AG writes: Since the dawn of 3D graphics back in the early 1990′s, the perception of the humble video game console has been drastically changed depending on who some people feel the entire hardware caters for specifically.
Starting today, Game Pass Ultimate drops from $29.99 to $22.99 a month. PC Game Pass will also drop from $16.49 to $13.99 a month. Prices may vary by region.
Beginning this year, future Call of Duty titles won’t join Game Pass Ultimate or PC Game Pass at launch. New Call of Duty games will be added to Game Pass Ultimate and PC Game Pass during the following holiday season (about a year later), while existing Call of Duty titles already in the library will continue to be available.
Its nice there is some kind of drop... but is that all they really value CoD to be, a lousy $7 a month?
I was hoping it would drop by $10.
That $7 equates to $84 per year - which is more than COD new ($69.99 + tax).
So - you can get the exact same thing - and save a few bucks - or you can skip COD and pocket the savings or use toward another game - or games if on sale.
That’s how I’m taking it - and is enough for me to sign back up after canceling the day it went to $29.99.
It's unlikely that COD is going to be the only title they stop offering day one, but we'll see how they play their hand.
Including Call of Duty in Game Pass is just leaving money on the table. When the Elder Scrolls VI releases hopefully Microsoft doesn’t launch it into Game Pass. Then it can make more profits and use it give more value to Xbox console owners!
Can’t wait to hear how this will be spun extremely positive. 🤣
I wonder why knowing Microsoft thick head something must has happened in the background in the levels of Xbox one and Kinect 🤷🏿
Any price cut is a good thing in this day and age, but it also reveals a flaw in GamePass' design that we've all been calling out for years... it's unsustainable, especially with day and date releases on new games. COD won't be the only game they exclude, they're setting a precedent with it that they'll likely expand upon in the future.
At least they're being realistic about it now. I bet in the future we're going to start seeing them try to subsidize the high price of new consoles by making you buy 2-3 years of gamepass with it to get the console cheaper. I'm still not sure that'll be enough to save either the hardware or gamepass, but we'll see.
price cuts are good, the removal of Call of Duty is clearly something they are planning to leverage. But considering everyone around N4G claims Call of Duty sucks, it's not a big loss now is it?
Well, they're removing their biggest game from being Day 1 on the service so GamePass users can buy it instead. That's the intention.
They increased the price to $30, then removed COD and dropped it to still be above the old price.
It's an understandable compromise but the consumer Ultimately is getting less.
Think the calculation is that *most* COD users don't play that many games and aren't interested in GamePass. The GamePass users who do like COD would just buy it anyway. MS reportedly lost out a lot of money last year putting COD on GamePass.
Well Call of duty could just be the beginning. What other games can they trim from the service to get the price down? How long before it's just the Xbox core first party studio games and not the one to everquired?
Create an interesting scenario with Call of duty as well. Will people wait a year to play it? Does that split the fan base? Will it hurt to Call of duty more than a benefits Game pass? These are all legitimate questions which we will find the answers to in the coming years
And I don't consider my post negative spin just realistic observation. At the very least this backtracking can be seen as an admittance that the previous strategy of gamepass was not sustainable as most of us said.
I'd get rid of the EA and Ubisoft+ too. That should bring the price down more. The only game from either of those parts of the service i played was jedi Fallen order / survivor. both of which i also bought on disc so it was more of a convenience i didnt have to put the disc in to play when i was playing them via remote play. And really that is why i still use GPU and PS+. its the convenience of having the games ready to play from a remote location. I havent picked up my consoles controllers in at least a few years. I guess that makes me a bad gamer, but so what. i'm still playing the games, just not physically on the machines themselves. GCloud and Portal are my go to now.
They’ll say no one is buying game pass so they had to drop the price , even though it’s been extremely profitable.
Why remove CoD if it's *extremely* profitable then? Why even increase it to begin with?
Always funny seeing those that defended the price hike go "how you gonna spin this now!" after the price drops.
You should be thanking those that called it out. Obviously this is a good thing especially with everything increasing nowadays.
Also, what happened to the reason why that the Activision acquisition was good for gaming was that CoD would be day one on GamePass? Another backtrack on that I guess...
What removing CoD on GamePass shows, is that it's not sustainable for for the more popular and/or bigger budget games because of the sales you lose out on like people have been saying since inception. It never made sense to put CoD on there unless you thought it's popularity would draw in a lot of subscribers which it obviously didn't. And if it was as sustainable as people claim they wouldn't have increased the price while putting it on there in the first place.
In my region, it’s still more expensive than it was before the last price hike, but it’s a far more viable price point.
Losing Call of Duty from the service, honestly, has zero effect on me, and given they chose to make it so, it’s probably not the big seller they originally thought. Overall, it’s really good news, but I still think they have work to do on the tier structure, having Premium and PC at the same price point with different features feels odd.
Yep take COD out. Them waiting a year is interesting but it make sense. They don't want certain ppl waiting 4 to 6 months they want fomo and maximum sales. Wait a year while the new one releases.
Ok so far so good.
A new Call of Duty game that isn't Modern Warfare 4 may be coming, and the surprise re-emergence of Warzone Mobile could be crucial to it.
According to Rovio, the redundancies are due to Angry Birds Dream Blast "not... performing as expected."
A hardcore game is a game that isn't going to make itself easy for the satisfaction of the inexperienced gamer.
It expects you to man up and grow a pair of balls - big ones. It's going to punish the weak and reward the strong. It's wants you to whip horses with chainsaws and drink oil while wearing army boots. It wants you to have knife fights with sailors with girls names and it wants you to eat metal for breakfast.
Now if you'll excuse me, i must go and comb my chest hair....
There are no hardcore games, only hardcore players.
I might have to write a blog to elaborate on this....
Hardcore games have multilayered storylines, gameplay that you cannot get bored with, something that doesnt run on a gimmick, and lastly, something you WANT to replay over and over.
I think we can justly say that there havnt been any hardcore games that have come out in a very long time. Last one for me personally (you cant include fighting games and multiplayer in this conversation, FYI HUGE street fan) was mgs4. Ive played that literally 5 times.
Reason you cant include multiplayer is, Even the really bad games, by nature, you can replay again and again. Example here would be something like mario kart wii, pretty bad overall when a handheld version is considered superior (mario kart ds) however, the game still made people play again and again.
Why some ppl like the one who write this article struggle to understand what a hardcore game is? is it really so hard to get it? here a simple explanation, Hardcore is:
1st a game that dont keep your hand & show u the way from start to finish
2nd a game that need a skilled & experienced player to grasp it's gameplay and unlock all the secrets this has to offer
3rd a game that force u to use your brain in order to progress
I cant make u a list of which is and which is not hardcore game but I can give u an example from Wii, this console is 99% casual games, games that any little kid in elementary school can start and finish w/o a sweat, but now in the end of the console's lifespan Nintendo decide to release some games that is not obviously for little kids & casual gamers.
The best example is Xenoblade Chronicles, this game demands from u to invest countless hours to finish it & to use your brain a lot to understand the complexity of the gameplay that's a pure hardcore game 100% a game which if u decide to unlock all it's secrets u must be prepare to spent more than 150 hours.
A hardcore game is a game with complexity, the difference between hardcore and casual is the difference between the level of complexity and simplicity. There are levels of hardcore, because there are games with hardcore controls, but not hardcore stories or themes. It's not just about complex gameplay, it's about complex story, art, design, graphics, controls. So Mario Galaxy,may have hardcore gameplay, but it has casual controls (because of the Wiimote), casual story, hardcore design and art, casual graphics.
IMO Metal Gear Solid is thee most hardcore game in gaming, looking at the story, controls, gameplay, design, art(may be the most casual part of it) and graphics. Not the reason I feel it's the greatest game ever, but I believe being a really core gamer by itself will make you have it in high regard.