Obsidian 'Wouldn't Have Made' Pentiment If Not For Xbox Game Pass

I gave it a quick whirl and I think I will like it.

Stylistically it's extremely unique; but at its core, it's a point-and-click adventure game.

Can't wait to dive in more and I am glad Game Pass offered Obsidian a chance to branch out.

I love Game Pass for having these smaller niche games that people really wouldn't have taken a chance on before. If they got rid of AAA games, and only kept Indies and older titles I'd be fine with that.

Ah obviously Obsidian didn't get the memo that Game Pass is "bad for gaming" 😅

It's amazing! And if Game Pass gives developers the opportunity to take more risks in what is currently such a risk averse industry, then fantastic for them.
Faaaaaaar too many remakes and "safe" games these days. Pentiment is genuinely my GOTY so far. Better than Bayonetta and Xenoblade Chronicles 3, better than God of War Ragnarok and better than Return to Monkey Island (which is my 2nd fav)
Pentiment is a genuine proper video game experience

Grateful that the extra support allows devs to take risks - which are all too rare these days.

In Act 2 now and I'm so happy that games like this have a chance to get made. Best looking game I've played all year and it's been an absolute gem.

I just downlaoded this and a few others today.
I grabbed As Dusk Falls and beat it with what I consider the "best " ending.
Tomorrow, I'll start this one.

I dropped State of Decay when it started in on the political crap.

I just stopped playing Phenyx because it got boring and repetitive, it's a good game otherwise, and I love the commentary from Zeus

This is the kind of game that I never would have bought but I am happy to play.

@uptownsoul Maybe, maybe not - the issue is that in a Sales based business model, Games like Pentiment would be deemed to much of a Commercial Risk for a Sales based publisher to green light. They would be 'forced' to work on a AAA Sequel designed to appeal to the 'majority' to maximise the sales (like Saints Row appears to have been).

Game Pass is not about 'Sales', its about Games, its about player engagement - which still requires 'quality' otherwise players won't be engaged through to the end with 'many' other games waiting. If you are not 'enjoying' a game or that engaged in it (for whatever reason - inc lack of polish), you'll move on to one of the many other options available.

Game Pass is as much for Devs as it is for us consumers. It enables them to make the games they really want and reach their 'audience' with no barriers to entry. That means games like Pentiment can find their 'niche' audience without the 'pressure' of Sales figures - which as we know can kill studio's/IP's who have to sell a certain number to appease the Publisher/investors...

@uptownsoul Well the XB1 didn't exactly sell well to have a 'large' install base to buy games in 'huge' numbers. If you only have 25m consoles on the market, that 'limits' the sales especially as you don't tend to get 100%. Some are lucky to reach 10% of the player base which would be 2.5m for 25m consoles or 10m for 100m consoles...

As for Halo, Forza and Gears, they were basically the only 1st party 'exclusives' made during the XB1 era - certainly before they brought in Game Pass - although Minecraft has continued to sell well too. They didn't have the Studio's to make 'other' games. Rare released Sea of Thieves straight into Game Pass and has over 25m players.

I am not saying that 'NO' publisher would greenlight a 'smaller' budget game, but how many would greenlight something like Pentiment with its artstyle and game-play. Most are older style (like 2D platformers for example) often with a AA artstyle etc that are not so 'niche' - something that is an easier sell to prospective Publishers and of course, gamers.

Since 2017, all MS 'exclusives' have launched into Game Pass. At that time, they had Mojang, 343, Turn 10, Rare and the Coalition as 'Xbox' Studios so basically only had those 3 franchises. In 2018, they added 8 new Studio's (Playground, Undead Labs (both only made games for Xbox), Compulsion, Ninja Theory, the Initiative and then later added Obsidian, InXile and Double Fine) and then added Zenimax Studios in March 2021. Therefore in terms of 'First Party' exclusive Sales, its understandable why Forza, Halo and Gears were their only 'big' sellers as that is all their Studios were making.

So coupled with 'weak' hardware sales, which means you don't have a large install base to buy games in large numbers, and a lack of Studio's producing a variety of IP's - Although Forza, Gears and Halo have covered multiple genres to provide more 'variety' of game-play - its understandable.

If you have 100m consoles on the market and sell 10m games, that's approx 10% of the players. If you have 25m and only sell 5m, that seems 'worse' but its actually selling 'better' in one way as its reached 20% of the potential users. If they could sell 100m consoles and reach 20% of their users, that's 20m.

Also, you have to factor in the 'investment' vs 'returns'. If you only have 25m players and think your game won't appeal to '90%'. that's a Sales projection of just 2.5m games which limits the profitability. I expect that led to cancellations like Scalebound because the amount of 'extra' investment required outweighed the potential to recuperate when sold.

All I am saying is that a sales based publisher is always going to be looking at the commercial aspect of the game and greenlight projects that they think will sell. Given the choice of greenlighting some 'niche' project or something with much 'broader' appeal, they won't pick the niche or more 'risky' project. Game Pass is not sales based so these niche/risky games have a platform to reach those gamers looking for something 'different'.

@uptownsoul I used 25m as an 'illustration' of the impact that Console sales have on game sales and MS certainly didn't have 50m consoles on the market 'before' they introduced Game Pass in 2017 and acquired Studios to make games other than Forza, Halo and Gears. I picked 25m to represent where MS could of been at before they changed their business model.

Before 2017, games were purely 'sold'. After that, you could also play via a Subscription. You can't look at Sea of Thieves and say 40%+ 'bought' the game because they have reached over 25m users because it released day and date into Game Pass. Therefore Game Sales and Console numbers after 2017 are not linked like they were prior.

FH5 and Halo:Infinite both had around 20m players in the first week of release yet Returnal, an award winning game, didn't reach 1m in its first month. That's not a criticism of Returnal or Sony btw. It depends on what's most important - and in a 'sales' only business, Sales are important but if you only 'reach' 1 or 2m gamers, is that 'better' than reaching 20m+

The reason I mentioned Sea of Thieves specifically above as a 'game' that has reached over 25m players but yet you only mentioned Forza, Halo & Gears as 'selling' well since the 360 era. Obviously we don't really know how well it Sold or whether it would of gone on to reach 25m+ without Game Pass, but I expect that it would of 'flopped' as it wouldn't have had the 'large' community invested in it which in turn would limit the devs support.

I had to illustrate where MS were at before they changed their business model from a purely 'sales' based platform. The introduction of Game Pass, as well as adding Backwards Compatibility and releasing the XB1S, then a year later, the XB1X - helped MS in the 2nd half of the generation to sell more consoles - so I picked 25m units to reflect pre-Game Pass 'Xbox' and explain why the 'only' games that 'Sold' well were those 3 franchises despite Sea of Thieves reaching 25m+ gamers...

@uptownsoul But what 1st Party developed games did they release - other than Forza, Gears and Halo. Crackdown was a commissioned project made by a 3rd Party studio - not their own - and so their games sold 'well' but not in the same numbers as Sony's own games but Sony had much bigger install base.

Affecting sales is quite difficult to assess. It's clear that it will affect sales in the early stages, the first few months of release, but whether or not it 'helps' longer term as people buy to 'keep' access now instead. The difference between Selling well and drying up over time versus perhaps not selling a lot to start with, but getting much more people 'hooked' and then buying to keep access may end up with more sales over a similar time. You can't exactly assess whether Halo:Infinite would have outsold Halo 5 for example but certainly 'reached' many more players in its first 24hrs!!

All I said is that 'prior' to Game Pass, Xbox only had a few game studio's and so ONLY had Forza, Halo and Gears games to 'sell'. Everything else was 3rd Party and as we know, XB1 was not selling well too. So whilst MS maybe 'happy' with 4/5m game sales to their 'limited' console users, they could not compete on Sales with Sony and their much larger install base. A game selling 4/5m on a platform with 100m users is far less impressive than a game selling 4/5m on a Platform with just 25m users.

If you are investing $50m+ into a game, they aren't going to do that if they don't expect to sell enough to recuperate the cost. If you have a smaller install base, that makes it more difficult to sell enough copies. It impacts on publishers, their decision to 'push' games out early rather than spend more to 'finish' the game, what games they are likely to greenlight.

Its easier to greenlight 'niche' projects too if you are releasing them 'everywhere' over a 'single' platform or 2.

Games like these don't take aslong to develop & are cheaper than big AAA games that's why it makes sense with gamepass

@uptownsoul Nobody is disputing they 'sell' well - but the point is that they can't 'reach' that many people if they don't sell hardware and even if they do, there is still a barrier to them 'reaching' every gamer to enjoy their 'games'. Its a 'travesty' that Award winning games have a 'barrier' to entry and may only 'reach' 1m people when 20m or more could enjoy that game.

If you can reach more and more people - even if you have to substitute 'purchasing' for a 'Subscription' its 'better' for the devs. Game of the year votes - 1m who played a game they bought or 25m+ who had access either by purchasing or subscriptions, able to play on whatever device...

You sell 4m games you have 4m players, you have 1m sales and 25m players via a Subscription, you have 26m players invested in your game... Does the 4m seller that was #1 in the 'sales' chart mean its 'better' than a 1m seller that doesn't make much impact on a sales chart but has 6.5x more players...

you see how 'pathetic' sales is now to Xbox because if they have 25m paying Subscribers, that's a big income to offset the 'few' extra million games they would have sold at launch and may well sell more when some of those 25m players buy it in a sale or to ensure they can keep playing...

Sales don't really matter anymore to MS because they are not dependent on sales. Game studios get closed down if their games don't sell yet also don't get the support, budget or appropriate time to make that game. That's what 'sales' based gaming is for a LOT of devs/studios.

MS is more about 'reach' than sales, hence Game Pass Cloud - bringing 'Xbox' to everyone, everyone has 'Xbox' in their house, in their hands. Now they are focussed on making you and every other gamer want to play Xbox games on whatever devices you have/want.

If you are 'selling' a game to 'sell' hardware, you don't make it available 'everywhere'. Selling 'consoles' and 'games' becomes a 'consumer' option but they have 'other' options now. Same with Xbox games - Sales is an 'option' so not an 'important' metric. Pre-this time, if you wanted to play, you had to buy and Xbox had 'limited' choice for 'exclusives' and limited opportunity to have the 'reach' they deserved as well as the cost being a barrier. Since 2017, Sales have no longer been important metrics to MS, Its now more about GP subscribers, Player Numbers. So Sony can brag X game has 'sold' 5m, 10m copies several years after release and many sales later, yet MS can announce 20m+ players in the first week...

@uptownsoul Are you deliberately being stupid or just being argumentative?

If you have 20m consoles, selling 4-5m copies of a game is selling well because with 20m consoles, 2m game sales is quite an achievement. But compared to other games, they don't 'reach' as many people.

They are trading some sales for more widespread reach - to get Xbox into 'every' gamers hands - hence they are providing 'different' options for as many gamers as possible. Want the 'traditional' Console and buying games, Xbox has an option, Spent money on a Gaming PC, Xbox has an option, only have a mobile, tablet or Laptop, Xbox has an option for you too. Instead of selling 4-5m, they now have 20m+ playing their games.

Sales are 'important' in that they contribute to MS's overall ecosystem and help offset losses on Hardware, but they aren't that important as a 'metric'. Its not a 'Sales' based metric where they top sales charts (best selling game, best selling hardware). Its not using 'sales' data to determine whether a 'project' should go ahead or whether a 'studio' fails to meet sales targets. Its now more about 'Player engagement'.

The fact is you don't NEED to buy an Xbox Console or NEED to buy Xbox games anymore - you can play via a Subscription on any compatible device. That's why MS don't provide 'Sales' data - its all Game Pass subscriber numbers and Player counts.

From around 2017, MS stopped being totally sales focussed. Sales are contributing of course, but its not the 'only' method of generating income and getting your games into peoples hands.

The point I was making is that 'sales' are relative to the install base. If you can reach 10% of the install base, that's pretty decent sales but that could be 1m games sold with 10m consoles or 10m games with 100m consoles. That 1m is still 'good' considering your 'install' base. With 3bn gamers though, its had very little reach or many gamers that will talk about it, recommend it to others etc.

The whole conversation started off because I said that Publishers wouldn't greenlight games that are risky from a sales perspective and prevent games like Pentiment from being made by a Studio like Obsidian. With Game Pass, its less risk because it doesn't matter if it doesn't 'sell' enough to recover their costs - because they have this 'big' pool of gamers paying a monthly sum to get 'new' games and with 'no' barrier to trying games, it will find its 'audience'. The game is essentially funded by Game Pass so doesn't need to sell X copies to break even etc...

Sales figures are NOT important when Purchases are 'optional'. Its consumer choice as to whether they buy an Xbox and buy Xbox games. Sales are a major contributor to the overall ecosystem - selling 'fewer' games at/around launch and having MANY more players engaged is more important now to MS than Sales Charts and comparing sales of Hardware or Games (especially between those on and those not on Game Pass day and date). They don't care if you buy an Xbox console or play on PC/Mobile etc, they don't care if you buy your Xbox game or Subscribe to Game Pass, just as long as you are in the ecosystem and playing their games. If you are, then you are spending your time and more likely your money too in their ecosystem - whether it is 3rd Party multi-plats, DLC/MTX etc to get their '30%' retailer cut or accessories like Controllers, storage space. The actual 'sales' of Hardware or their games are irrelevant because they are 'optional'...

If you go back to Halo 5, that sold about 5m copies on Console - estimated around 9.5m in total after several years inc PC - which was very good for Xbox at the time with that many XB1 consoles sold - but compare that to 22m in the first week of Halo: Infinite. It may of sold 'less' than 5m on Xbox hardware but had a much bigger launch....

Ah, the duality of game pass service.

If you like Pentiment then its a brilliant system that allows people to make interesting projects that might never have seen the light of day.
If, like me, Pentiment is not your thing and you find it boring, then GP made one of xboxes best devs able to waste time making something that quite clearly wont appeal to the bulk of players. They could have been making something we all would have liked.

On balance, im actually pleased to see experimental titles, even if I dont get on with this one (why does it have to sound so bad?), but you could argue making niche titles with little mass appeal is not a good look when you've e produced no popular big hitting games all year. You could use this title to illustrate a strength or weakness for GP depending on your view I guess...