Xbox Game Pass, the game subscription service that Microsoft launched in June 2017 to allow gamers to download and play a permanent or revolving catalog of titles on console and/or PC as part of a monthly or annual payment plan, happens to have a severe and negative impact on how well they sell on Xbox, according to new data shared by industry veteran Christopher Dring.
“Anecdotally, games that are in Game Pass can expect to lose around 80% of its expected premium sales on Xbox,” Dring, whose LinkedIn profile confirms he’s no longer the head of GamesIndustry.biz and has gone freelance, said during a industry Q&A.
“That’s the figure that gets thrown around. It’s less if it’s a big mainstream release, but generally… look at how low Hellblade 2 charted,” he continued. “Or where Indiana Jones came. Or even Starfield. Game Pass clearly hurt sales of those titles on Xbox.”
“Enjoy incredible new games on day one from Xbox Game Studios, Bethesda Softworks, Activision Blizzard, indie studios, and more,” reads a portion of Microsoft’s marketing for its Game Pass service, which remains available under the PC, Ultimate, Core, and Standard tiers. (The “new games on day one” perk is limited to the PC and Ultimate plans.)
Q: More generally, how do you feel these initiatives impacted the gaming landscape, and what do you make of their trajectory so far?
A: Anecdotally, games that are in Game Pass can expect to lose around 80% of its expected premium sales on Xbox. That’s the figure that gets thrown around. It’s less if it’s a big mainstream release, but generally… look at how low Hellblade 2 charted. Or where Indiana Jones came. Or even Starfield. Game Pass clearly hurt sales of those titles on Xbox.
But… if it’s a game on multiple platforms, it can be beneficial. That surge in players on one Xbox can have a strong impact on sales on PlayStation, for instance.
I am actually torn on subscription. I believe it can lead to lost revenue, and services like this make it harder for everyone else. Try being an indie game on Xbox right now that’s not on Game Pass…
But also, getting people to play your game in 2024/2025 is so, so, so hard. And subscription gets games in front of lots of people. We know from data that there are a lot of people that only play Call of Duty. And if some of those people decided to get Call of Duty this year via Game Pass, and those very same people took the opportunity to play some other Game Pass games, games they wouldn’t have otherwise played… it’s hard to argue that’s a bad thing.
There’s my on-the-fence answer.
As for trajectory… although subscriptions have a decent audience, there’s not been too much growth recently (we’re waiting to see that Call of Duty impact). In a world where the biggest games are free, and hundreds of hours long, the idea that the majority of gamers will be accessing their games via a subs service seems fanciful.
That’s my less on-the-fence answer.
Discussion (2 replies)
Join Discussion →Well no shit why wouldn't it be a negative impact? People have a shit ton of games at their disposal to play whenever they want for as long as they want (during the window). Better use would be to let the gamepass have a selection of always available older games, then like 6 hours of full release game play time on new games. After that, they have to buy it. Maybe at 10% off. But it needs to be bought then. Profit for everyone. But it would have to be for ALL titles not just some.
If they did that for PC I would sub. that's enough to know if I want to go all in on a game I'm hearing about without having to buy and return or whatever.
You could even limit the discount purchase price to x number of titles a month.