this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2025
202 points (98.1% liked)

Games

42632 readers
711 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MithranArkanere@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Infinite growth is impossible, so they switched to squeezing something until it breaks, then identifying the next thing to squeeze. Eventually, they run out of things to squeeze, and switch to squeezing the people directly.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago

And it started with convincing console gamers it is necessary to pay for multiplayer. Whole ecosystem has been about trying to squeeze consumers for all the money they have. Even the locked proprietary hardware feeds into it of normalizing lack of control over hardware.

But, it is Microsoft at the top so not surprising.

[–] FalseTautology@lemmy.zip 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Is it fair to blame 343 Studios' incredibly, laughably incompetent handling of the Halo franchise for this? And by this I mean the obvious death of the Xbox as a gaming platform. Or, from a different perspective, could Halo have actually saved the Xbox if the games had been amazing, or even just good?

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Possibility. Halo is a huge title and they trashed it. They should have finished out halo wars and odst trilogy and start one for the arbiter.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 15 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

While they might or might not have reasons to raise prices, those people who cancelled their subscriptions definitively had their reason.

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 5 points 20 hours ago

Yeah, it's too expensive.

[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 62 points 1 day ago

Xbox: "Price Increases Are Never Fun For Anybody"

Meanwhile Xbox execs:

[–] sadfitzy@ttrpg.network 34 points 1 day ago

It's fun for the people making more profit.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I remember when GamePass was first announced and everybody lauded Microsoft for being “pro-consumer” and outright cheered when they started buying up independent studios.

I remember being downvoted to oblivion for pointing out the very obvious 5 year plan for GP and the fact that it would go… exactly the way it’s currently going.

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I never understood the praise at all. It's literally turning DRM into a business model.

[–] Suburbanl3g3nd@lemmings.world 3 points 15 hours ago

Lol that's always been the business model

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I've been in the fuck subscriptions camp. Sony locking multiplayer behind PS+ was wha5 led me to dropping consoles as my primary gaming system, since I refused to pay for multiplayer.

[–] krooklochurm@lemmy.ca 1 points 16 hours ago

Tbf when Xbox first launched console multiplayer there was a monthly fee too.

That was anti-consumer from the get-go but it was also there from the start.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don’t mind subscriptions for ongoing infrastructure as much. My problem is with using a subscription to replace ownership.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If they are charging to multiplayer why wouldn't they want to replace ownership too so they get money every month.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Platform infrastructure like PSN costs an inordinate amount of money. People owning games they paid for does not cost you any money.you already made your money back by selling them the ownership.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Sounds like excuses when PS3 and Nintendo Wii, WiiU, and Nintendo DS had free multiplayer and it was after Sony decided to start charging Nintendo also jumped onboard because they saw peope like you were easy to take their money.

I don't even know why you'd have a problem with Xbox charging more for their subscription when you already argue for paid online.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Yes, charging customers for a product that costs you money to maintain is an excuse, and a valid one. Sony and Nintendo were giving away an expensive service for free to the user. It was generous, and a way to reduce friction with onboarding new users.

They jumped on board because maintaining that infrastructure has become exponentially more expensive to maintain today than it was 20 years ago.

I don't even know why you'd have a problem with Xbox charging more for their subscription when you already argue for paid online.

Because unlike paid user services, game ownership is not something that costs them any money. They aren’t recouping their costs for a service they provide, it’s just rentseeking.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah I don't buy it. Nintendo does free across multiple hardware then when they saw they were the only one decided they'd start taking money too, since it is in a companies nature to maximize profits exponentially.

And then there's Steam. Also in the hardware business and hosting games and mods and a bunch of other services even Epic with their Fortnite money hasn't matched. Yet online is free.

You just sound like a consumer who iust accepts whatever methods companies try to exploit consumers and defend as necessary. More a stockholder than a consumer.

[–] EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 points 15 minutes ago* (last edited 10 minutes ago)

You don’t buy… the fact that infrastructure that has to scale to millions of users globally, and the salaries of the many employees who maintain it cost money…? Buddy that shit costs literal millions a year.

Nintendos online user services were never free. They went from not having them, to having them and charging money.

And yes Steam is eating a metric shit ton of costs to give you those services for free. Because PCs are an open platform, they have to compete to keep you on their storefront. They eat all those costs because you don’t have to buy new hardware in order to switch.

These are very, very simple concepts you’re failing to grasp.

[–] sadfitzy@ttrpg.network 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yep. Same thing with netflix.

The average consumer is a moron, so their complacency is irrelevant in determining what's a good deal.

[–] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Yep in this thread I've been arguing with someone who is saying consoles have to charge for online because it is so expensive... Yet, on PC for platforms like Steam and Epic despite also hosting game downloads and having multiplayer games they don't charge.

Just goes to show how some consumers after being so used to not having flexibility and lack of restrictions when it comes to products become convinced it is necessary.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

I feel like I responded to this exact comment on Reddit years ago saying the same. The thing people don't realize, is subscriptions give you zero control of ownership and it's always in the best interest of the corp to bait and switch.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sundray@lemmus.org 134 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Never fun for anybody

Meanwhile, at Microsoft:

[–] Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 42 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, but, but, think of the shareholders! Nobody ever thinks about the shareholders! :(((

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] fuzzywombat@lemmy.world 39 points 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (12 children)

Raising the price of hardware twice since May and now raising the price of game pass by 50% is not something a company would do if they're interested in competing against Sony or Nintendo. Clearly Microsoft has thrown in the towel on XBOX. Only thing left for Microsoft to do is announce cancellation of next gen console altogether and do layoffs. I don't know when that will happen but it's inevitable at this point.

[–] rozodru@piefed.social 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

yup they'll go the route of Sega. The writing has been on the wall with the Xbox Division for awhile now that I'm honestly surprised they're still trying to "make it work".

Xbox was a weird one. I haven't used one since the 360 and honestly I couldn't even begin to tell you what the next console in the line was after the 360. was it the series x? was it the one? I dont' know. I mean after buying like 5 360s because of red ring or whatever why would I continue that idiocy?

[–] Laser@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago

Lol yeah the naming was incredibly bad. But I'm pretty sure it was 360 -> one -> series. I only owned the original one (not the One one) and a 360 which luckily was unaffected by RRoD.

I think the 360 was really good all things considered, it was a good console at the time and MS actually helped getting smaller studios their stuff into the store with summer of arcade. It also captured a lot of interest from third party studios. All in all pretty solid. Damn shame that the RRoD tainted the console so much.

Segmenting the market after into S and X was a really dumb move in my opinion. The other one was trying to turn it into an entertainment machine instead of a game console (TV, TV, TV, sports...)

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Prove_your_argument@piefed.social 77 points 2 days ago (4 children)

They're also upping the sub price for some home user office plans. Apparently it's milk the customer time at microsoft.

[–] bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone 52 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Part of the problem is that most of the people making these decisions have been seeing their incomes and net worth increase steadily over the past decade. They don't truly understand their subscriber base.

[–] RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 day ago

But they do understand "charge what the market will bear". It's all about short term profit.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] JeeBaiChow@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago

Lol, but here's one anyway. - Microsoft

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Especially for the companies who disappear because they were too greedy.

[–] datavoid@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm trying to think of a single example and I'm struggling

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Microsoft was never going to make gaming affordable. The entire goal of GP is like any subscription service, to get you hooked so they can increase the prices. Microsoft is not and never was a pro consumer company. And GamePass is Microsoft’s attempt at making a hardwareless console. It’s a BYOD walled garden. It’s bad for consumers and bad for developers and publishers. Consumers will own nothing and studios are beholden to MS gatekeepers. Some account manager basically decides how much the devs will be financially compensated before the game is even released, instead of letting the market decide. Remember those court documents which showed how much they under valued Baldur’s Gate 3. If you think the standard 30% store cut is outrageous GamePass is on another level of bad. Sure they are currently showering devs in cash, but once MS has a significant chunk of the market they are going to turn off that tap. We’ve seen it with Netflix and Spotify. Like even the most popular artists earn fractions of cents per user.

[–] commander@lemmy.world 42 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Sacrifice the future for a temporary revenue/profit go up

[–] AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, it will work out for them. They just made a 50% profit increase. I doubt if even 10% of subscribers cancel.

It worked for Netflix, Disney+, Hulu... People just need to stop buying shit, but they won't.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

but we're trying to reinforce by adding more value to these plans as well."
Fortnite Crew and Ubisoft+ Classics

So if you don't play Fortnite and aren't interested in 15 different Assassin's Creed titles, fuck you I guess

[–] datavoid@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago

Imagine, if you will, the possibility of NOT increasing prices 50% to give us the "additional value" of shit we don't want.

I was happy paying for games, but suddenly I'm extremely willing to get back into piracy. Fucking weird, right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] EnderLaw@lemmy.world 37 points 2 days ago
[–] Talaraine@fedia.io 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They've made very clear that they're reducing functionality, dropping products including their gaming companies, and raising prices across the board to somehow come up with billions for AI. They no longer care about their customers or employees, only this holy grail quest for money that will evaporate. Dump Microsoft.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Thank you captain obvious?

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's something we don't take lightly, and we're listening to the feedback of players and the community to try to provide them with more of what they’re asking for.

God they will never understand that we see right through their bullshit corpo-speak answers will they. Everything they just said is nothing. They don't take it lightly. They are listening. They will try. There is nothing concrete in that wet paper towel of an answer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You're selling an underpowered console that spies on the home for 800usd. Stfu about the price being tough on the company

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›