Xbox Game Pass, the $10 per month downloading of games service, in a Netflix style, just got an upgrade.
Update (25/01/18) – Turns out retailers aren’t happy.
As noted by WCCFTech, an Austrian retailer has delisted all Xbox One inventory, stating that if Microsoft wants to profit purely from software, they can do it alone.
So it seems a number of things are happening now.
Microsoft as we know traditionally launches and for a while sells consoles at a loss, making the difference in licensing and software. Lord knows Xbox One X breaks even at most. Naturally because of this, the margins for retailers selling consoles, especially new ones, cant be that high, and we already hear from most places that selling new sealed games isn’t very profitable, if at all, for retailers.
So with the Game Pass announcement that games from Microsoft will be there day and date for that same $10 fee, it seems like MS is moving to a model that allows them to keep making their limited library, and getting a constant stream of revenue from more users, rather than making a handful of games yearly and selling them to a smaller base for $60 a pop. Of course, that latter option will still exist.
Plus MS can easily eat up any potentially lost revenue from other areas of the business. Remember they have done that before.
But what’s apparently more shocking is that according to those who have worked in the retail scene, MS games are historically 30% better with margins than first party stuff from Nintendo and Sony. MS games, for retailers, are the best ones to sell new. They are now losing a potential source of revenue that will shift to MS directly and make MS more money than the $60 per sale.
Alright, I'll let you guys in on something here. The games we would make the most money on for new games were Microsoft First Party games. Gears, Forza, Halo etc all had margins up to 30% better than Sony and Nintendo First party games. Retailers are losing their best games.
Basically, $10 per month from 10 million people is better for investors than $60 per game every few months from 2 million people. But one retailer isn’t happy about this it seems. They’ve caught on that this does nothing for them and are dropping Xbox inventory.
Original Story
All future first party releases will not only be available via Xbox Live, and in stores, but Game Pass…on launch day.
So now not only do you get Xbox 360 and Xbox One games for $10, you now get included in that price, full price retail games on the day they launch.
This is an incredible move from Microsoft that has some people scratching their heads. Why would Microsoft release their own games for $60, and give you what is undeniably a better deal for $10 monthly, alongside a host of other games ready to go when you want?
Simple. Retailers, manufacturing, all of that stuff is factored into a $60 price tag. Plus, say a game got 2 million sales for $60. Lot of money, probably recoup development costs at that point. Now imagine 10 million people paying $10 a month.
For a company that hasn’t got the largest portfolio of first party software, this is a great move. They will be making in-house software fairly infrequently, as we have seen in the past few years, so why not sweeten the deal for a constant flow of $10 subscriptions each month?
The pros outweigh the cons it seems for Microsoft. Further, the Xbox brand historically has been covered by huge profits from other hardware and even Windows alone. Microsoft is fine with Xbox being a loss leader and with a subscription service…the bills effectively pay themselves.
I do believe this a way to get more money while not having to buy into more studios and make more games in a shorter time.
Of course there are cons to this however. If you stop paying your $10 a month, you can’t access the games, as is the case with PS Plus. You will be able to bulk buy 6 months at a time soon, so there is that for those who need it.
Secondly, the games are in rotation. They are only available for as long as they are up, just like shows on Netflix or BBC iPlayer. If it remains on the server, you can play it. For the new titles this is unlikely to be an issue, but older 360 titles may fall to this.
Finally, and this is the eventuality, what happens when the service ends? Would Microsoft let you play the games offline? Would you just get to keep them as you do with your physical Xbox 360 games?
These are the important questions and sadly they can’t be answered because this day has yet to come. We don’t know and I’m not sure Microsoft does either.
When considering Game Pass at face value, it is an excellent deal, but if you don’t play games much, you’re likely better off paying the $60 for a game outright.
Yes the eventuality of that is even physical copies of games now are subject to patches and updates, so when the servers one day go own, some games will be “unfinished” as it were, or at least unrefined. But at least you won’t lose access to the games entirely.
So this is the situation. Microsoft has made an aggressive move into a Netflix like format, and the payoffs are obvious: It’s more money, monthly, rather than per game.
But for us consumers, maybe it’s not so great in the very long-term, or even medium term depending on how the service is received or games are rotated.
Maybe we need to wait and see, but I didn’t think this day would come so soon.
Thanks for reading! I hope you enjoy this article, and I will be updating everyone on developments as they happen via social media. Until next time, Happy Gaming!
Allegedly, according to unnamed sources, the 64GB physical game storage cards for Nintendo Switch are delayed from mid 2018, to 2019. Let’s break down why this isn’t a big deal.
So first off, you need to understand that 64GB cards would be a significant deal, if only because, as I have noted before, this would surpass the limit for physical media on PS4 and Xbox, as Blu-Rays only go to 50GB. At least we would hear the last of “The cards aren’t big enough”, right?!
So the sources state that some western publishers especially are displeased with this. I have to ask, just who that would be? It’s not EA, or Activision, that’s for sure, because to our knowledge they just gave up. It’s not likely to be Ubisoft, as their games come in usually well sized. So that leaves Bethesda, who has done a good job with deciding what to put on a cart, and 2K. I bet it’s 2K.
So L.A. Noire on Nintendo Switch is a big game. 27.4GB in fact. That *would* fit on a 32GB card, but as noted during the entirety of the Switch Tax debacle and as noted by developers, that’s too expensive to produce, so they opt for 16GB cards normally, like Skyrim and DOOM did. L.A Noire comes on an 8GB card. Yes, even cheaper than 16GB, and the rest of the game is a download. I would like to take this opportunity to point out yet again, this is the same situation on PS4 and Xbox One as well. 2K took the cheap route.
Now one thing I want to know is just what Switch games will be upwards to 64GB? Certainly some will come in above 32GB yes, but most certainly not near 50GB or higher. That’s absurd even on PS4 and Xbox One, and when it does happen it’s because of 4K assets (Where files hit 100GBs!) or the game being 10-20GB over.
But any game from those systems being ported to Switch would have to be downgraded. If they aren’t the games wont run with the higher quality assets, the system can’t handle it. So lower quality, and most importantly smaller in size, assets will be used. This should, all things hopeful anyway, reduce the file size from the 50GBs. So this raises the question, what games would be above 50GBs on the system? Maybe two or three games as a bundle on one card, but not a single title, surely?
But this leads to another point. Most publishers right now, as shown with 2K, Bethesda, and more, find 32GBs too expensive t use, settling for 16GB, or foolishly 8GB. Now in the case of 16GB often they don’t actually need to go higher, such as with Skyrim, but sometimes stretching for 32GB would be fine.
But the publishers are so allergic to the notion of 32GB cards at their current price, that it makes the mind go wild over just why they would be upset over the notion of a bigger, much more expensive card not being ready yet, when they won’t shell out for what IS a cheaper card comparatively, even at the current price! Why are they upset if they won’t use 32GB with places stating “cost” is the reason. This just doesn’t add up.
Of course there is the belief that the introduction of a 64GB card will drive down prices of the others, and this isn’t strictly true. What will drive down the price is the manufacturing process getting cheaper and the Flash NAND chip shortage as noted by Toshiba being in part due to smart phones, ending. If the cost to make them falls, the cost to buy them will too. If you start making a newer, bigger, more expensive card, it doesn’t suddenly make the smaller ones cheaper.
But this all ties in to my last article on the matter of physical media not evolving. Sony and Microsoft are stuck with 50GB Blu-Rays and those can’t hold the games at 4k resolutions they are so desperately chasing. It’s been 11 years since Blu-Ray was used for games, surely by now they should be on to UHD Blu-Ray? Problem is cost. That’s expensive, so they won’t. But it’s funny that in a year or two, the Nintendo Switch will be outpacing what they can store in a disc, in a tiny little cartridge.
As I said before, physical media needs to catch up, and it looks like it has if these 64GB cards are anything to go by. All we need is the shortage to end, and the prices to fall, and Blu-Ray will be outdated for everything except 4K assets. Even then, who knows right?
Thanks for reading, and if you liked this article give it a share on social media, and I will see you next time. Until then, Happy Gaming!
2017 has been a bit of wild ride, from new systems, new franchises, a lot of old franchises, incredible highs and some very deep lows.
If you were to really take away one from this year in gaming, it’s that new hardware came and really impressed the world.
Where the PS4 Pro was a relatively safe (And some would argue lacklustre) refresh of the PS4, the Xbox One X stormed ahead and probably could just be considered a new generation of hardware of its own. This machine has proven itself to be a real powerhouse, and a lot of people were doubting it, both in part to the Xbox One having lower sales than the PS4, but by no means bad, we should stress, and its high price leading to a question: Who is it for? For the enthusiast it has taken the crowd by surprise.
Also of note is the Nintendo Switch, a machine so many were down prior to launch, and coming off the back of the Wii U and 2016 had many wondering if Nintendo had a place in the market anymore, including its own software partners. While it had a quieter start, demand was high from the off, and only grew. The real story is how over 10 months the perspective changed from doom and gloom, to “Oh it’s only early success, itll fall off”, to “Itll be dead by Xmas”, to a quieter rumbling of things still left to improve. If that isn’t a turn around, who knows what is.
The 3DS also had a hot year with many in-demand games and its end of life revision in the New 2DS XL being released. The little handheld has some time left in the sun, but no more than a year or two.
The PS4 had a quieter year, if only because business as usual isn’t noteworthy. 70 million units out in the world now, 4 years in, that’s pretty good. PSVR also hit 2 million despite a lack of compelling software because…price cuts I suppose, but the VR competition is lagging behind, and the market shows a chance of stalling without further innovation and software.
Overall then, hardware wise, it has been a fantastic year with every company really on top of their hardware game.
On to software then, the success stories really come from Sony and Nintendo, with Sony opting to front load its year with first party releases and major third-party titles before dropping off and letting the maligned GT Sport and third party deals flood the latter half of the year. Additionally, press events like Paris Games Week and E3 left a lot to be desired. People can only see the same game so many times without a release date.
Nintendo maintained a steady stream of games for both systems throughout the year. Critical and commercial darlings flooded their hardware and third parties developer some strong showings for once, despite a lack of desire to do so early on. Furthermore, gamers proved receptive to the software, with titles like Splatoon 2, Breath of the Wild, and Super Mario Odyssey setting records for their respective franchises.
Microsoft once again limped along on third-party offerings, but majority of sales were on PS4. Furthermore the cancellation of exclusives like Scalebound and closure of notable studios left the future in question, as well as delaying what few exclusives were planned to next year. Maybe it will pick up then.
The indie scene proved to be on fire with once again the Nintendo Switch dominating the stories there with very high indie sales. Steam fell behind in this regard and Sony seemingly lost interest, but the quality on display this year has been unmistakable.
Third parties as well proved a force to be reckoned with. If we ignore EA, as Mass Effect was a mess and their later games proved less than welcome with bad business decisions. Games like Nier, Nioh, Sonic Mania, Wolfenstein 2, Assassins Creed Origins, Mario + Rabbids, all proved surprise hits. Sure there were duds like Sonic Forces, but third parties not only showed renewed passion in their work, but renewed creativity.
Interestingly 2017 saw huge backlash against micro-transactions and lootboxes in gaming, as companies attempt to push them harder and harder into the core structure of games. This perhaps will be evidenced next year if more games opt to do this, and maybe this indicates a boom in the indie scene. Certainly “AA” games like Hellblade have shown they have a place, and companies like Square Enix have renewed interest in mid-range titles.
2017 will likely go down as a highlight year for the renewal of an industry that seemed to be struggling with staying fresh. Many companies came back from the brink and brought their A Game, and while there were some very loud duds from some, and some fresh controversy, it doesn’t drown out that regardless of what platform you choose, you had a fine year.
Except maybe Steam. I can’t see wading through that as fine. Seriously, sort that out Valve.
You’ll need to forgive me about this being a shorter piece. There isn’t much to say for this year beyond “It was really good”. Barring the issues around lootboxes later in the year and EA being EA…it’s been a fine year all around! So until next time, Happy Gaming!
At the end of every PS4 ad, I see that slogan. It’s the only slogan from a console maker I call bull at as well.
The PS4 got its early success from appearing “Friendly” compared to the upfront jackassery of the Xbox One reveal. Those anti-consumer practices of the launch were turned around and only really forgotten recently, under waves of good moves that are for the players of games.
Sony used this slogan early on, to show how they weren’t (But also kind of *were*) doing the things Microsoft were doing and talking about openly. At this time, the slogan made perfect sense. Position yourself as pro-consumer, all is good, and it worked. At the time, “For The Players” was very much the case.
Now readers may jump to the defence of the PS4 with “It’s just marketing” but also remember that marketing places an expectation. This is how you sell your product, this is what the buyer expects. The buyer will expect a pro-consumer experience except…nowadays, and always in reality (Though it wasn’t as prevalent back in 2014), this isn’t the case.
Before someone says “Well what about the other slogans for other systems?”, let’s look shall we?
Xbox One X: “The World’s Most Powerful Console”. This is objectively, for right now, true.
Nintendo 3DS: “There’s No Play Like It”. This is also objectively true, as right now there is no other dual screen stereoscopic 3D system.
Nintendo Switch: “Anytime, Anywhere, with Anyone”. Objectively true. You can play the console anytime, anywhere you want, with anyone you want.
Yet every time I see “For The Players”, man, it’s easy to fault it. It’s so simple to just look at what PlayStation is doing and seeing without even having to look twice, how they are right now the most anti-consumer of the three console makers.
So let’s start with backwards compatibility shall we?
So Sony with the PS2, allowed you to play every single PS1 game you owned. Straight away, no strings attached. With the PS3 they had to drop PS2 support entirely not long after launch for cost reasons which I admit is fair play. With PS4, good luck emulating the PS3.
Jump ahead to today, and we have the minimal trickle of PS2 Classics on the PS4. The rate at which these come out is frankly absurd with months between releases. Imagine the Wii U first party release schedule, but for older games. Yeah, it’s bad.
But it doesn’t stop with how fast they come. Even on PS3 some PS2 and PS1 Classics had emulation issues, or vanished from the digital store with no notice and re-appeared two years later (Crash 2 did this in the EU for no reason). The reason they once gave on the official PlayStation Blog was:
The journey from PSone disc to PSone emulation can be a long one – here’s the short version.
We make sure we’ve got a good copy of the original disk (or discs if there are localised versions), then the game is cleared for publish by our legal department.
Why are some games available on the US Store but not available on the EU Stores?
The million dollar question…
This usually comes down to either publishing rights or bugs that occur within the emulated PAL version that did not occur within the NTSC emulated version. There are several PAL titles that don’t play well with the emulator because of a PAL-only copy protection system that was used in several key releases, and sometimes other bugs occur at random.
Which is bulls***. Explain to me good sirs at Sony, why we here in the UK got the US versions of the Spyro Trilogy, two years after other regions mind you, with permanent slowdown, music playback errors, and frame rate issues? If you get the EU version of the game, why isn’t that the one we got and why is the emulation sub-par for those games?
In addition though, on PS4 in addition to the molasses pace at which old games show up, emulations issues are abound. I spent the past night with the PS4 edition of Jak X, emulated in 1080p on the PS4 with Trophy support (Hooray…) and it had frame pacing issues, frame rate issues, and combined with the games already rather loose control….this was a problem. Not unplayable, but certainly below what we expect.
But it doesn’t stop there, oh no. Remember on Wii U you could transfer your Wii stuff to the new console, and any Virtual Console games you brought were given a hefty discount on the Wii U Virtual Console if available? Sure this was clunky, but the system did have a way of making that purchase easier on you (Shame it isn’t also on 3DS mind…). Then we have Xbox One. Pop your disc in, and hey, a BC game is now there downloaded and ready to go free of charge. Or they see you have a 360 game downloaded to your account, and add it to your Xbox One queue immediately, as a free game, because you already owned the original release on your account, or in disk form.
PS4 doesn’t have this. Sure, it makes sense not to, BUT IT COULD HAVE THIS! So hear me out on this one.
When I downloaded the 4 Jak and Daxter games to my PS4, I realised, wait, I already downloaded the remasters on PS3. This is the same account. Am I not getting a discount here? Nope. To further compound things I check my trophy list, I have two separate lists now, one for the PS3 releases, one for the PS4 backwards compatibility releases! I can see this on my PS4! There is no reason this couldn’t be discounted by checking my account, or popping the disc in, as yes the PS4 can read DVDs.
But to compound this issue even further, because it goes even deeper than that, let’s hold up the PS Vita for a moment. Who remembers cross-buy? Anyone? The notion that you get a PS3/PS4 and Vita copy of a game in a single digital purchase? This is something they have already done, between systems, why hasn’t it been done here?
Again, “For The Players”. Where we see they could do it, and have done it in the past, and clearly have the capability to do it, they won’t. Still your friend yet?
Moving on let’s talk about cross-platform play. Oh boy. So the official stance from developers is that yes, they want cross platform play. Microsoft and Nintendo, will let developers do cross platform play, with no hesitation. Middleware developers like Epic Games have shown that they too want it. Sony doesn’t.
The reason why is simple. If your friend has a PS4 and you want to play a game with him so buy a PS4. It keeps them in the PS4 ecosystem, holding it to ransom basically. From a business standpoint that is sound logic especially as the dominant console. Until you meet someone like me. All of my friends are on Xbox and PC. Am I going to have them go buy a PS4 to play with me, one each, or am I going to get the game and take my multiplayer gaming elsewhere?
The answer is the latter, obviously. It’s an effective strategy until they consider people who want to play with their friends who already have another system. It won’t be logical to both go and buy a PS4, when only one of them needs to go buy an Xbox or Switch or PC. You can argue this won’t be the case for many people, but it also won’t be an insignificant number of people where this is in fact the case.
Again, this is a stupid anti-consumer move. Why would you limit this to force people into (Or away from as the case seems to be) a PS4 purchase when by all accounts the PS4 has enough merit to be a purchase of its own accord just by glancing over at its library? Funnily enough all these cross-play enabled platforms are doing just fine without gating away your friends, because their libraries are compelling. The PS4 most definitely has enough power behind it to not require this dumb move, anyone will tell you that, and given the freedom of choice, many people would pick PS4 anyway, if it interested them. Now they will be turned away, especially if their friends are on other systems.
But what really gets me is how Sony “Responded” to this at E3 2017. I say “Responded” because well…they gave several answers and didn’t stick with any of them…
Unfortunately it’s a commercial discussion between ourselves and other stakeholders, and I’m not going to get into the detail of that on this particular instance. And I can see your eyes rolling.
We’ve got to be mindful of our responsibility to our install base
Everybody has to take their own decisions. We’ll do that. Like I say, we have no philosophical stance against cross-play at all.
That said, to my knowledge, there is no live conversation ongoing at the moment.
Props to Eurogamer for this grilling, as it shows their reasoning is…well flimsy, is probably the right word. That’s all I will say on that matter, because again, they are still “For the Players”, right? Right?
Now let’s talk about indies. Hey Jim Ryan, come put your foot in it again. You were all about indie games early on, what happened?
It was just good to talk about in 2013/2014. It is less relevant now.
But that’s what is odd. Other indie developers have noted in interviews that the people leading Sony’s indie charge a few years ago have since left.
“Our contacts at Sony are not as reliable as those at Microsoft, to be honest,”…
“I don’t know them as well, they’re less engaged with what’s going on here at IndieCade — I’ve seen the Xbox people all over here all the time. I see, definitely, a difference.”
The general mood appears to be one of Sony almost withdrawing from indies as a pillar of their business and frankly doing so I think is damaging. These are the niche releases, the quirky creative games and no all of them can’t be good, but many are and they fill a much-needed gap in releases.
This rich, full and varied line up and promoting other developers (Like they promote their wonderful third-party partners in exchange for hot cash) will do nothing but promote game sales on your platform, which you get a cut from. Just look at sales of indie games when promoted by Nintendo, it fills in gaps, gets the games out there, and they sell well. Same for Microsoft.
Put your hat in the ring and push some more games and promote them during the period. Players will thank you, normally with money.
Now let’s look at basic features. External hard drive support? Took 3 years to arrive. Couldn’t tell you why, it just did. The basic feature that is expandable external storage was missing from PS4 for 3 years!
Oh and let’s quickly discuss PSN Names. You can’t change your PSN Username, unlike on every other system and platform imaginable, but I believe I have found the reason.
So in a database there will be a value, just a random string of digits, like a friend code on a Nintendo system. This value will never change. This is your account in the database.
Attached to this value are all the variables, things you can change, like your address, real name, card details, purchase history, settings, so on so forth. All those are changeable and tied to that unchangeable value. That is how the accounts on other systems are set up. Your username, your display name, is just another variable, as it should be.
On PSN, the thing all your variables are tied to is your account name. That username you are stuck with is the string of digits you can’t change in the database. That username is what holds all your data for your account in Sony’s servers. Brilliant foresight I have to sarcastically say, and though they claim they are working on it, we know that if this is the case the PSN will have to be completely rebuilt, as it’s still stuck in 2006.
To conclude, let’s talk about John Kodera. This is the man behind the PSN, PSVue, PSNow, all the services and streaming things tied to the PlayStation brand. He is now head of the branch, rather suddenly, and likely this is to leverage a service based, subscription based future for the PS4 and successor devices.
With words recently from Kazuhiko Takeda (Head of Corporate Planning) at an investors meeting, I do worry about this approach lining up a little too well with their future strategy…
Our business model involves selling both the game console and the software for it, so we’re working to get more customers paying continuously for content, for example through paid subscription services.
As Sony has said, their future for PlayStation is constant payment from you, the consumer. Tie that idea in with Kodera and his admitted enjoyment on micro-transactions, and his big focus on subscriptions and streaming things to you, as well as PS+, and it gets a bit…of a mess.
Oh and speaking of PS+ I didn’t even mention the service outage problems or the fact that they gleefully advertise that some DLC is on PS4 30 days before any other system! “For the Players!”.
Oh, and apparently what you see below happens on PS Now as well…
Seriously though, sarcasm aside, I think Sony has a lot of work to do. Their slogan was true early on with PS4 but now it holds no water, and as a tagline that is meant to sell you on something, and promise an experience accurate to those words, it falls flat in every way, outside of a good library of games.
But to their consumers, to us watching from the outside, it’s daunting. A lie on every box as it were. It has some merit, but dig just a little and you see a company that is very much against the players.
It has to change, otherwise they will find themselves where Microsoft was in 2013.
And that is our Christmas article for the year! A very long one I know but I had a lot to say and a lot of words to say it with. As always share this with your friends, leave comments here or on social media, tell me I’m wrong in every way and I will see you next time. Until then, Happy Gaming!
My past year in gaming has highlighted things that really should be addressed in games more often.
So fun fact: I have severe deuteranopia. This means some shades of red/green/brown (Anything in that range) can look identical. This means the colour spectrum I see is far more limited.
So on a 4K TV you have many more pixels, many more instances of colour, but with how little colour range I have, it can mean that a lot of those pixels look the same. The same is true for 1080p, or even 240p. But the more pixels there are, the more there is for my eyes to confuse.
In the image below, its actual the SDR image where I get better detail:
Add in HDR and well, we have a mess. The increased colour range of the display is nice, assuming you can distinguish them all. If you can’t, that’s just more shades of red and green to mix in with the others you can’t distinguish. And no, this isn’t me against the notion of 4K.
I didn’t know I was colour vision deficient for 19 years of my life, but in 2016 I got my hands on DOOM. Great game, by the way. This was relatively smooth sailing, until the 4th stage, which was in Hell. A lot of red and brown. Red mists, rocks, particles, red enemies, brown objects, you guessed it, it was like looking at a blob on the screen.
Thankfully, there is a mode for each form of colour deficiency, so I got a lovely, what the press termed it before release, “Piss filter” instead. But everything is far more visible, and I am no longer walking off of ledges because I can’t see the end for the other objects in the distance. I am no longer missing my shots, or my jumps.
But if the game, like so many sadly, didn’t have this feature? I couldn’t beat it. I have tried, even with my memory of the game, I can’t do it. Some games I find impossible to play. If Overwatch didn’t have colour blind options, I couldn’t tell who was on what team unless they hit me.
But this higher resolution, wider colour range thing is what Microsoft, Sony and PC are pushing towards. Bigger screens, more colour…and not having the colour blind modes so people like me can play the game without either straining, or just having to give up. A lot of games simply don’t feature them, and there are games I want to try, but can’t.
Plus in marketing, taking DOOM again, I wanted to see how the Nintendo Switch version looked compared to my PS4 version. The catch was, no colour blind footage. So I had no way to tell how low the game looked to my eyes.
And of course, this is not just to mention my article on the sheer importance of controls. Take 1-2 Switch, a game I will never talk about again most likely, that can be played by the hard of sight due to relying on sound and haptic feedback for a lot of games. That is a huge deal!
But a lot of games don’t account for the fact that this is a thing. Sure, you can’t make a controller that works in every situation, but occasionally you get a Rhythm Heaven or 1-2 Switch for the hard of sight, you get a colour blind mode for someone like me, you develop ways to make games more accessible, some far simpler than others.
Ultimately, I’d like to see even the basic modes be implemented into future games, since while the tech pushes on and on and creates more impressive visuals, with each passing year people like myself are left further and further behind, and some have been left already. In the world of gaming, that is just upsetting to see. We are all gamers, and we should all be able to play.
As always if you enjoyed this article give it a share and leave your thoughts below, and I will see you next time! Until then, Happy Gaming!
Physical storage media for games that you buy from a brick and mortar store is under fire, mostly on Nintendo Switch due to downloading the remainder of big games that don’t fit, or cheaper developers skimping on costs, but this is the case on all systems.
So what spurred this? Well two things. One is Resident Evil Revelations Collection news a few days ago, where Capcom Europe announced that again, like usual, they won’t have a physical run of the game in the EU due to costs. These costs involve paying PEGI and other ratings boards, shipping, distribution, localisation, it’s a bit of a mess to be fair. But even in other regions (Except Japan allegedly), the two games come as such: 1 on a card (The smaller game I might add) and the 2nd game as a download code.
This isn’t uncommon. The “Switch Tax” as it has become known is just a laundry list of third-party games that cost more on Nintendo Switch, attributed to cartridge costs. L.A. Noire, RiME, the list goes on. Is this entirely true? Not…really? Without official figures on costs we will likely never know, but one idea is that it is simply just price gauging a new market, which is normal. But the inclusion of goodies like OST keys and pins in physical editions shows developers and publishers (Indies, typically) want to sweeten the deal for physical buyers to offset that price.
The next issue with the game cards is actually publishers like Take Two, who have released LA Noire, NBA 2K18 and WWE 2K18 on the horizon. Each game is “Playable” without downloading the remainder, but there has been widespread panning of this move, instead with people preferring to pay a little premium and have the whole experience on a 32GB card, as opposed to what is right now, a 4GB or 8GB card, with the rest as a download.
In the case of something like DOOM, this is handled quite well. The game fits all single player and DLC content on the card (16GB) and offers all the multiplayer as a download. This way you don’t miss any of the “Main event”. With Take Two though, it’s been revealed that the backlash against the Switch copy being only “Partly physical” should also be levelled at the other editions.
On PS4 and Xbox One you use Blu-Ray discs, that hold up to 50GB of data. Most games fit on this, and L.A. Noire most certainly would. However, interestingly enough that game actually only has a small amount on the disc, the rest as a download. This is a mirror of what happens on Switch. Why? Simple: It’s cheaper. While full capacity Blu-Ray discs are cheaper than the 32GB cards on Switch, publishers, as noted by Take Two saying the following, want “Maximum Profits”:
“We’ve said that we aim to have recurrent consumer spending opportunities for every title that we put out at this company. It may not always be an online model, it probably won’t always be a virtual currency model, but there will be some ability to engage in an ongoing basis with our titles after release across the board,”
The truth is the digital storefronts of Xbox Live and PlayStation Network offer something physical games don’t: More money per sale. The prices are often the same regardless, but one of them won’t factor in costs of production, shipping, retailer cuts and so on. On PS4 and Xbox One this model of Digital Only is being pushed heavily, as both systems, even if using discs, just install them to the hard drive anyway, making the disc just a form of DRM and to save you downloading all of a game, instead (In this case anyway) most of it.
So what does this mean? Well your internal storage is being eaten up anyway, why not just go digital and be more convenient on yourself (Until the game gets pulled from the store…) and you can even get those Digital Gold Editions publishers like so much. In the end, more money for them. Take Two is the most brazen with this, as their games come piece meal regardless of format.
But sticking with Xbox One for a moment, let’s loop back to the complaint you have to download most of these third-party Switch games to get the full and best experience (OR complete experience) even when you buy physically.
The Xbox One X recently launched, and with it comes the ability to use actual UHD (4K) assets, which I assume (I haven’t got one of the boxes, I’m not rich!) look amazing. The problem with these are the file sizes are enormous, with HALO 5 and Forza Motorsport 7 passing 90GB to 100GBs each! Final Fantasy XV on PC is 170GBs, so that won’t fit on ANY current disc.
The catch here is to fully utilise your new shiny console, to get the best experience you can, you will have to download a good 50GB of game, or more heaven forbid. Why? The games have to come on standard Blu-Ray because they ALSO need to work on the basic Xbox One and One S. So what does this mean? These huge games require downloads, because the storage medium can’t hold them.
To confound this issue further, there IS a storage medium that COULD hold them. UHD Blu-ray. They go up to 100GBs. In fact, looking at how long regular Blu-Ray has been used for gaming (Since 2006 with the PS3), one would expect UHD Blu-Ray would be used by now, but an issue there would be cost. At which point no matter which option you take, you have the same issue as you do on Nintendo Switch: Games are too big for the medium flat-out, or the medium is too costly to use to store a full game. Sure it’s a little different, where the devices don’t even support UHD Blu-Ray (Well, the Xbox One S and X do for movies…) but the problem even then still persists when some games on the basic PS4 and Xbox One go over GB anyway!
The third-party publishers want a digital only future. Consumers are leaning to it from convenience. Console makers can’t keep up with the scope of games due to costs. A digital only future is most likely coming down the line. Physical media is already outdated on PS4 and Xbox One, skipped out on with all systems by publishers wanting to save costs, and too expensive on Switch and for UHD to hold the games being made in their entirety.
Let’s just hope they include bigger hard drives in the next ones right? 1TB in the Xbox One X…eesh.
As always if you enjoyed this give a like and share on social media, and I will see you next time! Happy Gaming!
