installs said update, and sometimes than can take 10 minutes or more. So Microsoft need to do something to enable us to still use the Helix without either the system slowing down, or becoming inaccessible...
I have said a few times, @Gemini53, that if Helix leans heavily into being a PC, then many a console gamer might find it utterly confusing when they transition from the simplicity of console to the potential minefield of PC gaming.
I know mods sound like they could be a fun addition to gaming, but I would have absolutely no idea where to start. I know there are sites that specialise in mods, but it seems to me that you have many steps to go through to get them to work, and you only have to do one step wrong and you could well find that your game won't work at all, and then you have the problem of trying to undo what you did in order to put it right. The idea certainly scares me off! 😂
If Microsoft can keep things simple, then that's fantastic. I am very likely to get one, but mostly because I will use it to play my Xbox games, though I will need to be able to play my existing Xbox games natively, not have to stream them.
As for using Steam, I'm up for that providing that accessing it is as easy as it is on my current PC, but I think mods will never be something that I use unless it is as easy as to use as they are in something like a Bethesda game, and it is just a case of a tick box and they work.
But to you question, I do think Helix has the potential to scare people off, but I think the more likely scenario is people buying a Helix and then realising that PC gaming is not always straightforward, and certainly often not as easy as console gaming. There could indeed be some buyers remorse when people find that PC gaming is not for them after all.
Of course, it does need to be borne in mind that I am old, and don't take to some technologies as easily as the younger generations, so it could just be me... 🤣
My experience is not that, @Gemini53, though I have not played on my PC in recent times.
I got fed up with games opening up in the wrong resolution. Often it would be so enlarged that I could not find the settings to change it, and sometimes I just gave up.
I got fed up with being unable to get a game running, or being unable to connect to a friends game, or sitting in the menus whilst a friend was having problems with their game. I lost many a night of gaming when that happened.
As an example, when Gears of War Ultimate Edition first released on PC, myself and my mate both bought the game in order to play together, but we just could not get into one another's game.
The thing with PCs is they are absolutely great if you understand them and how to fix issues with them. If you are clueless, as I am, then any minor issue can become absolutely huge because you cannot even work out the issue you are trying to fix. For example, a game is stuttering, or freezing, or whatever, and because you do not know what setting needs to be changed in order to remedy it, you have no idea what to do.
As I say, PCs are great for those that understand them. However, for those of us they are a potential minefield...
Just to be clear on your thinking, @Cakefish (and it lines up with what I said to some degree), you think that PC gamers, who are currently paying £160 a year for PC Game Pass will instead be charged the same as console gamers pay for Ultimate, namely £275?
My thinking is either Microsoft do need to do that, or they need to scrap Ultimate entirely.
If Microsoft do indeed increase PC Game Pass by £115 a year, then I will say that I cannot think for one moment what they are going to add into the subscription to compensate PC gamers for the additional cost. What I do foresee though is a mass exodus of PC Game Pass subscribers, because although PC Game Pass would be considered good value right now, I think they will not see the value with paying £275 a year, just as many console subscribers are failing to see the value in Ultimate right now. If there is a mass exodus, it could really hit Microsoft in the financials!
My other solution, is actually the one that I think is most likely, and that is that Microsoft will get rid of Ultimate altogether, and then everyone currently subscribed to Ultimate will be moved to Premium. Although Premium will go up in price too. In killing off Ultimate, Microsoft will then put an end to day one first-party games on the service, with the commitment being that first-party games will go on Premium 12 months after initial release. I think Microsoft will look to the revenue that actually selling first-party games on the Xbox within the first 12 months as a way of offsetting the money that doing away with GPU would usually bring in.
I agree that Essential could well become an add-tier option, but it would need to offer more than it does currently if Microsoft actually expect people to sign up to it because if you only have it to enable online play, and that is now free, then what do you need the service for anyway.
I do have one other thought, you maybe aware that EE mobile offers Game Pass Ultimate as one of their giveaways with some of their contracts? Well, I heard today that EE have been advised that GPU will be increasing in cost from the current £22.99 to £29.99 in September. That is about a 24% increase in price! So it sounds like Microsoft is not done with increasing the cost of Game Pass...
It sounds very good, but I really hope it is a game that can be played start to finish solo, and not one that is a struggle to do so because the game is more geared towards those that want to play it in co-op.
The fact that it is a co-op game gives me strong reservations when it comes to buying it for that exact reason...
I think I read somewhere about it being a Play Anywhere title, @Gemini53, so it does kind of make sense to at least get it on my Xbox, which would then enable me to play it on my PC. I just dislike all the faff that comes with gaming on a PC, much preferring the simplicity of a console.
I'm not going to rule it out, as it is a good suggestion, but I want to see what DF say first.
I wonder what sort of PC DF use to test games on...? 🤔
I know everyone thinks that Microsoft will remove the need for online, @Millionski , but will they? And if they do, how will they do it and how will it affect all the other tiers?
I really don't know how Microsoft are going to resolve this because right now, if you pay full price for a years worth of Game Pass in the UK, then you can expect to pay £275. PC Game Pass costs £160.
So can you really see Microsoft cutting everyone's subscription fees by over £115 in order to match PC Game Pass? Plus, just to throw another huge spanner into the works, what are they going to do with Essential, which currently costs about £84 a year? I mean, if PC Game Pass is £115 cheaper purely because they do not have to pay for online access, then if you remove the need to pay for it on existing consoles, then what happens to Essential because it already costs less than £115? Does it just cease to exist?
Personally, I'd be happy to see Ultimate scrapped entirely, taking day one first-party titles with it, and thus leaving Premium as the only option, but then what happens with the pricing for that too?
Currently a years subscription to Premium in the UK will cost you £132, but if we take off the price difference with PC Game Pass, then it should bring down the cost to just £16 a year! No way that's happening! No, the only thing I can foresee Microsoft doing is raising the price for Game Pass on PC to probably around the same as Ultimate costs right now, which will massively impact the number of subscribers there because they will be being asked to pay an additional 42%, which will go down like a led-balloon.
And one other problem, as if there were not already a multitude of them that people do not seem to even realise exists; let's just assume that I buy the Helix, and Microsoft do indeed remove the requirement to pay for online. My Helix is my main gaming machine, and occupies a space beneath my television in my front room. What happens when I want to play on my Series X, which now resides in my bedroom? I mean, if I am now gaming on my console, and not my Helix, surely we revert back to me needing to pay for online?
Everyone seems to think that somehow Microsoft can just remove the need to pay for online, but many people who have Essential only have it in order to game online. If you remove that need, not only will people have a period of Essential stacked for which they have no need, but more importantly, there would be masses of people that would no longer subscribe to Essential, meaning a massive reduction in revenue that Game Pass brings in, and that's before you start to think that they will need to reduce how much Premium and Ultimate costs on consoles too.
I just don't see how Microsoft can address this problem without fundamentally changing Game Pass. That's not to say they won't do that, and the new management, and the launch of Helix will be the perfect opportunity to do it.
My solution? Get rid of both Ultimate and Essential making Premium the only tier and have it apply to both PC and console at the same price. Do away with day one first-party titles completely, and compensate those with Ultimate by giving them 3 times their existing subscription as Premium instead (so if you have a year stacked, you then get 3 years worth of Premium).
This won't make everyone happy, and it could be disastrous for Game Pass, but I just don't see any other way of resolving this conundrum...
That's the target, @OldGamer999, but we don't know they can consistently achieve it, and we have seen other unforeseen issues arise with PSSR, so I think I'll wait to see what DF say first...
I know everyone thinks that Microsoft will remove the need for online, @Cakefish, but will they? And if they do, how will they do it and how will it affect all the other tiers?
I really don't know how Microsoft are going to resolve this because right now, if you pay full price for a years worth of Game Pass in the UK, then you can expect to pay £275. PC Game Pass costs £160.
So can you really see Microsoft cutting everyone's subscription fees by over £115 in order to match PC Game Pass? Plus, just to throw another huge spanner into the works, what are they going to do with Essential, which currently costs about £84 a year? I mean, if PC Game Pass is £115 cheaper purely because they do not have to pay for online access, then if you remove the need to pay for it on existing consoles, then what happens to Essential because it already costs less than £115? Does it just cease to exist?
Personally, I'd be happy to see Ultimate scrapped entirely, taking day one first-party titles with it, and thus leaving Premium as the only option, but then what happens with the pricing for that too?
Currently a years subscription to Premium in the UK will cost you £132, but if we take off the price difference with PC Game Pass, then it should bring down the cost to just £16 a year! No way that's happening! No, the only thing I can foresee Microsoft doing is raising the price for Game Pass on PC to probably around the same as Ultimate costs right now, which will massively impact the number of subscribers there because they will be being asked to pay an additional 42%, which will go down like a led-balloon.
And one other problem, as if there were not already a multitude of them that people do not seem to even realise exists; let's just assume that I buy the Helix, and Microsoft do indeed remove the requirement to pay for online. My Helix is my main gaming machine, and occupies a space beneath my television in my front room. What happens when I want to play on my Series X, which now resides in my bedroom? I mean, if I am now gaming on my console, and not my Helix, surely we revert back to me needing to pay for online?
Everyone seems to think that somehow Microsoft can just remove the need to pay for online, but many people who have Essential only have it in order to game online. If you remove that need, not only will people have a period of Essential stacked for which they have no need (and for which they would want a refund!), but more importantly, there would be masses of people that would no longer subscribe to Essential, meaning a massive reduction in revenue that Game Pass brings in, and that's before you start to think that they will need to reduce how much Premium and Ultimate costs on consoles too.
I just don't see how Microsoft can address this problem without fundamentally changing Game Pass. That's not to say they won't do that, and the new management, and the launch of Helix will be the perfect opportunity to do it.
My solution? Get rid of both Ultimate and Essential making Premium the only tier and have it apply to both PC and console at the same price. Do away with day one first-party titles completely, and compensate those with Ultimate by giving them 3 times their existing subscription as Premium instead (so if you have a year stacked, you then get 3 years worth of Premium).
This won't make everyone happy, and it could be disastrous for Game Pass, but I just don't see any other way of resolving this conundrum...
I'm looking forward to seeing how the game performs on the Pro in particular. I have been interested in this game this it was very first shown (back when people were questioning whether it was even a game!).
Thing is, if we knew when the Helix was coming, I'd probably get it on my Series X, but I'm guessing that it will play best on the Pro at the moment, and unless the Helix releases really pretty soon, I'll probably have moved on from this game anyway.
Either way, I cannot wait to play it, and just have to hope it performs well on all systems. I'm not going to play it until we hear from DF though...
Agreed, @FraserG. Bearing in mind that adding it to Game Pass will likely have come as a result of some sort of payment to Epic, you do have to wonder whether the cost of GPU would be slightly lower had it not been included, and also have to wonder how many more people might have stuck with GPU (rather than downgrade or leave altogether) had the price of GPU not included the cost of Fortnite Crew not been added. Obviously we will never know, but you do have to wonder whether the decision to include it has ultimately paid off for Microsoft...
Does not affect me in the slightest. To me it was an utterly pointless addition to Ultimate. Great for those few that it benefits, I suppose, but honestly, I fail to see why Microsoft thought it was a good idea to add it to Ultimate, and thus make everyone pay for something that only a small percentage actually use.
Just another dumb decision in a long line of dumb decisions...
It's only because I like to read all the comments on pretty much everything you post, @FraserG, but then you see a whole load of out of date comments, from people like myself... 😂
Is there any chance that when you repost this each month that you could wipe all the comments, @FraserG? Over time, some comments will relate to games that have already released, plus it just seems to me that it's almost pointless to read someone's comments posted many months previously. Just a thought. Most of the comments are from me anyway... 😂
That's what I have been saying, @StonyKL. Very, very few parents are going to splash out £1200 on little Timmy's first home console, when if they are determined to get him one, then the PS6 at £800 is a much (relatively!) cheaper option, though of course they would probably just get him a Switch 2, but that's not the point.
Parents are not going to be buying their children a £1200 console. At the beginning of this generation, I bought myself and my youngest son a Series X, and I bought us both an Xbox One at the beginning of the previous generation (and both of us a Gears of War 3 360 Collector's Edition console).
Back when my 3 children were younger, I bought each of them a 360 console too. Can you imagine a parent buying each of their children a £1200 machine? They are unlikely to buy even one, let alone multiple machines.
Also, are the 15-20 million people that bought a Series S for £300 or less going to suddenly spend 4 times that amount to upgrade to a Helix? It does need to be remembered that many of the 30-35 million that bought a Series console did so to use it strictly as a Games Pass console, so are they going to want to get a Helix, particularly when you factor into the equation the increase in price for Game Pass itself.
I'll be shocked if the Helix sells more than 2 million machines within the first 3 years. I think Microsoft will only make about a million available upon release, and it may sell out at that point, but then just as with the Xbox ROG Ally, I think sales will begin to tail off thereafter...
I have them all on DVD, @Gemini53, and just took a look at how much it would cost to upgrade to Blu-ray as DVD does not look great on my television these days.
For the complete collection of Blackadder its about £55, and for Red Dwarf it is £80. I ended up buying them, but it's £135 well spent as far as I am concerned.
They are undoubtedly fantastic shows. Blackadder, Baldrick and Rimmer are among the greatest characters ever created, along with Captain Flashheart played by the irreplaceable Rik Mayall, which then makes me think of Bottom, which is another fantastic comedy...
My existing gaming PC is about 5 years old now, although I have upgraded parts of it here and there since buying it. When I bought it it cost me £2600. I have since added upgrades worth around £1000.
If I were to replace each of the parts in my PC with the tech available today, and buy it from Alien as I did because I don't posses the knowledge on how to build it myself, I would probably expect to pay £3000 for it, and have a very capable PC at the end of it.
Now, this is where I begin to struggle with what Microsoft are going to offer us, because the simple fact is that the the further down the list of components you go when choosing what to install, the worse those components become.
In other words, I appreciate that Microsoft can negotiate a huge discount on the components that you or I could not get, but even so, what sort of discount do we think they will get? I would suggest that all depends on how many Helix's (Helixi?) Microsoft expect to make. If we assume 10 million lifetime sales, then they would be able to get a bigger discount on components than if they initially strike out for 3 million on the shelf at launch. However, if they want to to test the waters and choose to build just 1 million at first, then the discount they can demand will be smaller still.
My point is this, the Helix, were you or I to build it like for like, will cost anything between 20% to 50% more than it will cost Microsoft to make, and what that means is that if Microsoft offer us a PC that costs £1000, it would cost you or I to build it between £1200 and £1500, and therein lies the problem, you just cannot build a good PC for £1200/$1600 and would only be entering the region of middling to good at £1500/$2000. Personally, I think the more Microsoft charge the better the Helix will prove to be. I mean, my mate bought a PC that cost £4200/$5600.
Ultimately, what worries me is that in an effort to keep the costs down, Microsoft will only offer us what amounts to an entry point PC, and I'm not sure that is what any of us really want. I think we want the premium device that is being spoken of, but I just cannot see how they keep the price down if that is what we get...
I mean, I think I probably play more than most on here, @ilyn, almost certainly in terms of hours, but I do tend to stick to AAA games where they can take 50 to 100 hours to finish.
I think if I were to put my time into lots of smaller games, then I could probably complete one a week, but that would still be going some even for me.
Obviously not every game is intended to be played by everyone, but I agree, I would far rather fewer decent games, than lots of smaller ones that I consider to be filler. I'm sure there are people that enjoy those type of games, and I don't begrudge that of them. We all like different things, after all. However, I would far rather quality over quantity every time...
I gave up trying to use the voice AI on my television, @PROPS. I also have a Fire Cube, and even that things is not particularly accurate. Many of the things that Microsoft try to implement will be great in the future, but they nearly always seem to be a decade early...
That's exactly it, @Globo! Honestly, until we actually see some positive changes, I think people need to keep their excitement in check as that's the best way to avoid disappointment.
Ultimately, it could be that the only thing that ends up changing is the leadership...!
Thing is, you can effectively be am 'Xbox fan' even if you are gaming on PlayStation. All that would mean is being a fan of games made by Xbox, just as you could be a Capcom fan by virtue of being a fan of games made by Capcom. The point being that Nadella knows what he is saying, he has not risen to the top without knowing how to give a soundbite that plays well to his base, whilst it could actually be construed in a completely different way at the same time.
Right now, I just want to see some positive and concrete announcements. Things that are not open to interpretation, or which people need to try and add meaning to in an effort to understand what he is getting it.
Speak plainly, and make it be something that we actually want to see...
I agree, @Globo, I mean, if you buy the Helix, and it is a PC as is being touted, then surely you would move over to PC Game Pass anyway, which is, of course quite a bit cheaper, I assume because they do not need to pay for the online component.
Where it gets problematic, as far as I can see, is what if you buy a Helix for your front room, but also have a Series X in your bedroom? How do you get around not needing to pay for online downstairs, but needing to pay for it upstairs!
I think the only option is to remove the online requirement entirely, but if they do that, they will need to reduce what people are paying on each service quite considerably, which will in turn massively hit how much revenue the service brings in, and that could very much spell trouble for Game Pass.
Trouble with a capital T if they also remove day one first-party titles from the service too, because there will be many among us who subscribed to Ultimate purely because day one first-party titles were assured.
My only thought is that Microsoft could attempt to placate people by awarding them gift vouchers as recompense, but that would cost them a fortune. So I don't think they will be doing that, but what I can see them doing is offering a conversion of something like one to three from Ultimate to Premium; thus if you have a years worth of Ultimate stacked then you would be entitled to three years worth of Premium. However, whether that would be enough to placate everyone I find very doubtful.
I really don't know how Microsoft are going to resolve this because right now, if you pay full price for a years worth of Game Pass in the UK, then you can expect to pay £275. PC Game Pass costs £160. Can you really see Microsoft cutting everyone's subscription fees by over £115 in order to match PC Game Pass? And just to throw another huge spanner into the works, what are they going to do with Essential, which currently costs about £84 a year? I mean, if PC Game Pass is £115 cheaper purely because they do not have to pay for online access, then if you remove the need to pay for it on existing consoles, then what happens to Essential because it already costs less than £115? Does it just cease to exist?
Personally, I'd be happy to see Premium as the only option, but what happens with the pricing for that too? Currently a years subscription to Premium in the UK will cost you £132, but if we take off the price difference with PC Game Pass, then it should bring down the cost to just £16 a year! No way that's happening, much more likely is that PC gamers will end up being charged the same as Ultimate costs right now, which will massively impact the number of subscribers there because they will be being asked to pay an additional 42%, which will go down like a led-balloon.
No doubt about it, something has to change when it comes to Game Pass, but what they do without further crippling it, I have absolutely no idea...
I'm not going to lie, @ZeD, but part of me thinks that Microsoft won't be terribly disappointed were Game Pass to come to an end. It has undoubtedly failed to meet their, admittedly sky-high, expectations.
The recent price hikes will have one of two affects; if 51% or more people stick with Game Pass then Microsoft will be bringing in more money with the service. Alternatively, if 51% or more people leave the service, then they will be bringing in less revenue.
One has to assume that Microsoft want to bring in more money, rather than bring in less, unless, of course, their intention is to crash the service, which I highly doubt.
The problem is though, that no matter what Microsoft's intentions are, Game Pass will have taken a hit in terms of people downgrading or leaving the service, and it is whether or not sufficient people have stuck with the service to ensure its profitability that will decide its ultimate (no pun intended!) fate
I honestly think that Microsoft's only recourse is to stop putting first-party games on Game Pass day one. In my view, they should get rid of Ultimate, and Premium should then become the top tier. It is Premium that should then receives first-party games 12 months after their release, which is pretty much what it does now. That would then allow for a 12 month period for a game to be on sale prior to it going on Game Pass. In my view, the game should also be timed-exclusive for two years; one year only available on the Xbox on sale, and the second on sale and on Game Pass. After that period has elapsed, then it can go to PlayStation and Nintendo.
I actually think this move is the only way to save Game Pass, and potentially Xbox as a 'console' too.
I know people often like to cite the fact that Xbox has sold somewhere between 30 and 35 million Series consoles, but estimates put the number of Series X at around 15 million, which does then beg the question are people who bought a Series S for £300 (or less!) going to pay £1000 or more for an upgrade especially if the only bought their Xbox to be a Game Pass machine. After all, the whole point of Game Pass is to offer gaming on the cheap, and if you bought an S as a Game Pass machine, then are you really going to be interested in Helix? I'd argue probably not because the cost of Helix, and the increase in price for Game Pass, are not really conducive to gaming on the cheap...
I don't think Xbox is dead, @BacklogBrad & @fatpunkslim, but I definitely think it is on life-support (and I am specifically talking in terms of 'consoles', not in terms of being a publisher, Cloud etc. where I expect them to go from strength to strength.
Microsoft need sort out Game Pass, probably by way of removing the commitment to day one first-party titles, and having them enter the service after 12 months, and then by making it more affordable again.
They also need to return to having exclusives, even if it is only for 2 years, but it needs to be like this for every game where they are legally allowed to do so (which obviously means not CoD).
If they don't sort those two things out in particular, then Helix will be the last machine they produce, and if it is priced in excess of £1500, then it is not going to sell well enough to last more than a few years before Microsoft stop manufacturing them. My money is on that being 3 years, but it does depend on the my first two points; if they can sort those two, then there is more of a chance for Helix.
None of what Sharma or Nadella has said is Xbox console specific, but rather games, PCs and consoles in general. What exactly they will do to make us love Xbox again, or what she believes we expect of her, is not clear to me at the moment.
I'm also curious what you believe that Sharma meant by “everything is being relitigated.”, @fatpunkslim? How do you think that will affect us? In isolation I cannot fathom what she is getting at...
Blackadder and Red Dwarf are probably the two finest comedies ever written, @Gemini53. They are so good. The first series of both was a little weak, but the second series and onwards were fantastic. I was always gutted that Blackadder Goes Forth was the last in the series. I'm still pleased that they do a new series of Red Dwarf every now and again, even if they are not on par with the earlier series...
That's a great result, @Globo. I think it must stem from purchasing a first-party game because you don't usually get that much. Worth keeping in mind for the future though...
I agree, @BAMozzy. I think another potential issue is that when it comes to the Xbox One X then difference between that console and the Series consoles was not that great, and it is perfectly fine to game on. There was no real necessity to upgrade, it was just nice to do so. In other words, many people will have remained in the last generation, which will be the same come the next generation in that many people will rather stay with the Series consoles, and even the Xbox One X, rather than fork out what is likely to be a lot of money in order to by the Helix.
I absolutely agree that Microsoft have not done as well as they expected following the ABK acquisition, though it is almost as if they are not even trying to get the older games that came with the acquisition on the service.
It is also the case that they are nowhere near the realms that they thought they would be when it comes to Game Pass. After all, such were the expectations when it came to subscriber numbers that Nadella had bonus attached to it that would pay out when it hit 100 million subscribers. When it became apparent that they were not going to get anywhere near that, he had the bonus removed from his payment structure.
Part of my thinks Microsoft's current woes are from having unrealistic expectations, or they fail to listen to their consumers and then respond quickly enough. As an example, many were saying out the always online, DRM and the inclusion of Kinect as being problems prior to the release of the Xbox One, and none of them were sorted prior to its release, and it massively hurt Xbox. Hurt so deeply that they have never recovered.
However I also think they are sometimes too early with their thinking and their investments. An example is Cloud where you can believe it is the way forward, but if the infrastructure is not in place to support it, it just won't work. For those with great internet, then it will likely work relatively well, particularly is you are somewhat forgiving. However, many people are on middling internet speeds, and thus Cloud is less of an option. It will get better, no doubt, but to some extent, going early with the 'This is an Xbox' campaign was in fact too early because people could not use their televisions, etc. as an Xbox. It's not so much that Microsoft are wrong to look to these things, but more about the timing and the amount of their investment they put into it, which obviously then takes that funding away from something else that might have benefitted them more...
If you read through every comment, as I have, it is clear that a very high percentage of those that have commented have either downgraded from Ultimate to either Premium, or indeed Essential, or even left the service altogether. It's quite sobering to read, to be honest.
Of course, the theory goes that is 51% of people continue to actually pay for Ultimate each month, then Microsoft will still be bringing in more money than they were following the 50% increase. Same obviously goes for the other tiers.
In other words, it remains to be seen whether the 50% increase will lead to Microsoft making less money than they were previously, but personally, I expect that on the whole, the service will be raking in more money than it was before.
I still think the service is in trouble. Possibly deep trouble. And I also think that it needs to fundamentally change with Microsoft walking back from their commitment in putting first-party titles on the service day one. I think the change of leadership will allow Sharma the room to make this change, though what they then do for those people that are subscribed to Ultimate on the basis of there being day one first-party games, I don't know, because I think there will be a lot of very disgruntled people if Microsoft make this change. However, I firmly believe that Microsoft need to do so. On this particular strategy, I think Sony have got this bit right, even if I believe that their top tier is bloody awful value!
I am also of the opinion that the days of Game Pass are numbered, and that it will only survive (in it's current form) around 3 years after the release of the Helix...
I've not tried the Pro one, @FatGuyInLilCoat. I just bought a NexiGo wireless controller, and although it was similar to the standard the Xbox controller, it was a little bit smaller, which I didn't particularly like. However, the biggest issue was with the buttons not being the same as Xbox, and the fact that my old brain is hardwired into where they are on the Xbox controller, and it struggled to get it right when they were in the wrong place. Probably more of a me problem, than a problem with the controller. I mean, I'm playing Resident Evil on my PS5, and the 'X' button is in the wrong place, which does occasionally cause me problems... 😂
I have pre-ordered Greedfall 2 because I absolutely loved the first game. Namcon need some assistance right now too, so they can have my money. Just have to hope that it helps.
Unsealed The Mare looks like it could be interesting. Maybe one to pick up in a sale at some point if the reviews are decent.
I've not played the original, nor have I played the first game, but I am keen to see how the remake of FATAL FRAME II: Crimson Butterfly is received. It looks like it could be pretty decent, and another title that I may pick up in a sale.
John Carpenter's Toxic Commando is another game I am keen to see how it turns out. It looks pretty budget right now, but it may still be a fun game. It might also be a fun game to play in co-op, so here's hoping it is good, and that I can convince my mate to buy it too!
Lastly Wild West Legacy sounds pretty decent going by it's description, and may well prove to be something WORTH picking up at some point. I need to see the game in motion though, because whilst the screenshots look decent, they may not tell the whole story...
I actually think that Microsoft might try and keep Expedition 33 on Game Pass beyond the initially agreed period. The game was roaring success both for the developer and for Game Pass. Sales will undoubtedly have slowed by now, but whether the people of playing it on Game Pass have slowed as much, I don't know.
I think that in light of the huge increase in the cost of Game Pass, that Microsoft may believe that it will curry some favour with Game Pass subscribers to keep the game on the service for a little longer.
Could be wrong about that of course, but just a thought...
I totally agree, @kmtrain83. The only problem I foresee, when it comes to the sales figures, is that Sony will probably tell us how many copies are sold for their system, whereas Microsoft probably won't. Of course, if it is not available for the Switch or PC upon initial release, then we can just deduct how many copies sold on PlayStation from the overall figure that Rockstar provide us. My guess is that Sony will have the publicity rights for the game too, which will massively affect the number of games that are sold on their system.
Right now, I am not interested in the game, but I am interested to see what it turns out like, and how ridiculous the sales numbers turn out to be. It's going to be outrageous...
If you should run this type of poll again, @Kezelpaso, could you perhaps have a subset of options along the lines of:
How long you are subscribed for
When you subscribed
What will you do when your current period of subscription ends
Or something similar, please?
I ask because I have Ultimate right now, but only because I stacked 3 years back in 2023. When my subscription ends next June, I won't be subscribing to Ultimate again. And depending on what Microsoft do with Helix and the need to have Essential for online gaming, I may not subscribe ever again.
I'm sure there will be a subset of people that are currently locked into a subscription for Ultimate (for example) having previously stacked when the service was more reasonably priced, and who will, like myself, either downgrade or leave entirely come the end of their current subscription.
If Microsoft do not remove the need for at least Essential in order to play online, then that is the tier I will subscribe to in the future, and if I were not locked into Ultimate right now, then Essential is where I would be at but only because I need online access.
On my Series X I am undertaking a single Master Horde in Gears 5 each day.
On my PS5 Pro I am playing Resident Evil: Requiem.
On my PC? Nothing, as I don't like gaming on PC.
On my Switch? Nothing whatsoever, same as the past 3 years as I prefer gaming on my other two consoles, and I really don't like the controller I have for it...
I looked it up after your post, @Globo, and Microsoft do sometimes do special offers on their first-party titles. They say they offer up to 30% back in points, so it is probably something to do with that. It's definitely something worth thinking about when buying their first-party titles because it is a nice little reward...
I have my Series X, my PS5 Pro, my Switch and my gaming PC all linked up to my 65" OLED in my front room, @kmtrain83. All of my gaming is done that way. It's the only way to game... 😉
I think we can now say with a 99% probability of certainty that there will be one more generation of Xbox (although not a console!), @Millionski. However, I firmly believe that Helix will prove to be very, very niche. If it sells more than 2 million within the first 3 years, I will be absolutely gobsmacked. I maintain once that period of 3 years ends that Microsoft will stop manufacturing the Helix.
I've said many times that I think Game Pass will end at around the same time, though when I say end, I have always meant that it will probably morph into a first-party only service, at which point Sony will likely allow it on their platform.
With that said, I do think there is a strong possibility, now that we have new Xbox leadership, that Sharma may well scrap Ultimate Game Pass altogether, and that Premium will become the top tier of the service.
Ultimately, I think the experiment of putting first-party titles day one on Game Pass has proven to be a failure. It has led to one time exclusives having to be put on the PlayStation in order to chase those sales that Microsoft were not seeing (in sufficient numbers) on the Xbox itself.
I believe that this will be the best thing that can happen to Game Pass, and possibly pretty much the only truly impactive thing that Sharma can do in an effort to save Xbox from its presently dire position. I think first-party games entering Game Pass a year after release will help Xbox. I know that many here will just wait for the games to land on the Service, but this will undoubtedly lead to more games being sold on the Xbox console.
I don't think there is any reversal on putting former exclusives on PlayStation. The immediate influx of money that doing so brings in is not to be sniffed at, and Microsoft will not want to interfere with that revenue stream. The horse has bolted, run the Grand National, fallen at the first fence, broken its leg, been shot, and turned into dog food. There ain't no going back now...
Comments 4,610
Re: Microsoft's 'This Is An Xbox' Post Taken Down As Fans Wonder If The Controversial Ad Is No More
The campaign may as well have said, 'Why buy an Xbox when you can play on something else?', not as snappy, but the affect was the same. It effectively told everyone you do not need an Xbox, which whilst potentially true, will quite possibly have harmed sales. It was an idiotic idea from the outset...
Re: Fortnite Price Hikes Are Coming, And They'll Affect Xbox Game Pass Ultimate
I get exactly what you are saying, @Cakefish, but here's the thing (and the figures I use are entirely for illustrate purposes, and in now way meant to be regarded as accurate), if Game Pass is receiving day one first-party games and is losing 1 million pounds a year, and the bean-counters calculate that selling those first-party games for a year, before they go on Game Pass, will bring in 1 million, then that is a difference of 2 million.
In other words, if Microsoft calculate that completely changing the way Game Pass works to having first-party games only enter the service after 12 months will mean that they get more money because of the sales on Xbox, then that is what they should do. From a consumer perspective, it would not be so good, I absolutely agree. However, if Microsoft is using the funds from elsewhere (in this case sales on PlayStation) to prop up Game Pass, then they are effectively wasting money because those sales would still take place on PlayStation whether or not the games are on Game Pass, but instead of propping up Game Pass they could simply be pocketing the profits.
I know some people try to argue that Game Pass is profitable, but I find that hard to believe, and Microsoft are always very evasive on the subject.
The real question (and the gamble that Microsoft may well be forced to take), is how will fundamentally changing Game Pass affect the number of subscribers it has, and will selling their first-party games for a full year prior to putting them on Game Pass offset the revenue loss that people leaving Game Pass will inevitably cause?
Personally, I think Microsoft need to be crystal clear on what the future plans with Game Pass are. The new leadership and the Helix present the perfect opportunity to make the necessary changes, and we all know changes are incoming because of the need for free online access with the Helix, and also the fact that PC Game Pass is so much cheaper. Something has to change.
I would not want to be the one making these decisions, but I do believe that the continued existence of Game Pass is what we are talking about here because Microsoft (and Hood and Nadella in particular) will not like the idea of a loss making service. Yes, there would be some reputational damage in making these changes, but we all know that Microsoft is not adverse to making unpopular decision that they feel to be necessary regardless of what we, the consumer, might think of them...
Re: Xbox Reveals New Details On 'Project Helix' Next-Gen Console, Says Devs Will Get It In 2027
I'm not so sure they will stop making Xbox versions of games, @Weebleman. Certainly not in the short-term. The reason I cannot see this is because right now 30-35 million people are gaming on a Series console, and who knows how many on generations prior to that.
I reckon that Helix will sell something like a million machines over the course of the first year, and then a further million over the next 2 years.
If they only make PC versions of games, they will be leaving behind easily 30 million Xbox gamers. I just cannot see it...
Re: Roundup: Toxic Commando Is Out Today On Xbox, And The First Reviews Have Arrived
It sounds like another game that I would like to play, but that is better optimised for co-op play, which means that I'll probably have to give it a miss, which is a shame...
Re: Fortnite Price Hikes Are Coming, And They'll Affect Xbox Game Pass Ultimate
I absolutely agree that from a consumer perspective having day one first-party releases is fantastic value, @Cakefish, but that is the point, that is just from a consumer perspective. I would put money on it that Microsoft is leaving money on the table with each first-party game they have enter the service. Not only are they losing money in terms of sales (very obvious but true nonetheless), but I would strongly suggest that even with the addition of these games Game Pass is not bringing in the revenue required to sustain the service long term, hence the 50% increase last year, and what looks like a further 25% this September. Put simply, you don't keep raising prices on a product if it is turning in a profit because you risk people choosing to no longer buy your product. Microsoft have tried for years to obfuscate Game Pass revenue, but I think everyone knows that it is highly likely to be unprofitable, and indeed costing Microsoft money. Removing first-party day one games will hurt Game Pass in the short-term, but they literally have to do something with it. It may not be pre-consumer, but it cannot carry on as is...
Re: Xbox Reveals New Details On 'Project Helix' Next-Gen Console, Says Devs Will Get It In 2027
That is the main bugbear I have with the likes of Digital Foundry. They benchtest a game during the initial launch period, condemn it if it's poorly optimised, but then rarely revisit a title when obvious improvements have been made. The result? The initial benchtest sticks in people's minds
This is my grievance with reviews of games generally, @Gemini53, and something that I have mentioned on here a few times. The obvious example is Cyberpunk 2077, for which the review scores reflected the issues on launch, yet we all know that the game is in a completely different state now, and were it to be reviewed now it would score far better. It is indeed fortunate for Cyberpunk that we all know this, but for many games that is not the case and the initial review scores together with the public perception does not reflect the quality of the game right now. Obviously this is the fault of the developers in the first instance, but I would love to see those big games revisited a year later and have a further review.
Starfield will be the next one to watch get reviewed after many updates and DLC, though it will only be for PlayStation, and could potentially face some bias for it being an Xbox game for that reason alone. There are some sites that will never forgive Microsoft for having 'taken' this exclusive from them!
Obviously reviewers are far too busy to return to games and review a game that they have already reviewed for a second time, but it is my habit to always put user reviews in date order and then concentrate on the most recent ones as they tend to reflect the current state of a game...
Re: 'Abyssus' Brings Its Otherworldly FPS To Xbox Game Pass This Summer
Thank you, @GeeEssEff. I absolutely loved Deadzone Rogue. Such a good game...
Re: Crimson Desert Has Three Different Performance Modes On Xbox Series X
I think the issue is that sometimes you don't actually know exactly what the issue is, @Gemini53, which then makes researching the solution really tricky.
I do hope that Microsoft manage to sort someway of the Helix to auto-update in standby mode, much like the Series consoles do now. Right now, if you put your PC into Sleep mode, it won't download or install any upgrades, meaning that when you turn it on, it can slow the system quite considerably when it then begins to download an update. Then the whole PC becomes completely inaccessible whilst it installs said update, and sometimes than can take 10 minutes or more. So Microsoft need to do something to enable us to still use the Helix without either the system slowing down, or becoming inaccessible...
Re: Crimson Desert Has Three Different Performance Modes On Xbox Series X
I have said a few times, @Gemini53, that if Helix leans heavily into being a PC, then many a console gamer might find it utterly confusing when they transition from the simplicity of console to the potential minefield of PC gaming.
I know mods sound like they could be a fun addition to gaming, but I would have absolutely no idea where to start. I know there are sites that specialise in mods, but it seems to me that you have many steps to go through to get them to work, and you only have to do one step wrong and you could well find that your game won't work at all, and then you have the problem of trying to undo what you did in order to put it right. The idea certainly scares me off! 😂
If Microsoft can keep things simple, then that's fantastic. I am very likely to get one, but mostly because I will use it to play my Xbox games, though I will need to be able to play my existing Xbox games natively, not have to stream them.
As for using Steam, I'm up for that providing that accessing it is as easy as it is on my current PC, but I think mods will never be something that I use unless it is as easy as to use as they are in something like a Bethesda game, and it is just a case of a tick box and they work.
But to you question, I do think Helix has the potential to scare people off, but I think the more likely scenario is people buying a Helix and then realising that PC gaming is not always straightforward, and certainly often not as easy as console gaming. There could indeed be some buyers remorse when people find that PC gaming is not for them after all.
Of course, it does need to be borne in mind that I am old, and don't take to some technologies as easily as the younger generations, so it could just be me... 🤣
Re: Crimson Desert Has Three Different Performance Modes On Xbox Series X
My experience is not that, @Gemini53, though I have not played on my PC in recent times.
I got fed up with games opening up in the wrong resolution. Often it would be so enlarged that I could not find the settings to change it, and sometimes I just gave up.
I got fed up with being unable to get a game running, or being unable to connect to a friends game, or sitting in the menus whilst a friend was having problems with their game. I lost many a night of gaming when that happened.
As an example, when Gears of War Ultimate Edition first released on PC, myself and my mate both bought the game in order to play together, but we just could not get into one another's game.
The thing with PCs is they are absolutely great if you understand them and how to fix issues with them. If you are clueless, as I am, then any minor issue can become absolutely huge because you cannot even work out the issue you are trying to fix. For example, a game is stuttering, or freezing, or whatever, and because you do not know what setting needs to be changed in order to remedy it, you have no idea what to do.
As I say, PCs are great for those that understand them. However, for those of us they are a potential minefield...
Re: Fortnite Price Hikes Are Coming, And They'll Affect Xbox Game Pass Ultimate
Just to be clear on your thinking, @Cakefish (and it lines up with what I said to some degree), you think that PC gamers, who are currently paying £160 a year for PC Game Pass will instead be charged the same as console gamers pay for Ultimate, namely £275?
My thinking is either Microsoft do need to do that, or they need to scrap Ultimate entirely.
If Microsoft do indeed increase PC Game Pass by £115 a year, then I will say that I cannot think for one moment what they are going to add into the subscription to compensate PC gamers for the additional cost. What I do foresee though is a mass exodus of PC Game Pass subscribers, because although PC Game Pass would be considered good value right now, I think they will not see the value with paying £275 a year, just as many console subscribers are failing to see the value in Ultimate right now. If there is a mass exodus, it could really hit Microsoft in the financials!
My other solution, is actually the one that I think is most likely, and that is that Microsoft will get rid of Ultimate altogether, and then everyone currently subscribed to Ultimate will be moved to Premium. Although Premium will go up in price too. In killing off Ultimate, Microsoft will then put an end to day one first-party games on the service, with the commitment being that first-party games will go on Premium 12 months after initial release. I think Microsoft will look to the revenue that actually selling first-party games on the Xbox within the first 12 months as a way of offsetting the money that doing away with GPU would usually bring in.
I agree that Essential could well become an add-tier option, but it would need to offer more than it does currently if Microsoft actually expect people to sign up to it because if you only have it to enable online play, and that is now free, then what do you need the service for anyway.
I do have one other thought, you maybe aware that EE mobile offers Game Pass Ultimate as one of their giveaways with some of their contracts? Well, I heard today that EE have been advised that GPU will be increasing in cost from the current £22.99 to £29.99 in September. That is about a 24% increase in price! So it sounds like Microsoft is not done with increasing the cost of Game Pass...
Re: 'Abyssus' Brings Its Otherworldly FPS To Xbox Game Pass This Summer
It sounds very good, but I really hope it is a game that can be played start to finish solo, and not one that is a struggle to do so because the game is more geared towards those that want to play it in co-op.
The fact that it is a co-op game gives me strong reservations when it comes to buying it for that exact reason...
Re: Crimson Desert Has Three Different Performance Modes On Xbox Series X
I think I read somewhere about it being a Play Anywhere title, @Gemini53, so it does kind of make sense to at least get it on my Xbox, which would then enable me to play it on my PC. I just dislike all the faff that comes with gaming on a PC, much preferring the simplicity of a console.
I'm not going to rule it out, as it is a good suggestion, but I want to see what DF say first.
I wonder what sort of PC DF use to test games on...? 🤔
Re: Tech Journalist Predicts A Price Of 'At Least $1,000' For Xbox Project Helix
I think you are right, @Millionski, even if the PS6 costs £600, there would be no way I would buy each of my 3 children their own console...
Re: Microsoft CEO On Xbox's Future: 'We'll Always Invest In Gaming'
I know everyone thinks that Microsoft will remove the need for online, @Millionski , but will they? And if they do, how will they do it and how will it affect all the other tiers?
I really don't know how Microsoft are going to resolve this because right now, if you pay full price for a years worth of Game Pass in the UK, then you can expect to pay £275. PC Game Pass costs £160.
So can you really see Microsoft cutting everyone's subscription fees by over £115 in order to match PC Game Pass? Plus, just to throw another huge spanner into the works, what are they going to do with Essential, which currently costs about £84 a year? I mean, if PC Game Pass is £115 cheaper purely because they do not have to pay for online access, then if you remove the need to pay for it on existing consoles, then what happens to Essential because it already costs less than £115? Does it just cease to exist?
Personally, I'd be happy to see Ultimate scrapped entirely, taking day one first-party titles with it, and thus leaving Premium as the only option, but then what happens with the pricing for that too?
Currently a years subscription to Premium in the UK will cost you £132, but if we take off the price difference with PC Game Pass, then it should bring down the cost to just £16 a year! No way that's happening! No, the only thing I can foresee Microsoft doing is raising the price for Game Pass on PC to probably around the same as Ultimate costs right now, which will massively impact the number of subscribers there because they will be being asked to pay an additional 42%, which will go down like a led-balloon.
And one other problem, as if there were not already a multitude of them that people do not seem to even realise exists; let's just assume that I buy the Helix, and Microsoft do indeed remove the requirement to pay for online. My Helix is my main gaming machine, and occupies a space beneath my television in my front room. What happens when I want to play on my Series X, which now resides in my bedroom? I mean, if I am now gaming on my console, and not my Helix, surely we revert back to me needing to pay for online?
Everyone seems to think that somehow Microsoft can just remove the need to pay for online, but many people who have Essential only have it in order to game online. If you remove that need, not only will people have a period of Essential stacked for which they have no need, but more importantly, there would be masses of people that would no longer subscribe to Essential, meaning a massive reduction in revenue that Game Pass brings in, and that's before you start to think that they will need to reduce how much Premium and Ultimate costs on consoles too.
I just don't see how Microsoft can address this problem without fundamentally changing Game Pass. That's not to say they won't do that, and the new management, and the launch of Helix will be the perfect opportunity to do it.
My solution? Get rid of both Ultimate and Essential making Premium the only tier and have it apply to both PC and console at the same price. Do away with day one first-party titles completely, and compensate those with Ultimate by giving them 3 times their existing subscription as Premium instead (so if you have a year stacked, you then get 3 years worth of Premium).
This won't make everyone happy, and it could be disastrous for Game Pass, but I just don't see any other way of resolving this conundrum...
Re: Crimson Desert Has Three Different Performance Modes On Xbox Series X
That's the target, @OldGamer999, but we don't know they can consistently achieve it, and we have seen other unforeseen issues arise with PSSR, so I think I'll wait to see what DF say first...
Re: Fortnite Price Hikes Are Coming, And They'll Affect Xbox Game Pass Ultimate
I know everyone thinks that Microsoft will remove the need for online, @Cakefish, but will they? And if they do, how will they do it and how will it affect all the other tiers?
I really don't know how Microsoft are going to resolve this because right now, if you pay full price for a years worth of Game Pass in the UK, then you can expect to pay £275. PC Game Pass costs £160.
So can you really see Microsoft cutting everyone's subscription fees by over £115 in order to match PC Game Pass? Plus, just to throw another huge spanner into the works, what are they going to do with Essential, which currently costs about £84 a year? I mean, if PC Game Pass is £115 cheaper purely because they do not have to pay for online access, then if you remove the need to pay for it on existing consoles, then what happens to Essential because it already costs less than £115? Does it just cease to exist?
Personally, I'd be happy to see Ultimate scrapped entirely, taking day one first-party titles with it, and thus leaving Premium as the only option, but then what happens with the pricing for that too?
Currently a years subscription to Premium in the UK will cost you £132, but if we take off the price difference with PC Game Pass, then it should bring down the cost to just £16 a year! No way that's happening! No, the only thing I can foresee Microsoft doing is raising the price for Game Pass on PC to probably around the same as Ultimate costs right now, which will massively impact the number of subscribers there because they will be being asked to pay an additional 42%, which will go down like a led-balloon.
And one other problem, as if there were not already a multitude of them that people do not seem to even realise exists; let's just assume that I buy the Helix, and Microsoft do indeed remove the requirement to pay for online. My Helix is my main gaming machine, and occupies a space beneath my television in my front room. What happens when I want to play on my Series X, which now resides in my bedroom? I mean, if I am now gaming on my console, and not my Helix, surely we revert back to me needing to pay for online?
Everyone seems to think that somehow Microsoft can just remove the need to pay for online, but many people who have Essential only have it in order to game online. If you remove that need, not only will people have a period of Essential stacked for which they have no need (and for which they would want a refund!), but more importantly, there would be masses of people that would no longer subscribe to Essential, meaning a massive reduction in revenue that Game Pass brings in, and that's before you start to think that they will need to reduce how much Premium and Ultimate costs on consoles too.
I just don't see how Microsoft can address this problem without fundamentally changing Game Pass. That's not to say they won't do that, and the new management, and the launch of Helix will be the perfect opportunity to do it.
My solution? Get rid of both Ultimate and Essential making Premium the only tier and have it apply to both PC and console at the same price. Do away with day one first-party titles completely, and compensate those with Ultimate by giving them 3 times their existing subscription as Premium instead (so if you have a year stacked, you then get 3 years worth of Premium).
This won't make everyone happy, and it could be disastrous for Game Pass, but I just don't see any other way of resolving this conundrum...
Re: Crimson Desert Has Three Different Performance Modes On Xbox Series X
I'm looking forward to seeing how the game performs on the Pro in particular. I have been interested in this game this it was very first shown (back when people were questioning whether it was even a game!).
Thing is, if we knew when the Helix was coming, I'd probably get it on my Series X, but I'm guessing that it will play best on the Pro at the moment, and unless the Helix releases really pretty soon, I'll probably have moved on from this game anyway.
Either way, I cannot wait to play it, and just have to hope it performs well on all systems. I'm not going to play it until we hear from DF though...
Re: Fortnite Price Hikes Are Coming, And They'll Affect Xbox Game Pass Ultimate
Agreed, @FraserG. Bearing in mind that adding it to Game Pass will likely have come as a result of some sort of payment to Epic, you do have to wonder whether the cost of GPU would be slightly lower had it not been included, and also have to wonder how many more people might have stuck with GPU (rather than downgrade or leave altogether) had the price of GPU not included the cost of Fortnite Crew not been added. Obviously we will never know, but you do have to wonder whether the decision to include it has ultimately paid off for Microsoft...
Re: Fortnite Price Hikes Are Coming, And They'll Affect Xbox Game Pass Ultimate
Does not affect me in the slightest. To me it was an utterly pointless addition to Ultimate. Great for those few that it benefits, I suppose, but honestly, I fail to see why Microsoft thought it was a good idea to add it to Ultimate, and thus make everyone pay for something that only a small percentage actually use.
Just another dumb decision in a long line of dumb decisions...
Re: Feature: 30 Xbox Series X|S Games To Look Forward To In March-December 2026
It's only because I like to read all the comments on pretty much everything you post, @FraserG, but then you see a whole load of out of date comments, from people like myself... 😂
Re: Feature: 30 Xbox Series X|S Games To Look Forward To In March-December 2026
Is there any chance that when you repost this each month that you could wipe all the comments, @FraserG? Over time, some comments will relate to games that have already released, plus it just seems to me that it's almost pointless to read someone's comments posted many months previously. Just a thought. Most of the comments are from me anyway... 😂
Re: Tech Journalist Predicts A Price Of 'At Least $1,000' For Xbox Project Helix
That's what I have been saying, @StonyKL. Very, very few parents are going to splash out £1200 on little Timmy's first home console, when if they are determined to get him one, then the PS6 at £800 is a much (relatively!) cheaper option, though of course they would probably just get him a Switch 2, but that's not the point.
Parents are not going to be buying their children a £1200 console. At the beginning of this generation, I bought myself and my youngest son a Series X, and I bought us both an Xbox One at the beginning of the previous generation (and both of us a Gears of War 3 360 Collector's Edition console).
Back when my 3 children were younger, I bought each of them a 360 console too. Can you imagine a parent buying each of their children a £1200 machine? They are unlikely to buy even one, let alone multiple machines.
Also, are the 15-20 million people that bought a Series S for £300 or less going to suddenly spend 4 times that amount to upgrade to a Helix? It does need to be remembered that many of the 30-35 million that bought a Series console did so to use it strictly as a Games Pass console, so are they going to want to get a Helix, particularly when you factor into the equation the increase in price for Game Pass itself.
I'll be shocked if the Helix sells more than 2 million machines within the first 3 years. I think Microsoft will only make about a million available upon release, and it may sell out at that point, but then just as with the Xbox ROG Ally, I think sales will begin to tail off thereafter...
Re: Next Xbox Console: Everything We Know So Far About Microsoft's Next-Gen System
I have them all on DVD, @Gemini53, and just took a look at how much it would cost to upgrade to Blu-ray as DVD does not look great on my television these days.
For the complete collection of Blackadder its about £55, and for Red Dwarf it is £80. I ended up buying them, but it's £135 well spent as far as I am concerned.
They are undoubtedly fantastic shows. Blackadder, Baldrick and Rimmer are among the greatest characters ever created, along with Captain Flashheart played by the irreplaceable Rik Mayall, which then makes me think of Bottom, which is another fantastic comedy...
Re: Tech Journalist Predicts A Price Of 'At Least $1,000' For Xbox Project Helix
My existing gaming PC is about 5 years old now, although I have upgraded parts of it here and there since buying it. When I bought it it cost me £2600. I have since added upgrades worth around £1000.
If I were to replace each of the parts in my PC with the tech available today, and buy it from Alien as I did because I don't posses the knowledge on how to build it myself, I would probably expect to pay £3000 for it, and have a very capable PC at the end of it.
Now, this is where I begin to struggle with what Microsoft are going to offer us, because the simple fact is that the the further down the list of components you go when choosing what to install, the worse those components become.
In other words, I appreciate that Microsoft can negotiate a huge discount on the components that you or I could not get, but even so, what sort of discount do we think they will get? I would suggest that all depends on how many Helix's (Helixi?) Microsoft expect to make. If we assume 10 million lifetime sales, then they would be able to get a bigger discount on components than if they initially strike out for 3 million on the shelf at launch. However, if they want to to test the waters and choose to build just 1 million at first, then the discount they can demand will be smaller still.
My point is this, the Helix, were you or I to build it like for like, will cost anything between 20% to 50% more than it will cost Microsoft to make, and what that means is that if Microsoft offer us a PC that costs £1000, it would cost you or I to build it between £1200 and £1500, and therein lies the problem, you just cannot build a good PC for £1200/$1600 and would only be entering the region of middling to good at £1500/$2000. Personally, I think the more Microsoft charge the better the Helix will prove to be. I mean, my mate bought a PC that cost £4200/$5600.
Ultimately, what worries me is that in an effort to keep the costs down, Microsoft will only offer us what amounts to an entry point PC, and I'm not sure that is what any of us really want. I think we want the premium device that is being spoken of, but I just cannot see how they keep the price down if that is what we get...
Re: Microsoft CEO On Xbox's Future: 'We'll Always Invest In Gaming'
I mean, I think I probably play more than most on here, @ilyn, almost certainly in terms of hours, but I do tend to stick to AAA games where they can take 50 to 100 hours to finish.
I think if I were to put my time into lots of smaller games, then I could probably complete one a week, but that would still be going some even for me.
Obviously not every game is intended to be played by everyone, but I agree, I would far rather fewer decent games, than lots of smaller ones that I consider to be filler. I'm sure there are people that enjoy those type of games, and I don't begrudge that of them. We all like different things, after all. However, I would far rather quality over quantity every time...
Re: Xbox Must Live Up To Expectations Of Fans Who Have 'Counted On Us', Says Microsoft Boss
I gave up trying to use the voice AI on my television, @PROPS. I also have a Fire Cube, and even that things is not particularly accurate. Many of the things that Microsoft try to implement will be great in the future, but they nearly always seem to be a decade early...
Re: Xbox Must Live Up To Expectations Of Fans Who Have 'Counted On Us', Says Microsoft Boss
That's exactly it, @Globo! Honestly, until we actually see some positive changes, I think people need to keep their excitement in check as that's the best way to avoid disappointment.
Ultimately, it could be that the only thing that ends up changing is the leadership...!
Re: Xbox Must Live Up To Expectations Of Fans Who Have 'Counted On Us', Says Microsoft Boss
Thing is, you can effectively be am 'Xbox fan' even if you are gaming on PlayStation. All that would mean is being a fan of games made by Xbox, just as you could be a Capcom fan by virtue of being a fan of games made by Capcom. The point being that Nadella knows what he is saying, he has not risen to the top without knowing how to give a soundbite that plays well to his base, whilst it could actually be construed in a completely different way at the same time.
Right now, I just want to see some positive and concrete announcements. Things that are not open to interpretation, or which people need to try and add meaning to in an effort to understand what he is getting it.
Speak plainly, and make it be something that we actually want to see...
Re: Microsoft CEO On Xbox's Future: 'We'll Always Invest In Gaming'
I agree, @Globo, I mean, if you buy the Helix, and it is a PC as is being touted, then surely you would move over to PC Game Pass anyway, which is, of course quite a bit cheaper, I assume because they do not need to pay for the online component.
Where it gets problematic, as far as I can see, is what if you buy a Helix for your front room, but also have a Series X in your bedroom? How do you get around not needing to pay for online downstairs, but needing to pay for it upstairs!
I think the only option is to remove the online requirement entirely, but if they do that, they will need to reduce what people are paying on each service quite considerably, which will in turn massively hit how much revenue the service brings in, and that could very much spell trouble for Game Pass.
Trouble with a capital T if they also remove day one first-party titles from the service too, because there will be many among us who subscribed to Ultimate purely because day one first-party titles were assured.
My only thought is that Microsoft could attempt to placate people by awarding them gift vouchers as recompense, but that would cost them a fortune. So I don't think they will be doing that, but what I can see them doing is offering a conversion of something like one to three from Ultimate to Premium; thus if you have a years worth of Ultimate stacked then you would be entitled to three years worth of Premium. However, whether that would be enough to placate everyone I find very doubtful.
I really don't know how Microsoft are going to resolve this because right now, if you pay full price for a years worth of Game Pass in the UK, then you can expect to pay £275. PC Game Pass costs £160. Can you really see Microsoft cutting everyone's subscription fees by over £115 in order to match PC Game Pass? And just to throw another huge spanner into the works, what are they going to do with Essential, which currently costs about £84 a year? I mean, if PC Game Pass is £115 cheaper purely because they do not have to pay for online access, then if you remove the need to pay for it on existing consoles, then what happens to Essential because it already costs less than £115? Does it just cease to exist?
Personally, I'd be happy to see Premium as the only option, but what happens with the pricing for that too? Currently a years subscription to Premium in the UK will cost you £132, but if we take off the price difference with PC Game Pass, then it should bring down the cost to just £16 a year! No way that's happening, much more likely is that PC gamers will end up being charged the same as Ultimate costs right now, which will massively impact the number of subscribers there because they will be being asked to pay an additional 42%, which will go down like a led-balloon.
No doubt about it, something has to change when it comes to Game Pass, but what they do without further crippling it, I have absolutely no idea...
Re: Microsoft CEO On Xbox's Future: 'We'll Always Invest In Gaming'
I'm not going to lie, @ZeD, but part of me thinks that Microsoft won't be terribly disappointed were Game Pass to come to an end. It has undoubtedly failed to meet their, admittedly sky-high, expectations.
The recent price hikes will have one of two affects; if 51% or more people stick with Game Pass then Microsoft will be bringing in more money with the service. Alternatively, if 51% or more people leave the service, then they will be bringing in less revenue.
One has to assume that Microsoft want to bring in more money, rather than bring in less, unless, of course, their intention is to crash the service, which I highly doubt.
The problem is though, that no matter what Microsoft's intentions are, Game Pass will have taken a hit in terms of people downgrading or leaving the service, and it is whether or not sufficient people have stuck with the service to ensure its profitability that will decide its ultimate (no pun intended!) fate
I honestly think that Microsoft's only recourse is to stop putting first-party games on Game Pass day one. In my view, they should get rid of Ultimate, and Premium should then become the top tier. It is Premium that should then receives first-party games 12 months after their release, which is pretty much what it does now. That would then allow for a 12 month period for a game to be on sale prior to it going on Game Pass. In my view, the game should also be timed-exclusive for two years; one year only available on the Xbox on sale, and the second on sale and on Game Pass. After that period has elapsed, then it can go to PlayStation and Nintendo.
I actually think this move is the only way to save Game Pass, and potentially Xbox as a 'console' too.
I know people often like to cite the fact that Xbox has sold somewhere between 30 and 35 million Series consoles, but estimates put the number of Series X at around 15 million, which does then beg the question are people who bought a Series S for £300 (or less!) going to pay £1000 or more for an upgrade especially if the only bought their Xbox to be a Game Pass machine. After all, the whole point of Game Pass is to offer gaming on the cheap, and if you bought an S as a Game Pass machine, then are you really going to be interested in Helix? I'd argue probably not because the cost of Helix, and the increase in price for Game Pass, are not really conducive to gaming on the cheap...
Re: Microsoft CEO On Xbox's Future: 'We'll Always Invest In Gaming'
I don't think Xbox is dead, @BacklogBrad & @fatpunkslim, but I definitely think it is on life-support (and I am specifically talking in terms of 'consoles', not in terms of being a publisher, Cloud etc. where I expect them to go from strength to strength.
Microsoft need sort out Game Pass, probably by way of removing the commitment to day one first-party titles, and having them enter the service after 12 months, and then by making it more affordable again.
They also need to return to having exclusives, even if it is only for 2 years, but it needs to be like this for every game where they are legally allowed to do so (which obviously means not CoD).
If they don't sort those two things out in particular, then Helix will be the last machine they produce, and if it is priced in excess of £1500, then it is not going to sell well enough to last more than a few years before Microsoft stop manufacturing them. My money is on that being 3 years, but it does depend on the my first two points; if they can sort those two, then there is more of a chance for Helix.
None of what Sharma or Nadella has said is Xbox console specific, but rather games, PCs and consoles in general. What exactly they will do to make us love Xbox again, or what she believes we expect of her, is not clear to me at the moment.
I'm also curious what you believe that Sharma meant by “everything is being relitigated.”, @fatpunkslim? How do you think that will affect us? In isolation I cannot fathom what she is getting at...
Re: Next Xbox Console: Everything We Know So Far About Microsoft's Next-Gen System
Blackadder and Red Dwarf are probably the two finest comedies ever written, @Gemini53. They are so good. The first series of both was a little weak, but the second series and onwards were fantastic. I was always gutted that Blackadder Goes Forth was the last in the series. I'm still pleased that they do a new series of Red Dwarf every now and again, even if they are not on par with the earlier series...
Re: Next Xbox Console: Everything We Know So Far About Microsoft's Next-Gen System
That's a great result, @Globo. I think it must stem from purchasing a first-party game because you don't usually get that much. Worth keeping in mind for the future though...
Re: Microsoft CEO On Xbox's Future: 'We'll Always Invest In Gaming'
So that's the long term existence of Jewel confirmed... 😉
Re: Xbox Adds More Perks For Game Pass Members (March 2026)
I agree, @BAMozzy. I think another potential issue is that when it comes to the Xbox One X then difference between that console and the Series consoles was not that great, and it is perfectly fine to game on. There was no real necessity to upgrade, it was just nice to do so. In other words, many people will have remained in the last generation, which will be the same come the next generation in that many people will rather stay with the Series consoles, and even the Xbox One X, rather than fork out what is likely to be a lot of money in order to by the Helix.
I absolutely agree that Microsoft have not done as well as they expected following the ABK acquisition, though it is almost as if they are not even trying to get the older games that came with the acquisition on the service.
It is also the case that they are nowhere near the realms that they thought they would be when it comes to Game Pass. After all, such were the expectations when it came to subscriber numbers that Nadella had bonus attached to it that would pay out when it hit 100 million subscribers. When it became apparent that they were not going to get anywhere near that, he had the bonus removed from his payment structure.
Part of my thinks Microsoft's current woes are from having unrealistic expectations, or they fail to listen to their consumers and then respond quickly enough. As an example, many were saying out the always online, DRM and the inclusion of Kinect as being problems prior to the release of the Xbox One, and none of them were sorted prior to its release, and it massively hurt Xbox. Hurt so deeply that they have never recovered.
However I also think they are sometimes too early with their thinking and their investments. An example is Cloud where you can believe it is the way forward, but if the infrastructure is not in place to support it, it just won't work. For those with great internet, then it will likely work relatively well, particularly is you are somewhat forgiving. However, many people are on middling internet speeds, and thus Cloud is less of an option. It will get better, no doubt, but to some extent, going early with the 'This is an Xbox' campaign was in fact too early because people could not use their televisions, etc. as an Xbox. It's not so much that Microsoft are wrong to look to these things, but more about the timing and the amount of their investment they put into it, which obviously then takes that funding away from something else that might have benefitted them more...
Re: Talking Point: Are You Happy With Xbox Game Pass Ultimate In 2026?
If you read through every comment, as I have, it is clear that a very high percentage of those that have commented have either downgraded from Ultimate to either Premium, or indeed Essential, or even left the service altogether. It's quite sobering to read, to be honest.
Of course, the theory goes that is 51% of people continue to actually pay for Ultimate each month, then Microsoft will still be bringing in more money than they were following the 50% increase. Same obviously goes for the other tiers.
In other words, it remains to be seen whether the 50% increase will lead to Microsoft making less money than they were previously, but personally, I expect that on the whole, the service will be raking in more money than it was before.
I still think the service is in trouble. Possibly deep trouble. And I also think that it needs to fundamentally change with Microsoft walking back from their commitment in putting first-party titles on the service day one. I think the change of leadership will allow Sharma the room to make this change, though what they then do for those people that are subscribed to Ultimate on the basis of there being day one first-party games, I don't know, because I think there will be a lot of very disgruntled people if Microsoft make this change. However, I firmly believe that Microsoft need to do so. On this particular strategy, I think Sony have got this bit right, even if I believe that their top tier is bloody awful value!
I am also of the opinion that the days of Game Pass are numbered, and that it will only survive (in it's current form) around 3 years after the release of the Helix...
Re: Talking Point: Are You Happy With Xbox Game Pass Ultimate In 2026?
Who do you get your internet through then, @PsBoxSwitchOwner? I also have internet, Sky Sports and Movies, and it costs me £170.49 a month...!
Re: Xbox Adds More Perks For Game Pass Members (March 2026)
Fire TV is also an Xbox. No console needed.
Says it all really, doesn't it. And they wonder why the consoles are not selling...
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? (March 7-8)
I've not tried the Pro one, @FatGuyInLilCoat. I just bought a NexiGo wireless controller, and although it was similar to the standard the Xbox controller, it was a little bit smaller, which I didn't particularly like. However, the biggest issue was with the buttons not being the same as Xbox, and the fact that my old brain is hardwired into where they are on the Xbox controller, and it struggled to get it right when they were in the wrong place. Probably more of a me problem, than a problem with the controller. I mean, I'm playing Resident Evil on my PS5, and the 'X' button is in the wrong place, which does occasionally cause me problems... 😂
Re: Next Xbox Console: Everything We Know So Far About Microsoft's Next-Gen System
Cannot really explain it, @Globo, but it's definitely a good result...
Re: These 10+ Games Are Coming To Xbox Next Week (March 9-13)
I have pre-ordered Greedfall 2 because I absolutely loved the first game. Namcon need some assistance right now too, so they can have my money. Just have to hope that it helps.
Unsealed The Mare looks like it could be interesting. Maybe one to pick up in a sale at some point if the reviews are decent.
I've not played the original, nor have I played the first game, but I am keen to see how the remake of FATAL FRAME II: Crimson Butterfly is received. It looks like it could be pretty decent, and another title that I may pick up in a sale.
John Carpenter's Toxic Commando is another game I am keen to see how it turns out. It looks pretty budget right now, but it may still be a fun game. It might also be a fun game to play in co-op, so here's hoping it is good, and that I can convince my mate to buy it too!
Lastly Wild West Legacy sounds pretty decent going by it's description, and may well prove to be something WORTH picking up at some point. I need to see the game in motion though, because whilst the screenshots look decent, they may not tell the whole story...
Re: Here's What Might Leave Xbox Game Pass In April 2026
I actually think that Microsoft might try and keep Expedition 33 on Game Pass beyond the initially agreed period. The game was roaring success both for the developer and for Game Pass. Sales will undoubtedly have slowed by now, but whether the people of playing it on Game Pass have slowed as much, I don't know.
I think that in light of the huge increase in the cost of Game Pass, that Microsoft may believe that it will curry some favour with Game Pass subscribers to keep the game on the service for a little longer.
Could be wrong about that of course, but just a thought...
Re: Talking Point: Are You Happy With Xbox Game Pass Ultimate In 2026?
That's you and me both, @Netret0120. Trapped in Ultimate, when I'll be happy with just Essential... 😂
Re: Talking Point: Will 'Project Helix' Be A Niche Device, Or An Xbox Console For The Masses?
I totally agree, @kmtrain83. The only problem I foresee, when it comes to the sales figures, is that Sony will probably tell us how many copies are sold for their system, whereas Microsoft probably won't. Of course, if it is not available for the Switch or PC upon initial release, then we can just deduct how many copies sold on PlayStation from the overall figure that Rockstar provide us. My guess is that Sony will have the publicity rights for the game too, which will massively affect the number of games that are sold on their system.
Right now, I am not interested in the game, but I am interested to see what it turns out like, and how ridiculous the sales numbers turn out to be. It's going to be outrageous...
Re: Talking Point: Are You Happy With Xbox Game Pass Ultimate In 2026?
If you should run this type of poll again, @Kezelpaso, could you perhaps have a subset of options along the lines of:
Or something similar, please?
I ask because I have Ultimate right now, but only because I stacked 3 years back in 2023. When my subscription ends next June, I won't be subscribing to Ultimate again. And depending on what Microsoft do with Helix and the need to have Essential for online gaming, I may not subscribe ever again.
I'm sure there will be a subset of people that are currently locked into a subscription for Ultimate (for example) having previously stacked when the service was more reasonably priced, and who will, like myself, either downgrade or leave entirely come the end of their current subscription.
If Microsoft do not remove the need for at least Essential in order to play online, then that is the tier I will subscribe to in the future, and if I were not locked into Ultimate right now, then Essential is where I would be at but only because I need online access.
Thank you...
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? (March 7-8)
On my Series X I am undertaking a single Master Horde in Gears 5 each day.
On my PS5 Pro I am playing Resident Evil: Requiem.
On my PC? Nothing, as I don't like gaming on PC.
On my Switch? Nothing whatsoever, same as the past 3 years as I prefer gaming on my other two consoles, and I really don't like the controller I have for it...
Re: Next Xbox Console: Everything We Know So Far About Microsoft's Next-Gen System
I looked it up after your post, @Globo, and Microsoft do sometimes do special offers on their first-party titles. They say they offer up to 30% back in points, so it is probably something to do with that. It's definitely something worth thinking about when buying their first-party titles because it is a nice little reward...
Re: Talking Point: Will 'Project Helix' Be A Niche Device, Or An Xbox Console For The Masses?
I have my Series X, my PS5 Pro, my Switch and my gaming PC all linked up to my 65" OLED in my front room, @kmtrain83. All of my gaming is done that way. It's the only way to game... 😉
Re: Talking Point: Will 'Project Helix' Be A Niche Device, Or An Xbox Console For The Masses?
I think we can now say with a 99% probability of certainty that there will be one more generation of Xbox (although not a console!), @Millionski. However, I firmly believe that Helix will prove to be very, very niche. If it sells more than 2 million within the first 3 years, I will be absolutely gobsmacked. I maintain once that period of 3 years ends that Microsoft will stop manufacturing the Helix.
I've said many times that I think Game Pass will end at around the same time, though when I say end, I have always meant that it will probably morph into a first-party only service, at which point Sony will likely allow it on their platform.
With that said, I do think there is a strong possibility, now that we have new Xbox leadership, that Sharma may well scrap Ultimate Game Pass altogether, and that Premium will become the top tier of the service.
Ultimately, I think the experiment of putting first-party titles day one on Game Pass has proven to be a failure. It has led to one time exclusives having to be put on the PlayStation in order to chase those sales that Microsoft were not seeing (in sufficient numbers) on the Xbox itself.
I believe that this will be the best thing that can happen to Game Pass, and possibly pretty much the only truly impactive thing that Sharma can do in an effort to save Xbox from its presently dire position. I think first-party games entering Game Pass a year after release will help Xbox. I know that many here will just wait for the games to land on the Service, but this will undoubtedly lead to more games being sold on the Xbox console.
I don't think there is any reversal on putting former exclusives on PlayStation. The immediate influx of money that doing so brings in is not to be sniffed at, and Microsoft will not want to interfere with that revenue stream. The horse has bolted, run the Grand National, fallen at the first fence, broken its leg, been shot, and turned into dog food. There ain't no going back now...