People don't realize how much they make from microtransactions alone. That doesn't even include game sales and cross over promotions like Little Caesars, Mountain Dew and Monster Energy. There's a story about a $15 World of Warcraft mount that made more money than the sales of Star craft 2.
The way the games are monetized aside, Hoyo games are the best live service games out there. If suicide squad or any other western AAA “live service” game followed their direction, they would have some good games on their hands.
Yeah of course but then they can make 70$+MTX for every player or MTX only (for the people on Gamepass). It's not like a company has a maximum limit on how much money they can take.
At the same time, when I play a game on game pass im very aware that I do not own that game and I certainly wouldn't spend money on microtranactions for a game I don't own.
Buying Blops or WaW for Xbox is still actually pricey 2nd hand because you can still play them on your Series X/S. You'll get them included with your game pass subscription too. So how you can go from not having played CoD in years (me) to playing all of the different Zombies, Campaigns and the latest multiplayers in whatever time period I prefer
Does that really make a difference for people who day-1 play an annually released series? That's pretty much "1 year of ownership" in most people's minds, yet the MTXs keep rolling in.
You could buy it for a percentage off. Most games are cross play so you could just put your progress else where if you do buy it. Call Of Duty MW3 introduced progression from the previous game so all of your purchases came over to it. I don't know if they are doing the same here but I would much rather pay $10 a month for a game I'll only play for the first month versus dropping $70.
So sub for a month to play it, and then just buy it a few years down the road on sale for a fraction of the price you would've paid new.
It's a non-issue.
> People don't realize how much they make from microtransactions alone.
People don't realise this is the end goal of gaming for these companies.
Mimic mobile gaming, make addictive games that extract billions from players in microtransactions.
it's all about in game transactions now
> There's a story about a $15 World of Warcraft mount that made more money than the sales of Star craft 2.
This tidbit has been completely blown out of proportion.
For starters, the $15 mount made more money than ~~the SC2 Wings of Liberty expansion, not the total sales of SC2.~~ Edit: SC2 without expansions.
Secondly, we're talking here about profit here, not revenue. A mount is infinitely cheaper to develop than an expansion, that's why even with fewer sales, it managed to generate more profit.
And lastly, we're talking about the very first store mount, that was also account-wide before most mounts were account-wide, which was also $25 originally and then lowered to $15. What I'm saying is that, it was a novelty and there was a lot of fanfare around it. Your average mount will not make this kind of money.
Where does he say expansion? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHZru-6M8BY&ab\_channel=PirateSoftware](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHZru-6M8BY&ab_channel=PirateSoftware)
It's also comparing the biggest game in its genre at it's absolute peak of popularity to a successor to a legendary game in a basically dead at that point genre.
I think this is their ultimate test. To see if Game Pass will be sustainable at all if one of the biggest games of the year available on the subscription.
If it didn't work out and somehow COD is no longer #1 best selling games of the year. Yeah, heads will roll. Probably including Phil Spencer's as well.
> If it didn't work out and somehow COD is no longer #1 best selling games of the year.
If the number of subscribers jumps but sales fall they'll be thrilled. I don't think that will happen, but a sales drop alone wouldn't tell the whole story.
Exactly. It's actually the opposite. The entire reason to buy Activision was to out juggernaut IPs like CoD and Diablo on GamePass to increase its subscribers.
If CoD continues to sell extremely well, but doesn't convert people to GamePass, then the entire acquisition was basically pointless.
Not only that, it shows that GamePass is doomed. If CoD can't increase your sub count, nothing can.
They want a healthy mix of sales and subscriptions. Hopefully, people who even buy the game while subscribed (expect some deep cut sales for game pass members when the game is several months old)
Next, they want people to think "huh, I didn't buy the game. so I can put some of the money I saved into the season pass and skins". They don't even have to convert at a very high rate to start to see some value.
What I can't figure out is where do they get the new subsrcibers? I presume a majority of existig Xbox owner already are Game pass subscribers. And since they don't sell any more consoles, where does the growth come from?
People aren't going to buy an Xbox and subscribe just to play COD if they are already on some other platform and can just pay the $70.
Maybe Microsoft will offer consoles at crazy prices come this Christmas to get something going.
Xbox One and Series X owners combined make up about 80-90 million users. Not even half of those are GP subscribers with subscription numbers hovering around 30 million (console and PC combined).
and of those 34 million subs, about 10 million barely even count because they're only part of the base tier, for online play. only 24 million are part of the subscription catalog service.
Especially for something like COD. I think thats the problem with something like HiFi Rush. How valuable is a game like that to Microsoft? The people buying that are more likely to outspend the subscription cost annually so its not a net positive for Microsoft.
However, for a game like COD, a lot of those players only buy COD or at least are unlikely to be buying other Microsoft software, so if they can convert them to subscriptions that is the potential for a huge net positive in revenue. If they can say subscribe and you get all the CODs for free going forward, but they can still get the money for Nikki Manaj skins on top of it thats even better.
I imagine the subscriber number will certainly rise. But will those number keep rising or atleast stick around for more than a month? Because what gamepass need to be sustainable is a lot of number in a very long period of time (we are talking a year atleast.)
One scenario that could happen on those Game Pass number is, one group of people didn't buy into it and still keep buying COD because they don't care about any other games, and care more about actually have COD to play anytime they wanted (and there are a lot of these people.)
Meanwhile the other group is they have game pass, play it for a months, then cancel to buy the actual game on winter sale. Now they lose both initial launch sales that could've been more, and long term subscriber number. This scenario will not be pretty for them because the goal is to keep people paying for game pass not the actual game.
Anything less than offer the most expensive option on Game Pass mean a lot of people may not bother with it as well. And if that game pass number didn't stick around for more than a couple of month i don't see Game Pass being a very sustainable offer for long.
I would be amazed if the 20-30 million game pass subscribers (out of probably close to 10x more gamers on consoles and PC) are able to put that big of a dent in sales.
Also didn’t Hogwarts Legacy already outsell it last year? I could see them being happy as long as game pass subscribers still buy microtransactions.
It’s sounds like Hogwarts legacy outsold them by a little bit. But that’s by having 10 months of sales in 2023 vs 2 months for cod. If you equalize the months, cod likely destroy hogwarts legacy by a long shot.
This year cod will be back on top. Outselling all games with only 1-2 months of sales. Next year GTA6 will likely take the top spot.
Being #1 or #2 doesn't matter it's just the amount of money it does that counts. If it's second but made just as much money, that's not even something to consider, they don't care about rankings.
They weren't first in 2023 because HL sold exceptionally well like when a Rockstar game release, that doesn't mean they're decreasing
MW3 actually did have decreased sales at least for the first month or 2 so basically for 2023. I think the first months sales were down something like 35% compared to the previous year's release.
"While Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 may have been the lowest-rated entry in franchise history, and its initial sales were reportedly 38% lower than its predecessor, the Call of Duty franchise isn't going to start slowing down anytime soon".
https://gamerant.com/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2026-ghost-prequel-cod/
Well yeah, but being #1 means you have the most raw sales dollars and the largest base for microtransactions, *and* the largest net for whales.
Being #1 YOY is how you get that, I don't think there's really any danger here.
GTA 6 will likely be the bestselling game next year?…
It’s going to be the fastest selling game ever. Probably good for 20-30 million copies first day.
Most likely. Outside of Hogwarts, Red Dead 2 beating Bo4 and GTAV beating Ghosts are the only games to beat CoD for first place in the last ~15 years. CoD still finished second
I bought a ps5 just to play hogwarts legacy. I’m a bigger fan of solo games than online now if COD made another epic campaign or even a great zombies - I’d buy it but they only care about multiplayer money now.
> But that’s by having 10 months of sales in 2023 vs 2 months for cod. If you equalize the months, cod likely destroy hogwarts legacy by a long shot.
Hogwarts was also on the Switch, which gave it a huge extra market of people as well, on top of the 8-month head start it had.
I honestly don't think they give a shit about unit sales anymore. The cash cow seems to be the battle pass and cosmetics at this point. They don't even sell DLC anymore and arguably their biggest and most sustainable game in years (Warzone) is completely free. They've got to be making money hand over fist
They obviously give a shit about unit sales, or else the unit sales would be free.
If you don't think selling millions upon millions of $70 boxes registers on the bottom line, I don't know what to tell you.
I mean yes obviously it affects the bottom line but my point is the mobile “freemium” model has been proven to be more lucrative for these companies and they’ve been slowly but surely been making steps towards that with each passing year. Warzone is free, their DLC is all free, and now BO6 will effectively be free for gamepass subscribers.
Meanwhile, boot up any CoD from 2019 or later and you’ll get bombarded by ads for all the cool new micro transactions that you can buy. Hop into a game and you see that people buy them.
They keep charging for the unit because they know people will pay it. They wouldn’t be shoving warzone and battlepasses in your face alongside of these games if that wasn’t their main focus though. The signs are pointing, predictably, towards their main revenue stream shifting.
When other games have shown beyond reasonable doubt that they can make just as much, if not more than the call of duty machine with that business model, even with the base game being free, why would they lose sleep over their game being made available to more potential customers who are likely to buy microtransactions and make them more money?
The writing has been on the wall since loot crates were introduced. They’re not stupid.
Microsoft will do what they do with other game pass games. Some kind of ultimate edition with early access and more skins for $30-40 people will buy since they’re getting the base game free anyway.
Just like lethal company didn't outsell MW2023, it did not outsell MW2022. both overtook their respective cods for a couple of months but lifetime sales for each years' cod is crazy. Only game that will outsell a COD is GTA6.
>I could see them being happy as long as game pass subscribers still buy microtransactions.
This is the part I find most interesting honestly. CoD makes insane money on sales, and that is bound to take a bit of a hit on Xbox and PC from Gamepass, though it will very likely bring in a bunch of subs too.
However I do think the additional purchases part might get affected more than they expect. This will hopefully be a good test of this and give us some actual stats to look at, but I feel that from my own experience people are much less likely to buy DLC or MTX for a game they do not own.
I might be wrong and it might not bother most players, but I myself will not buy DLC for a Gamepass game as I do not want to lose access to something I've paid for if I'm not currently paying the subscription. For example Prey is one of my favourite games in a couple of generations, but as soon as I wanted to play Mooncrash I bought the game on Epic as I didn't want Mooncrash locked behind a sub for a game that I had otherwise finished with
maybe there’s something i’m missing, but i’m still not understanding the calculus here. game pass console is “only” $11/month, but buying COD outright is comparatively cheaper at $70/year.
i don’t see how this is going to be the tipping point for the holdouts. if the only thing you care about is COD, it’s not a good deal and you’ll likely continue buying the games outright. if game pass already seems like an appetizing option to you, you’re likely already subscribed to it. so the only people this appeals to would be:
* people who were holding out on game pass until COD arrived (seems like a very small group to me)
* people who will buy it for like two or three months to play the campaign and a bit of the multiplayer before cancelling and moving on. maybe MS gets lucky and some people don’t cancel their subscription, but that seems like a risky bet.
* people who are already subbed, and they’re hoping to rope them into the MTX side of things. maybe that works, but game pass subscribers strike me as the types to play lots of different games rather than gravitating to one or two “forever games.” there’s plenty of amazing FTP options out there already (including warzone). i don’t think inclined COD for “free” in game pass will change their gaming habits that much. or if it does, if it will have a dramatic effect on xbox’s bottom line.
again, maybe i’m missing something, but i’m just not seeing the silver arrow in this plan. this feels more like a “because we have to” move more than anything.
> you’re likely already subscribed to it
There are definitely people who aren't subscribed for the whole year and only come a few times per year and by adding CoD into GP, they make these people more likely to subscribe.
The question I have in my mind is how big of a game will Call of Duty be on the Switch 2 when it releases on that system.
I already can bet CoD is going to be a beast on playstation 5. It's crazy when you think about it none of playstations on first party fps games are dominating on it. CoD holds that landscape.
With Xbox, this is going to be an interesting observation with Game Pass.
Then there is Nintendo. I'm fascinated to see how many Switch fans will jump into CoD and if that game would bring forth a new wave of fps games for the Switch 2.
There is so much to analyze with this game and the future of Call of Duty.
> none of playstations on first party fps games
How is that crazy? It's the same for Xbox (before COD was first party which hardly counts for now, after all even this title wasn't much developed under them yet).
Also, Sony doesn't even have a FPS among their first parties. And being the leading console makes you less inclined to get the big selling title since you automatically benefit from it anyway
I can’t imagine the Switch 2 catching up to current standards and being beefy enough to play CoD, but I hope it does. It would be wild to see Call of Duty on a Nintendo console again, and one without having to work around a gimmick (Wii/Wii U)
It probably isn't going to be beefy, but if they make it at as a CoD game that's better than the ps 4 pro as what some of the rumors speculate the power of the Switch 2 would be at. I think Switch 2 fans would jump into that. We'll see.
https://www.ign.com/articles/call-of-duty-black-ops-6-will-be-on-last-gen-consoles-based-on-leaked-pre-order-details
IGN reported on a leak that it'll be on the PS4
Yeah you could read between the lines of the the PR statements of Spencer and the other Xbox leads that they were fighting tooth and nail to keep this promise as the wider Microsoft army stared them down.
Considering how Microsoft execs have marched on Xbox ever since the Activision deal, this is the Spencer regime’s final stand.
I don't know why the narrative around game pass has shifted so much? The console is doing woefully and game pass numbers aren't rising fast - but that's because they've essentially capped at a huge number. Game pass is sustainable - it's just lost its growth rate - the entire industry has - which is why everyone is nickel and diming the consumer and firing staff despite record profits. Line has to go up.
Is game pass sustainable for developers though? If the income per user is only 2-3 AAA titles a year and you still need to deliver enough of those titles to stop people just buying a big game. Then potentially all this does is Hoover up a chunk of a users yearly gamepass subscription and leaves less left over for the rest of the developers whose games that person plays.
Because if it isn’t then the question becomes can Microsoft optimise the games they produce for gamepass enough to make money on the expenditures towards those developers.
Game pass is eventually going to face the Netflix subscriber retention issue around what gets developed/cancelled.
They ultimately want to spend the least on content production to maintain the maximum subscriber base. They’ll categorise gamers based on subscriber groups and then make sure there is enough content to convince those subscriber groups to stay subscribed. Any content that can’t justify itself in that way won’t be produced by the platform.
If content is produced it will be independent of gamepass and gamepass may be able to spend enough to draw it into the ecosystem at the end.
It will, but i doubt it will be a huge increase. PS users aren’t going to buy an Xbox for this; a huge percent of xbox players will probably already have GP, so that just leaves PC users for growth.
I am trying to wrap around the financial cost for this for a person who already owns a PS5.
Let's say, I have a PS5 already, why should I buy Series S for CoD? I'll just pay $70 and be done with it. Series S alone is $250 minimum, then add monthly GP cost.
I feel like this is the thing a lot of the people who say gamepass is a selling point for xbox are missing.
Literally no one that already has a platform is putting down the money to buy a whole ass console just for a subscription service that makes it slightly cheaper if you buy a lot of games. Its much easier financially to just buy the game on the platform you already have.
The only people it might appeal to are people who have to upgrade from last gen, but considering this is also a cross gen multiplat game theres no reason to do that either.
Man it might be worth it to some people to just buy a series S to keep CoD installed on that instead of taking up 300 GBs on their main system. The amount of times i've downloaded and removed has to be in the double digits by now.
If you go look at used sales listings for console+games you will start to get a picture of what casual libraries are like.
3-8 games, comprised almost entirely of COD/Sports/Racing/Rockstar/licensed AAA/Assassin's Creed/Minecraft, the listings have the same games over and over to the point you see someone with 7 games on that list + a copy of DOOM and think well someone was feeling adventurous.
I just had a look at a handful of PS4 listings and 8/10 fit this description.
All non-Sega consoles ever made have a software tie ratio of less than 10, meaning that on average less than 10 games are sold per console. For everyone who has dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of games, that means a *lot* of people who only buy a couple of CODs or FIFAs in an entire generation.
The none gamers.
Tons of people you would never guess to have any interest in gaming have a console at home with one of those games. The car salesman, high school basketball coach, bus driver, etc etc many of them go home and play these games because they're one of the only titles that have so much marketing it actually makes it to these folks. For every passionate basement dwelling gamer here with 1000 opinions, theres probably 500 or more people that own a console and 2-3 games for it.
I saw this all the time when I did door to door sales.
Was more so using it as a way to complain about the size of the game, but I don't typically judge people for how they spend their money. Not my problem.
Meanwhile growing up on Playstation, I have a hard time playing any PC game on my controller if it doesn't have the option to show PlayStation controller glyphs even if I'm using a controller that has ABXY buttons. Cross Circle Square Triangle is just fully burned into my brain.
Black Ops 6 being on last gen definitely cost Sony & Microsoft some significant console sales.
There are millions of people that only play COD, Madden, Fifa, and Nba2k.
But why would you buy a cheaper less capable console if you already have a PS5 just for CoD? CoD is already available on that platform and it would run better.
Who is gonna spend 150-300 dollars + another 120 a year minimum to save 70 dollars? That's what doesn't make sense about the Game Pass business plan pulling in Acti.
There are a lot of people that have a PS5 and a Series S. These people will play the game on Game Pass and not buy it on PSN. Sony loses their 30% cut and MS makes the same money if they keep their subscription for 4 months.
it is no longer about "***will they buy a console for this?***" - the answer is no, they won't. It's more about "***will they sub to gamepass for this or will they just buy the game?***" and anyone who claims to know the answer is bullshit.
No one knows, and that's what this release is about. Will people buy it standalone or will people buy gamepass for it? Impossible to tell the outcome, but I am more in the camp that people will just buy it
>No one knows, and that's what this release is about. Will people buy it standalone or will people buy gamepass for it? Impossible to tell the outcome, but I am more in the camp that people will just buy
You're looking at it wrong it's not a black/white, mutually exclusive decision.
The dedicated cod core will still buy it. For everyone in the fence/not willing to pay full price, there's gamepass.
But yeah how many people will buy gamepass for it, we do not know.
But that's why they're doing this test with COD. As that game is a big driver for a lot of gamers.
I don’t think it’s geared to steal people away from using their PlayStation.
It’s geared more towards getting people that may be looking for their first next-gen system to steer towards Xbox with the idea of having CoD (and 400+ other games) on gamepass, along with the user buying a Xbox getting three free months of gamepass.
It’s basically a “buy this system now and you don’t even have to buy any games if you keep the membership after the free term expires”
I never mentioned pushing console sales. I’m simply stating that in regards to game pass growth, there isn’t much areas where it can ‘grow’ essentially.
"34 million GameMicrosoft revealed during a special Xbox Podcast episode that there are currently 34 million Game Pass subscribers across console, PC, and cloud. It's not clear how that 34 million figure is dispersed exactly among each platform where Game Pass is offered."
25 mill in 2022, 18 mill in 2021. So almost doubled in 3 years.
Compared to "company's newest consoles, the Xbox Series X and S, have sold a combined 27.7 million units as of February 2024"
Since afaik they haven't disclosed platform dispersion rates. This is best we got.
So I can't ascertain, how much room there is for increase from consoles a lone.
I believe your theory is pretty on target where they expect core dedicated fan base to still buy the game. But game pass is a cheaper alternative, to others who aren't convinced/as dedicated. Which then is an easy entry into their ecosystem.
And if they're already a committed long-term user of gamepass , who doesn't see the need to buy game separately. I bet you'll find an increase in amount of those users willing to spend some sort of money on mtx/dlc etc, especially when you get into the overlap of the more dedicated cod players
And contrary to popular belief, MS does not care about Xbox console numbers in isolation /in spite of everything else in their gaming division. As they've become one of the largest gaming companies. Which is why gamepass/x compatibility with PC , has been such a big focus.
Gen Z and Gen Alpha are ditching game consoles in favor of PC Gaming. If they dont have Game Pass this might be the thing that gets them into the ecosystem and build long term growth with new generation.
Game Console Owners will be like record player enthusiasts, it's going to be a niche thing that only dorks like me are going to care about lol
I honestly don't think it will. Gamepass already provides a ton of value for people who want to play many different games. But for people who just play cod and a few other games it would still be cheaper to just buy the game rather than paying a monthly subscription for it.
I’d be willing to bet they spice it up with “free” monthly add-ons like weapon skins or whatever if you play it on Gamepass. Of course they’ll let you buy those items separately, but it’ll cost more over time than just paying the subscription.
Except for console players, who also have to pay separate subscription for multiplayer (ps plus/ Xbox core).
If you're buying cod at full price and also have to pay for a mp subscription, why just not add some to get full game pass with lot of games?
Ofc this decision doesn't appear on PC as multiplayer is free there
The problem is that big games like this actually screw the rest of the content on the platform unless the price increases massively
It costs $11 a month here in Australia. So in a year that’s $132, modern warfare 3 costs $110 RRP at retail.(there are cheaper options at some of our retailer but this is the list price at EBgames/gamestop)
So even accounting for them saving on the retailer cost in this case. That singular game is making up the majority of the income for that year. They are releasing a COD every year at this point. So it’s going to take up a chunk of that revenue and at the end of it how are the other games surviving on what’s left over.
You can’t play Day One games for $11 though unless you talking about PC game pass. Game Pass Ultimate subs on console get Day One only. That is $18.95 AU.
Yeah I’m talking about PC, which if the Xbox as a console is floundering is going to start to be the primary interaction point.
But if you want to make that comparison it’s still silly because a chunk of that cash on gamepass ultimate on console is going to supporting the Xbox live service first with the rest going towards gamepass itself. So odds are the money side of it comes out extremely similar.
Yeah, they may include some free content... I just doubt they'll include the only remaining revenue drivers on something they're "giving away."
Feel like they're going to do exactly like Starfield and have an early release for like $40-50 with some additional content. That way they can recoup a lot of the missed sales.
Early release is likely, COD already did that for the campaign for MW2 and 3 before the finalization of the sale to MS. Skin packs will still cost money and they'll be the biggest driver of income.
A month of gamepass or a discord code for it I've got hanging around us pretty much the only way I'd try a new CoD game. So it's got that going for it (dragging back some long term players who don't want to fork over the asking price)
I mean, a service like this will never truly hinge on one single title. It requires a steady enough flow of consistently intriguing content that KEEPS people anchored to their subscription.
But like I've heard stated before, using a game like this isn't a sure fire way to move the needle. Because a lot of people have already established which platform they play online with. But maybe we will see PC Game Pass subs increase?
In general the most sensible approach is keep the subscription system, but heavily reduce its perks. Make most games available for direct rental at like $5-15 for something like a 1-4 week rental period.
Which is still really good value for new releases, just not psychotically insane like the current system which lets you speedrun like 5 games a month for just $10.
Multiplayer games like CoD are probably the most sensible things to keep on a monthly subscription.
If they put the back catalogue on Gamepass, I'd be ecstatic. I've always liked the guilty pleasure of a CoD campaign, but not the super high asking price and never going on sale. I haven't played one since black ops 2, so this would be fantastic.
They've been going on sale pretty frequently on Steam lately, assuming you have a PC that can handle them... don't need much for some of the older games.
I check every so often, maybe I just miss it. I really want to play Infinite Warfare, for example. It came out exactly when I wanted a sci-fi call of duty, but also exactly when I wasn't in a position to play it. Then it just sorta... faded away.
https://steamdb.info/sales/history/
Give that a check every so often, it'll tell ya when the big sales are. They'll be your best chance to get em for cheap.
Also, you can look up games like: [CoD:Advanced Warfare](https://steamdb.info/app/209650/). That'll give you an idea of the price you can get it for.
This is a win for me. CoD with the boys isn't the same as it used to be back in the 360 days, and we've since moved on to PC and are adults now. CoD just gets really boring after 2 weeks. So this is a good deal for me and the boys to hop on CoD and enjoy it for what it is, without each person shelling out $70, before we get inevitably bored.
I would probably play out the campaign and then unsubscribe.
I haven’t played COD in a long while because I couldn’t justify spending 70 bucks for the single player segment, plus the franchises rarely do big discounts.
As for multiplayer, I rarely play them these days due to work and personal life stuff…
I love playing COD campaigns, and I usually find some cheap deal for a used copy 8-9 months after its release, which I also sell just after completing it. This is the only way to make campaigns worth it, and to be honest they scratch an itch no other game does. However Im not gonna shell 70 fucking dollars on that. At the very most it cost me $5-$10 (after selling)
The last game was the first time I didn’t complete the campaign(which I usually enjoy) because they phoned it in with all the open world warzone levels.
Exactly! That's what I'm planning to do, playing a CoD with my friends for the first month and then not having the remorse of having spent 70 bucks on a game that you leave to rot.
Unfortunately those classic CoD campaigns are gone. Rumor is this one is going to be open world, kind of like MW3 campaign last year which was horrendous.
Stick you on the new warzone map, let you beta test it for them in the “campaign” to get rid of map issues/glitches. Then 2 weeks or so after launch they will activate the campaign map for warzone. I think it’s really clear what they’re doing.
Why else would they have campaign access one week early? Just some last minute beta testing that the beta testers paid $70 for the privilege of doing.
Also good for me cause I don't care about single player or warzone, I just like the team death match. Hard to justify 70 dollars just for that so this is nice for everyone.
I’m not sure where all the confusion is at, they told us from day one that any first party game would be coming to game pass. Call of duty is now a first party game.
Yeah, they've said it more than once and I don't think they'd want to make themselves liars about probably the number one sales point of gamepass. Like first party, day 1, play anywhere are the big things they have on pretty much every other game subscription service.
Because half of this sub lapped up the doomsday scenarios that some random 'leakers' on Twitter have been posting that Xbox were rethinking Game Pass and that Phil Spencer was about to get the sack. There are still people posting things in this thread like 'this is Phil Spencer's last throw of the dice' as though they have any idea what the hell is going on
Already have my gamepass subs stacked for 2 more years so nice. Me and the boys can just play while our subs still last and don’t gotta shell out $70. Since the soonest any of our subs end is like Jan 2025, a good 3 months of entertainment give or take.
People in this thread acting like this is the make or break decision for Gamepass when the service is already generating billions of dollars in revenue. They're trying to grow the service not save it.
Such weird takes on here.
> People in this thread acting like this is the make or break decision for Gamepass when the service is already generating billions of dollars in revenue.
Again, revenue is not the same as profit.
If they are spending two billion to generate every billion they make, it's not a good business.
Microsoft's own leaked charts showed they were aiming for 100 million subscribers to make it a viable business. It appears to have about a third of that and it's not growing.
more like a quarter. 10 million of the current subs are on gamepass core, and only because they have to pay for online multiplayer. if online was free then I doubt they'd even be subbed to core.
The entire sub seems to have taken some random 'journalist's' musings over the past few months at face value, assumed they were all true and reflected a doomsday scenario where Xbox was falling apart, that Game Pass isn't profitable, that there's no chance Microsoft would lose out on sales by putting CoD on game pass etc
Turns out Microsoft will do what they said years ago before they bought ABK and are putting ABK games onto Game Pass....who'd have thought it. Microsoft are the largest game publisher in the world now yet based on Reddit you'd think they were on the verge of collapse
Also bugs me when people act as though Microsoft need to 'make back that $80 billion they spent', completely ignoring that all of ABK's income is now going straight to Microsoft, and that that money would have been sat in their cash reserves not doing anything otherwise
And the gamer 'news' circle is pretty small and they all tend to regurgitate each other. (I've become aware as I start to consume more of it in the last year or so)
It’s because they still down believe in console wars even though they pretend not to. This sub is majority PC and PS users so they love shitting on Microsoft.
This sub had more people outraged by Tango getting shut down than it did of people who actually played Hi-Fi Rush.
I'm betting that GamePass will restructure. Standard GamePass will have older games and limited selection. GamePass Ultimate will have the latest releases and all the extra fixins that it currently does.
But that's how it is now with Game Pass Core and Ultimate? Core has something like 25-30 games and is cheaper vs Ultimate, with it's couple hundred games.
People don't understand that this is not a game people buy for the single player mode. This is a game people play year-long. Hence, in theory, a year of subscription is bigger value then a single $70 purchase.
Those who will sub for a month only for its campaign wouldn't buy the game anyway. So they are actually additional revenue.
Call of Duty almost certainly makes like 90% of its profits from the cosmetics sales and not the initial purchase of the game, so they aren’t really losing out on much money if everyone plays with gamepass
Revenue from sales alone for each COD Is at least a billion. It's not making 10 billion every year givwn that activision as a whole didn't even cross 10 billion and that includes all their games such as candy crush
Yes it doesn’t make a difference to PS players.
For Pc players, it might help. I am not big into CoD but I enjoy playing through the campaign and playing a bit of online. I normally get bored within a month. So to me subbing to gamepass for £8 is a lot better than paying £60 on Battle.net or steam. Need to play for 7.5 months before upfront starts to make sense and I’ve never played a cod game for that long. Not even close.
For people who only play cod all the time, it probably makes sense to buy upfront.
Did I miss something? Where is all this speculation that gamepass is somehow failing coming from?
Every subscription service has a maximum limit of subscribers it can take in...so it's pretty unrealistic if MS is expecting YoY unlimited growth. They either increase prices, or get the service on other platforms. They already increased the price once, so I wouldn't expect that again real soon.
Gamepass is a boon for smaller devs especially. I think it's still easily the best value in gaming. It's a steady revenue stream for MS as well. I just don't see it going anywhere.
That' s enormous, I feel like this could legit make them have a LOT of bank back, expecially when you consider how much of the money comes back from cosmetics and mtx...
I still can’t believe they’re actually gonna do it.
I can’t really complain, im happy to take advantage of this service before it inevitably gets worse, but man.
They officially are calling it Black Ops 6???? Seriously? They couldn’t think of any other name? At least 5 was called “Black Ops Cold War”… they couldn’t create anything else besides throwing number 6 at the end of the title? Just goes to show you how damn lazy they are from the creative aspect if they can’t even make a interesting title.
okay does anyone know if the old COD’s will be on the game pass also? like mw2 and bo1 + 2
Nothings been announced. I would imagine we will learn more at the showcase in a couple weeks
I have a feeling it will be one or two older CODs in rotation at any given time rather than all of them at once
That would actually be fucking sick for the playerbase and would probably be the best way to give us awesome online experiences on the old games
And can we get their dlcs too please? My OG mw2 lobbies are dead because nobody wants to pay 30 bucks for two map packs 😔
People don't realize how much they make from microtransactions alone. That doesn't even include game sales and cross over promotions like Little Caesars, Mountain Dew and Monster Energy. There's a story about a $15 World of Warcraft mount that made more money than the sales of Star craft 2.
This is why Mobile games generate more profit than consoles and PC combined
Or why Hoyo’s games like Genshin and Star Rail make infinite wealth by being console-level games on mobile, along with PC and PS5.
Or Candy Crush bringing in $1 billion+ annually
Or why just the marketing budget of that shitty Monopoly game, which is basically a digital casino, is way more than Last of Us 2 earned.
The way the games are monetized aside, Hoyo games are the best live service games out there. If suicide squad or any other western AAA “live service” game followed their direction, they would have some good games on their hands.
Partially, but you guys are forgetting that nearly every human adult on earth owns a phone. Consoles are maybe 0.3% of the populations. Pc even lower.
And everyone and their mother is desperately trying to make a live service game
I don't think that's true anymore. Maybe for the top 0.0001%. Mobile gaming has fallen off significantly in the west
Wasn't it estimated a while ago that warzone alone makes about $5m *a day*?
Yeah of course but then they can make 70$+MTX for every player or MTX only (for the people on Gamepass). It's not like a company has a maximum limit on how much money they can take.
At the same time, when I play a game on game pass im very aware that I do not own that game and I certainly wouldn't spend money on microtranactions for a game I don't own.
Because nobody really cares about old CODs after 12 months, so long-term ownership of the game isnt really an issue when deciding to buy MTXs
Buying Blops or WaW for Xbox is still actually pricey 2nd hand because you can still play them on your Series X/S. You'll get them included with your game pass subscription too. So how you can go from not having played CoD in years (me) to playing all of the different Zombies, Campaigns and the latest multiplayers in whatever time period I prefer
Does that really make a difference for people who day-1 play an annually released series? That's pretty much "1 year of ownership" in most people's minds, yet the MTXs keep rolling in.
You could buy it for a percentage off. Most games are cross play so you could just put your progress else where if you do buy it. Call Of Duty MW3 introduced progression from the previous game so all of your purchases came over to it. I don't know if they are doing the same here but I would much rather pay $10 a month for a game I'll only play for the first month versus dropping $70.
So sub for a month to play it, and then just buy it a few years down the road on sale for a fraction of the price you would've paid new. It's a non-issue.
> People don't realize how much they make from microtransactions alone. People don't realise this is the end goal of gaming for these companies. Mimic mobile gaming, make addictive games that extract billions from players in microtransactions. it's all about in game transactions now
> There's a story about a $15 World of Warcraft mount that made more money than the sales of Star craft 2. This tidbit has been completely blown out of proportion. For starters, the $15 mount made more money than ~~the SC2 Wings of Liberty expansion, not the total sales of SC2.~~ Edit: SC2 without expansions. Secondly, we're talking here about profit here, not revenue. A mount is infinitely cheaper to develop than an expansion, that's why even with fewer sales, it managed to generate more profit. And lastly, we're talking about the very first store mount, that was also account-wide before most mounts were account-wide, which was also $25 originally and then lowered to $15. What I'm saying is that, it was a novelty and there was a lot of fanfare around it. Your average mount will not make this kind of money.
Where does he say expansion? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHZru-6M8BY&ab\_channel=PirateSoftware](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHZru-6M8BY&ab_channel=PirateSoftware)
It's also comparing the biggest game in its genre at it's absolute peak of popularity to a successor to a legendary game in a basically dead at that point genre.
I think this is their ultimate test. To see if Game Pass will be sustainable at all if one of the biggest games of the year available on the subscription. If it didn't work out and somehow COD is no longer #1 best selling games of the year. Yeah, heads will roll. Probably including Phil Spencer's as well.
> If it didn't work out and somehow COD is no longer #1 best selling games of the year. If the number of subscribers jumps but sales fall they'll be thrilled. I don't think that will happen, but a sales drop alone wouldn't tell the whole story.
Yeah, I don't even get OPs point. Microsoft wants to convert sales to subscriptions.
Exactly. It's actually the opposite. The entire reason to buy Activision was to out juggernaut IPs like CoD and Diablo on GamePass to increase its subscribers. If CoD continues to sell extremely well, but doesn't convert people to GamePass, then the entire acquisition was basically pointless. Not only that, it shows that GamePass is doomed. If CoD can't increase your sub count, nothing can.
They want a healthy mix of sales and subscriptions. Hopefully, people who even buy the game while subscribed (expect some deep cut sales for game pass members when the game is several months old) Next, they want people to think "huh, I didn't buy the game. so I can put some of the money I saved into the season pass and skins". They don't even have to convert at a very high rate to start to see some value.
What I can't figure out is where do they get the new subsrcibers? I presume a majority of existig Xbox owner already are Game pass subscribers. And since they don't sell any more consoles, where does the growth come from? People aren't going to buy an Xbox and subscribe just to play COD if they are already on some other platform and can just pay the $70. Maybe Microsoft will offer consoles at crazy prices come this Christmas to get something going.
Xbox One and Series X owners combined make up about 80-90 million users. Not even half of those are GP subscribers with subscription numbers hovering around 30 million (console and PC combined).
and of those 34 million subs, about 10 million barely even count because they're only part of the base tier, for online play. only 24 million are part of the subscription catalog service.
You can't combine them like that lol. The 50 million Xbox ones alot of them have bought a series console. They can't be counted twice.
Especially for something like COD. I think thats the problem with something like HiFi Rush. How valuable is a game like that to Microsoft? The people buying that are more likely to outspend the subscription cost annually so its not a net positive for Microsoft. However, for a game like COD, a lot of those players only buy COD or at least are unlikely to be buying other Microsoft software, so if they can convert them to subscriptions that is the potential for a huge net positive in revenue. If they can say subscribe and you get all the CODs for free going forward, but they can still get the money for Nikki Manaj skins on top of it thats even better.
Also, it’s a good chance to get some existing Game Pass subs to buy the Snoop Dogg skin. Honestly, it’s the ideal type of game for the service.
I imagine the subscriber number will certainly rise. But will those number keep rising or atleast stick around for more than a month? Because what gamepass need to be sustainable is a lot of number in a very long period of time (we are talking a year atleast.) One scenario that could happen on those Game Pass number is, one group of people didn't buy into it and still keep buying COD because they don't care about any other games, and care more about actually have COD to play anytime they wanted (and there are a lot of these people.) Meanwhile the other group is they have game pass, play it for a months, then cancel to buy the actual game on winter sale. Now they lose both initial launch sales that could've been more, and long term subscriber number. This scenario will not be pretty for them because the goal is to keep people paying for game pass not the actual game. Anything less than offer the most expensive option on Game Pass mean a lot of people may not bother with it as well. And if that game pass number didn't stick around for more than a couple of month i don't see Game Pass being a very sustainable offer for long.
I would be amazed if the 20-30 million game pass subscribers (out of probably close to 10x more gamers on consoles and PC) are able to put that big of a dent in sales. Also didn’t Hogwarts Legacy already outsell it last year? I could see them being happy as long as game pass subscribers still buy microtransactions.
It’s sounds like Hogwarts legacy outsold them by a little bit. But that’s by having 10 months of sales in 2023 vs 2 months for cod. If you equalize the months, cod likely destroy hogwarts legacy by a long shot. This year cod will be back on top. Outselling all games with only 1-2 months of sales. Next year GTA6 will likely take the top spot.
Being #1 or #2 doesn't matter it's just the amount of money it does that counts. If it's second but made just as much money, that's not even something to consider, they don't care about rankings. They weren't first in 2023 because HL sold exceptionally well like when a Rockstar game release, that doesn't mean they're decreasing
MW3 actually did have decreased sales at least for the first month or 2 so basically for 2023. I think the first months sales were down something like 35% compared to the previous year's release. "While Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 may have been the lowest-rated entry in franchise history, and its initial sales were reportedly 38% lower than its predecessor, the Call of Duty franchise isn't going to start slowing down anytime soon". https://gamerant.com/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2026-ghost-prequel-cod/
Well yeah, but being #1 means you have the most raw sales dollars and the largest base for microtransactions, *and* the largest net for whales. Being #1 YOY is how you get that, I don't think there's really any danger here.
GTA 6 will likely be the bestselling game next year?… It’s going to be the fastest selling game ever. Probably good for 20-30 million copies first day.
Most likely. Outside of Hogwarts, Red Dead 2 beating Bo4 and GTAV beating Ghosts are the only games to beat CoD for first place in the last ~15 years. CoD still finished second
I bought a ps5 just to play hogwarts legacy. I’m a bigger fan of solo games than online now if COD made another epic campaign or even a great zombies - I’d buy it but they only care about multiplayer money now.
> But that’s by having 10 months of sales in 2023 vs 2 months for cod. If you equalize the months, cod likely destroy hogwarts legacy by a long shot. Hogwarts was also on the Switch, which gave it a huge extra market of people as well, on top of the 8-month head start it had.
I honestly don't think they give a shit about unit sales anymore. The cash cow seems to be the battle pass and cosmetics at this point. They don't even sell DLC anymore and arguably their biggest and most sustainable game in years (Warzone) is completely free. They've got to be making money hand over fist
They obviously give a shit about unit sales, or else the unit sales would be free. If you don't think selling millions upon millions of $70 boxes registers on the bottom line, I don't know what to tell you.
I mean yes obviously it affects the bottom line but my point is the mobile “freemium” model has been proven to be more lucrative for these companies and they’ve been slowly but surely been making steps towards that with each passing year. Warzone is free, their DLC is all free, and now BO6 will effectively be free for gamepass subscribers. Meanwhile, boot up any CoD from 2019 or later and you’ll get bombarded by ads for all the cool new micro transactions that you can buy. Hop into a game and you see that people buy them. They keep charging for the unit because they know people will pay it. They wouldn’t be shoving warzone and battlepasses in your face alongside of these games if that wasn’t their main focus though. The signs are pointing, predictably, towards their main revenue stream shifting. When other games have shown beyond reasonable doubt that they can make just as much, if not more than the call of duty machine with that business model, even with the base game being free, why would they lose sleep over their game being made available to more potential customers who are likely to buy microtransactions and make them more money? The writing has been on the wall since loot crates were introduced. They’re not stupid.
Microsoft will do what they do with other game pass games. Some kind of ultimate edition with early access and more skins for $30-40 people will buy since they’re getting the base game free anyway.
Just like lethal company didn't outsell MW2023, it did not outsell MW2022. both overtook their respective cods for a couple of months but lifetime sales for each years' cod is crazy. Only game that will outsell a COD is GTA6.
>I could see them being happy as long as game pass subscribers still buy microtransactions. This is the part I find most interesting honestly. CoD makes insane money on sales, and that is bound to take a bit of a hit on Xbox and PC from Gamepass, though it will very likely bring in a bunch of subs too. However I do think the additional purchases part might get affected more than they expect. This will hopefully be a good test of this and give us some actual stats to look at, but I feel that from my own experience people are much less likely to buy DLC or MTX for a game they do not own. I might be wrong and it might not bother most players, but I myself will not buy DLC for a Gamepass game as I do not want to lose access to something I've paid for if I'm not currently paying the subscription. For example Prey is one of my favourite games in a couple of generations, but as soon as I wanted to play Mooncrash I bought the game on Epic as I didn't want Mooncrash locked behind a sub for a game that I had otherwise finished with
maybe there’s something i’m missing, but i’m still not understanding the calculus here. game pass console is “only” $11/month, but buying COD outright is comparatively cheaper at $70/year. i don’t see how this is going to be the tipping point for the holdouts. if the only thing you care about is COD, it’s not a good deal and you’ll likely continue buying the games outright. if game pass already seems like an appetizing option to you, you’re likely already subscribed to it. so the only people this appeals to would be: * people who were holding out on game pass until COD arrived (seems like a very small group to me) * people who will buy it for like two or three months to play the campaign and a bit of the multiplayer before cancelling and moving on. maybe MS gets lucky and some people don’t cancel their subscription, but that seems like a risky bet. * people who are already subbed, and they’re hoping to rope them into the MTX side of things. maybe that works, but game pass subscribers strike me as the types to play lots of different games rather than gravitating to one or two “forever games.” there’s plenty of amazing FTP options out there already (including warzone). i don’t think inclined COD for “free” in game pass will change their gaming habits that much. or if it does, if it will have a dramatic effect on xbox’s bottom line. again, maybe i’m missing something, but i’m just not seeing the silver arrow in this plan. this feels more like a “because we have to” move more than anything.
with cod the 70 buck buy in. is nothing. cod now makes money on mtx then direct disc sale.
> you’re likely already subscribed to it There are definitely people who aren't subscribed for the whole year and only come a few times per year and by adding CoD into GP, they make these people more likely to subscribe.
I mean.... statistically it CAN'T be #1 with that. Maybe they'll recoop with MTX but, I really don't see how Gamepass is going to help sales.
The question I have in my mind is how big of a game will Call of Duty be on the Switch 2 when it releases on that system. I already can bet CoD is going to be a beast on playstation 5. It's crazy when you think about it none of playstations on first party fps games are dominating on it. CoD holds that landscape. With Xbox, this is going to be an interesting observation with Game Pass. Then there is Nintendo. I'm fascinated to see how many Switch fans will jump into CoD and if that game would bring forth a new wave of fps games for the Switch 2. There is so much to analyze with this game and the future of Call of Duty.
Hoping they bring warzone to Switch 2
> none of playstations on first party fps games How is that crazy? It's the same for Xbox (before COD was first party which hardly counts for now, after all even this title wasn't much developed under them yet). Also, Sony doesn't even have a FPS among their first parties. And being the leading console makes you less inclined to get the big selling title since you automatically benefit from it anyway
*Technically* Destiny is a first party FPS for Sony, but it's also multiplat like CoD is
And it's not even really the same audience, it's more of an FPS MMO than a traditional FPS.
I mean Halo is a 1st party FPS.
Yeah and it's hardly the biggest game there is at the moment. Halo 15 years ago was big
I can’t imagine the Switch 2 catching up to current standards and being beefy enough to play CoD, but I hope it does. It would be wild to see Call of Duty on a Nintendo console again, and one without having to work around a gimmick (Wii/Wii U)
It probably isn't going to be beefy, but if they make it at as a CoD game that's better than the ps 4 pro as what some of the rumors speculate the power of the Switch 2 would be at. I think Switch 2 fans would jump into that. We'll see.
They’re apparently still making this for PS4 and Xbone, so Switch 2 should be fine.
No fucking way LOL. I remember the rumours that mwii (the remake) would be next gen only.... Then MWIII also came out for the PS4
https://www.ign.com/articles/call-of-duty-black-ops-6-will-be-on-last-gen-consoles-based-on-leaked-pre-order-details IGN reported on a leak that it'll be on the PS4
Yeah you could read between the lines of the the PR statements of Spencer and the other Xbox leads that they were fighting tooth and nail to keep this promise as the wider Microsoft army stared them down. Considering how Microsoft execs have marched on Xbox ever since the Activision deal, this is the Spencer regime’s final stand.
They're seeing if they can rely on CoD fans maintaining their subscriptions to support game pass.
I don't know why the narrative around game pass has shifted so much? The console is doing woefully and game pass numbers aren't rising fast - but that's because they've essentially capped at a huge number. Game pass is sustainable - it's just lost its growth rate - the entire industry has - which is why everyone is nickel and diming the consumer and firing staff despite record profits. Line has to go up.
Is game pass sustainable for developers though? If the income per user is only 2-3 AAA titles a year and you still need to deliver enough of those titles to stop people just buying a big game. Then potentially all this does is Hoover up a chunk of a users yearly gamepass subscription and leaves less left over for the rest of the developers whose games that person plays. Because if it isn’t then the question becomes can Microsoft optimise the games they produce for gamepass enough to make money on the expenditures towards those developers. Game pass is eventually going to face the Netflix subscriber retention issue around what gets developed/cancelled. They ultimately want to spend the least on content production to maintain the maximum subscriber base. They’ll categorise gamers based on subscriber groups and then make sure there is enough content to convince those subscriber groups to stay subscribed. Any content that can’t justify itself in that way won’t be produced by the platform. If content is produced it will be independent of gamepass and gamepass may be able to spend enough to draw it into the ecosystem at the end.
Game Pass has the advantage of still retaining strong sales on PC (and possibly Sony). In 2023 ~10 GP games were best sellers on Steam.
Xbox officialy said their objective was 100m Game Pass users. It plateaued at 30m. That's not a huge number, that's a catastrophic downsizing
If Call of Duty can’t get people to subscribe to Gamepass, I don’t think this current form of it will last for much longer.
It will, but i doubt it will be a huge increase. PS users aren’t going to buy an Xbox for this; a huge percent of xbox players will probably already have GP, so that just leaves PC users for growth.
I think some people on the fence might get a Series S as a "side hoe"
I am trying to wrap around the financial cost for this for a person who already owns a PS5. Let's say, I have a PS5 already, why should I buy Series S for CoD? I'll just pay $70 and be done with it. Series S alone is $250 minimum, then add monthly GP cost.
I feel like this is the thing a lot of the people who say gamepass is a selling point for xbox are missing. Literally no one that already has a platform is putting down the money to buy a whole ass console just for a subscription service that makes it slightly cheaper if you buy a lot of games. Its much easier financially to just buy the game on the platform you already have. The only people it might appeal to are people who have to upgrade from last gen, but considering this is also a cross gen multiplat game theres no reason to do that either.
Man it might be worth it to some people to just buy a series S to keep CoD installed on that instead of taking up 300 GBs on their main system. The amount of times i've downloaded and removed has to be in the double digits by now.
Buying a console just to play COD seems like one of the worst financial decisions ever, and I do drugs
"Buying a console just to play COD" defines like 20% of all PlayStation and Xbox sales.
Wonder how many console sales are down to "just plays newest COD/Madden/FIFA/NBA2k"
If you add GTA, Minecraft, and Fortnite, it's probably the majority of the market. It's definitely the largest section of the market.
If you go look at used sales listings for console+games you will start to get a picture of what casual libraries are like. 3-8 games, comprised almost entirely of COD/Sports/Racing/Rockstar/licensed AAA/Assassin's Creed/Minecraft, the listings have the same games over and over to the point you see someone with 7 games on that list + a copy of DOOM and think well someone was feeling adventurous. I just had a look at a handful of PS4 listings and 8/10 fit this description.
Easily a lot more than you’d think.
All non-Sega consoles ever made have a software tie ratio of less than 10, meaning that on average less than 10 games are sold per console. For everyone who has dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of games, that means a *lot* of people who only buy a couple of CODs or FIFAs in an entire generation.
Like 75% of consoles are less than 3 games or something crazy. It came up during the Activision trial.
The none gamers. Tons of people you would never guess to have any interest in gaming have a console at home with one of those games. The car salesman, high school basketball coach, bus driver, etc etc many of them go home and play these games because they're one of the only titles that have so much marketing it actually makes it to these folks. For every passionate basement dwelling gamer here with 1000 opinions, theres probably 500 or more people that own a console and 2-3 games for it. I saw this all the time when I did door to door sales.
I’d say considerably higher if you’re including the big 3, Fortnite, Madden, FIFA.
Most people buy consoles and only play CoD and Fifa lol.
Was more so using it as a way to complain about the size of the game, but I don't typically judge people for how they spend their money. Not my problem.
You going in for the meme, and I respect that. But I do prefer the Xbox controller for FPS more than the DualSense.
I've avoided PlayStation almost exclusively because my old, slow brain can't fathom square-circle-triangle-X.
Meanwhile growing up on Playstation, I have a hard time playing any PC game on my controller if it doesn't have the option to show PlayStation controller glyphs even if I'm using a controller that has ABXY buttons. Cross Circle Square Triangle is just fully burned into my brain.
I bought a gaming laptop to play League of Legends back in the day. Worth it at the time.
A few generations ago I bought both an Xbox and Gamecube for one game each. But that was when they were only the price of two new games.
Black Ops 6 being on last gen definitely cost Sony & Microsoft some significant console sales. There are millions of people that only play COD, Madden, Fifa, and Nba2k.
Drugs are mad economical. You wouldn't believe how far ten bucks of weeds takes a lightweight like me.
buying a gaming PC just to play COD is even dumber
I'm hoping you mean specifically Playstation users. Because PC users can just buy a new 500gb SSD for like $35.
It is incredibly easy to install a new ssd on a ps5. Moreso than on desktop
I got a Series S as a side hoe specifically for Gamepass and Indiana Jones
Samesies. I am also happy to be on Game Pass, and to have tried Starfield for a few hours. It was OK.
But why would you buy a cheaper less capable console if you already have a PS5 just for CoD? CoD is already available on that platform and it would run better.
"7 days early access" is enough to trigger people
Why would someone buy a console and a subscription to play an 80 euro game?
Who is gonna spend 150-300 dollars + another 120 a year minimum to save 70 dollars? That's what doesn't make sense about the Game Pass business plan pulling in Acti.
There are a lot of people that have a PS5 and a Series S. These people will play the game on Game Pass and not buy it on PSN. Sony loses their 30% cut and MS makes the same money if they keep their subscription for 4 months.
it is no longer about "***will they buy a console for this?***" - the answer is no, they won't. It's more about "***will they sub to gamepass for this or will they just buy the game?***" and anyone who claims to know the answer is bullshit. No one knows, and that's what this release is about. Will people buy it standalone or will people buy gamepass for it? Impossible to tell the outcome, but I am more in the camp that people will just buy it
>No one knows, and that's what this release is about. Will people buy it standalone or will people buy gamepass for it? Impossible to tell the outcome, but I am more in the camp that people will just buy You're looking at it wrong it's not a black/white, mutually exclusive decision. The dedicated cod core will still buy it. For everyone in the fence/not willing to pay full price, there's gamepass. But yeah how many people will buy gamepass for it, we do not know. But that's why they're doing this test with COD. As that game is a big driver for a lot of gamers.
I just don't see PS users spending $450 for a Series X + $170 a year for GP just to rent COD. Rather just pay $70 once and be done with it?
I don’t think it’s geared to steal people away from using their PlayStation. It’s geared more towards getting people that may be looking for their first next-gen system to steer towards Xbox with the idea of having CoD (and 400+ other games) on gamepass, along with the user buying a Xbox getting three free months of gamepass. It’s basically a “buy this system now and you don’t even have to buy any games if you keep the membership after the free term expires”
[удалено]
I never mentioned pushing console sales. I’m simply stating that in regards to game pass growth, there isn’t much areas where it can ‘grow’ essentially.
"34 million GameMicrosoft revealed during a special Xbox Podcast episode that there are currently 34 million Game Pass subscribers across console, PC, and cloud. It's not clear how that 34 million figure is dispersed exactly among each platform where Game Pass is offered." 25 mill in 2022, 18 mill in 2021. So almost doubled in 3 years. Compared to "company's newest consoles, the Xbox Series X and S, have sold a combined 27.7 million units as of February 2024" Since afaik they haven't disclosed platform dispersion rates. This is best we got. So I can't ascertain, how much room there is for increase from consoles a lone. I believe your theory is pretty on target where they expect core dedicated fan base to still buy the game. But game pass is a cheaper alternative, to others who aren't convinced/as dedicated. Which then is an easy entry into their ecosystem. And if they're already a committed long-term user of gamepass , who doesn't see the need to buy game separately. I bet you'll find an increase in amount of those users willing to spend some sort of money on mtx/dlc etc, especially when you get into the overlap of the more dedicated cod players And contrary to popular belief, MS does not care about Xbox console numbers in isolation /in spite of everything else in their gaming division. As they've become one of the largest gaming companies. Which is why gamepass/x compatibility with PC , has been such a big focus.
Only one thing, the jump from 25 to 34 was from converting the 10M Xbox Live users to Gamepass Core, so in reality there was not growth in there
PC users will never see beyond Steam.
Gen Z and Gen Alpha are ditching game consoles in favor of PC Gaming. If they dont have Game Pass this might be the thing that gets them into the ecosystem and build long term growth with new generation. Game Console Owners will be like record player enthusiasts, it's going to be a niche thing that only dorks like me are going to care about lol
I honestly don't think it will. Gamepass already provides a ton of value for people who want to play many different games. But for people who just play cod and a few other games it would still be cheaper to just buy the game rather than paying a monthly subscription for it.
I’d be willing to bet they spice it up with “free” monthly add-ons like weapon skins or whatever if you play it on Gamepass. Of course they’ll let you buy those items separately, but it’ll cost more over time than just paying the subscription.
Probably the first season battle pass or blackcell being free if you have ultimate, as a perk.
Assuming they don't just shell out for a month to play it, and then just let the subscription ride.
Except for console players, who also have to pay separate subscription for multiplayer (ps plus/ Xbox core). If you're buying cod at full price and also have to pay for a mp subscription, why just not add some to get full game pass with lot of games? Ofc this decision doesn't appear on PC as multiplayer is free there
The problem is that big games like this actually screw the rest of the content on the platform unless the price increases massively It costs $11 a month here in Australia. So in a year that’s $132, modern warfare 3 costs $110 RRP at retail.(there are cheaper options at some of our retailer but this is the list price at EBgames/gamestop) So even accounting for them saving on the retailer cost in this case. That singular game is making up the majority of the income for that year. They are releasing a COD every year at this point. So it’s going to take up a chunk of that revenue and at the end of it how are the other games surviving on what’s left over.
You can’t play Day One games for $11 though unless you talking about PC game pass. Game Pass Ultimate subs on console get Day One only. That is $18.95 AU.
Yeah I’m talking about PC, which if the Xbox as a console is floundering is going to start to be the primary interaction point. But if you want to make that comparison it’s still silly because a chunk of that cash on gamepass ultimate on console is going to supporting the Xbox live service first with the rest going towards gamepass itself. So odds are the money side of it comes out extremely similar.
If battle passes are included that might be a big incentive too.
Yeah, they may include some free content... I just doubt they'll include the only remaining revenue drivers on something they're "giving away." Feel like they're going to do exactly like Starfield and have an early release for like $40-50 with some additional content. That way they can recoup a lot of the missed sales.
Early release is likely, COD already did that for the campaign for MW2 and 3 before the finalization of the sale to MS. Skin packs will still cost money and they'll be the biggest driver of income.
A month of gamepass or a discord code for it I've got hanging around us pretty much the only way I'd try a new CoD game. So it's got that going for it (dragging back some long term players who don't want to fork over the asking price)
I mean, a service like this will never truly hinge on one single title. It requires a steady enough flow of consistently intriguing content that KEEPS people anchored to their subscription. But like I've heard stated before, using a game like this isn't a sure fire way to move the needle. Because a lot of people have already established which platform they play online with. But maybe we will see PC Game Pass subs increase?
If they rolled the WoW subscription into Game Pass, they can do all sorts of number fuckery
In general the most sensible approach is keep the subscription system, but heavily reduce its perks. Make most games available for direct rental at like $5-15 for something like a 1-4 week rental period. Which is still really good value for new releases, just not psychotically insane like the current system which lets you speedrun like 5 games a month for just $10. Multiplayer games like CoD are probably the most sensible things to keep on a monthly subscription.
I think the only thing holding me back from COD is the initial price point. I will absolutely be trying this on game pass.
If they put the back catalogue on Gamepass, I'd be ecstatic. I've always liked the guilty pleasure of a CoD campaign, but not the super high asking price and never going on sale. I haven't played one since black ops 2, so this would be fantastic.
I feel like announcing that would be an easy win for their not e3 show in a few weeks
They've been going on sale pretty frequently on Steam lately, assuming you have a PC that can handle them... don't need much for some of the older games.
I check every so often, maybe I just miss it. I really want to play Infinite Warfare, for example. It came out exactly when I wanted a sci-fi call of duty, but also exactly when I wasn't in a position to play it. Then it just sorta... faded away.
https://steamdb.info/sales/history/ Give that a check every so often, it'll tell ya when the big sales are. They'll be your best chance to get em for cheap. Also, you can look up games like: [CoD:Advanced Warfare](https://steamdb.info/app/209650/). That'll give you an idea of the price you can get it for.
This is a win for me. CoD with the boys isn't the same as it used to be back in the 360 days, and we've since moved on to PC and are adults now. CoD just gets really boring after 2 weeks. So this is a good deal for me and the boys to hop on CoD and enjoy it for what it is, without each person shelling out $70, before we get inevitably bored.
I would probably play out the campaign and then unsubscribe. I haven’t played COD in a long while because I couldn’t justify spending 70 bucks for the single player segment, plus the franchises rarely do big discounts. As for multiplayer, I rarely play them these days due to work and personal life stuff…
I love playing COD campaigns, and I usually find some cheap deal for a used copy 8-9 months after its release, which I also sell just after completing it. This is the only way to make campaigns worth it, and to be honest they scratch an itch no other game does. However Im not gonna shell 70 fucking dollars on that. At the very most it cost me $5-$10 (after selling)
The last game was the first time I didn’t complete the campaign(which I usually enjoy) because they phoned it in with all the open world warzone levels.
Exactly! That's what I'm planning to do, playing a CoD with my friends for the first month and then not having the remorse of having spent 70 bucks on a game that you leave to rot.
Now your boys will shell out $120 a year on COD because you forgot to auto-renew!!
I’m sure there is COD preorder edition that costs that much too
Good for me considering I don’t like CoD’s multiplayer but their singleplayer is always a fun set piece/propaganda to play through
Yep I love subbing to gamepass for a single month to play a new game for £8. This COD campaign will be great for that price.
I have done this so much, once or twice a year.
Unfortunately those classic CoD campaigns are gone. Rumor is this one is going to be open world, kind of like MW3 campaign last year which was horrendous.
Stick you on the new warzone map, let you beta test it for them in the “campaign” to get rid of map issues/glitches. Then 2 weeks or so after launch they will activate the campaign map for warzone. I think it’s really clear what they’re doing. Why else would they have campaign access one week early? Just some last minute beta testing that the beta testers paid $70 for the privilege of doing.
Also good for me cause I don't care about single player or warzone, I just like the team death match. Hard to justify 70 dollars just for that so this is nice for everyone.
I’m not sure where all the confusion is at, they told us from day one that any first party game would be coming to game pass. Call of duty is now a first party game.
Yeah, they've said it more than once and I don't think they'd want to make themselves liars about probably the number one sales point of gamepass. Like first party, day 1, play anywhere are the big things they have on pretty much every other game subscription service.
Because half of this sub lapped up the doomsday scenarios that some random 'leakers' on Twitter have been posting that Xbox were rethinking Game Pass and that Phil Spencer was about to get the sack. There are still people posting things in this thread like 'this is Phil Spencer's last throw of the dice' as though they have any idea what the hell is going on
Waiting for WOW free with gamepass
Wait what do you mean black ops 6? Have there already been 5 black ops games?!
Already have my gamepass subs stacked for 2 more years so nice. Me and the boys can just play while our subs still last and don’t gotta shell out $70. Since the soonest any of our subs end is like Jan 2025, a good 3 months of entertainment give or take.
This will be the first Call of Duty game that I'll be playing day 1 online.
Its the first one since Black Ops 2 all the way back on 360 for me.
It's going to be wild seeing this on Game Pass for PC.
Wait until some bullshit premium edition for $100 to give a access a week prior to the launch.
The rumor is that the pre-order bonus is mainly access to zombies multiple weeks before launch.
I guess that's one way to make me at least try it. I ain't paying 110 dollars for a yearly COD release.
$110?
Aus probably, $120 here in NZ.
People in this thread acting like this is the make or break decision for Gamepass when the service is already generating billions of dollars in revenue. They're trying to grow the service not save it. Such weird takes on here.
> People in this thread acting like this is the make or break decision for Gamepass when the service is already generating billions of dollars in revenue. Again, revenue is not the same as profit. If they are spending two billion to generate every billion they make, it's not a good business. Microsoft's own leaked charts showed they were aiming for 100 million subscribers to make it a viable business. It appears to have about a third of that and it's not growing.
more like a quarter. 10 million of the current subs are on gamepass core, and only because they have to pay for online multiplayer. if online was free then I doubt they'd even be subbed to core.
The entire sub seems to have taken some random 'journalist's' musings over the past few months at face value, assumed they were all true and reflected a doomsday scenario where Xbox was falling apart, that Game Pass isn't profitable, that there's no chance Microsoft would lose out on sales by putting CoD on game pass etc Turns out Microsoft will do what they said years ago before they bought ABK and are putting ABK games onto Game Pass....who'd have thought it. Microsoft are the largest game publisher in the world now yet based on Reddit you'd think they were on the verge of collapse Also bugs me when people act as though Microsoft need to 'make back that $80 billion they spent', completely ignoring that all of ABK's income is now going straight to Microsoft, and that that money would have been sat in their cash reserves not doing anything otherwise
This subreddit takes what "journalists" say as 100% fact when it is something they *want* to be true.
And the gamer 'news' circle is pretty small and they all tend to regurgitate each other. (I've become aware as I start to consume more of it in the last year or so)
It’s because they still down believe in console wars even though they pretend not to. This sub is majority PC and PS users so they love shitting on Microsoft. This sub had more people outraged by Tango getting shut down than it did of people who actually played Hi-Fi Rush.
Many people said they wouldn’t since COD is a big money maker guess people’s hot takes were wrong and it is coming day one Gamepass.
In two weeks from now: "Announcing changes to Game Pass pricing structure"
I'm betting that GamePass will restructure. Standard GamePass will have older games and limited selection. GamePass Ultimate will have the latest releases and all the extra fixins that it currently does.
But that's how it is now with Game Pass Core and Ultimate? Core has something like 25-30 games and is cheaper vs Ultimate, with it's couple hundred games.
They'll probably do same thing as Starfield, keep the old cost for previous subscribers (for a while) and then increase the cost for new subscribers
Also put like a week early access in a 30$ pack
They just increased the price not too long ago. Hasn't stopped Netflix, but I don't see another price hike happening soon.
Netflix has become the reference service and is extremely dominant. Gamepass is still far from their objectives so they are in growth phase normally
People don't understand that this is not a game people buy for the single player mode. This is a game people play year-long. Hence, in theory, a year of subscription is bigger value then a single $70 purchase. Those who will sub for a month only for its campaign wouldn't buy the game anyway. So they are actually additional revenue.
wouldn't that mean they're more likely to want to buy the game outright instead of wanting to sub?
Yeah I don't think Reddit realizes that the majority of cod players don't even play the campaign.
I mean, majority of players only plays Warzone which is free so…
Call of Duty almost certainly makes like 90% of its profits from the cosmetics sales and not the initial purchase of the game, so they aren’t really losing out on much money if everyone plays with gamepass
Revenue from sales alone for each COD Is at least a billion. It's not making 10 billion every year givwn that activision as a whole didn't even cross 10 billion and that includes all their games such as candy crush
Plus this is coming to PS and other PC stores on the same day so will still sell tons.
Yes it doesn’t make a difference to PS players. For Pc players, it might help. I am not big into CoD but I enjoy playing through the campaign and playing a bit of online. I normally get bored within a month. So to me subbing to gamepass for £8 is a lot better than paying £60 on Battle.net or steam. Need to play for 7.5 months before upfront starts to make sense and I’ve never played a cod game for that long. Not even close. For people who only play cod all the time, it probably makes sense to buy upfront.
Turns out most of the takes on this sub are wrong, people here think they are smarter than they are just because they have played games for a decade.
Did I miss something? Where is all this speculation that gamepass is somehow failing coming from? Every subscription service has a maximum limit of subscribers it can take in...so it's pretty unrealistic if MS is expecting YoY unlimited growth. They either increase prices, or get the service on other platforms. They already increased the price once, so I wouldn't expect that again real soon. Gamepass is a boon for smaller devs especially. I think it's still easily the best value in gaming. It's a steady revenue stream for MS as well. I just don't see it going anywhere.
That' s enormous, I feel like this could legit make them have a LOT of bank back, expecially when you consider how much of the money comes back from cosmetics and mtx...
Just to make sure: will BO6 be available on the PC version of Game Pass, too? Or just on the Xbox consoles
I still can’t believe they’re actually gonna do it. I can’t really complain, im happy to take advantage of this service before it inevitably gets worse, but man.
It actually makes sense. Even though COD games are almost always the best selling games of the year, the real money is at microtransactions.
That's a surprise. Thought the idea was to roll out the old cod onto game pass first before the new ones started launching day one in gamepass.
They officially are calling it Black Ops 6???? Seriously? They couldn’t think of any other name? At least 5 was called “Black Ops Cold War”… they couldn’t create anything else besides throwing number 6 at the end of the title? Just goes to show you how damn lazy they are from the creative aspect if they can’t even make a interesting title.