Baldur's Gate 3 Dev Reveals Concerns With Xbox Game Pass-Style Subscriptions

If Larian and whoever else continues to make masterpieces like Baldur's Gate 3, they really have nothing to worry about.
It's nice when he have more options.
You know with some companies that's it's more quantity over quality, like with Ubisoft, and I say that while being a big Assassin's Creed guy and always buying the newest big entry full price.
With some, like Sega, it's quantity and quality at the same time.
Larian can keep doing their thing and we'll keep appreciating and supporting them.

So does this mean the notifications for BG1 & 2 on GamePass were completely wrong?

To translate, they think their game is popular enough to stand on its own without a subscription service. They are correct in this case but if/when one of their games bomb then I think they will be singing a different tune very quickly.

"Direct from developer to players is the way."
My feeling exactly. I don't need any third party getting between me and the product I want.
I respect that the subscription model may work for some people, but not for me. I don't play regularly enough to justify it. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I subscribe to Gamepass, and as a result I have purchased several physical copies of games that I would not have bought outright without getting to try it first. BG3 is the first game I bought without getting a chance to play it first. I was extremely hesitant as I hate turn based games, but thankfully it has blown my mind.

@awp69 Maybe not as BG1 &BG2 are by Black Isle and nothing to do with Larian

Those comments from Larian seem spot on to me.

Not saying there isn't a place for a subscription but if it becomes the only model available that will be a dark day for gaming.

@awp69 Those are published by Beamdog, not Larian.

The more subscription services grow the less people will look outside the service for games. You already see tons of people say "i never pay for games anymore". Without a gamepass deal your game has to compete with it, and unless it's already in an established IP that's pretty close to a death sentence.

@TheCrafter1578 I completely agree. I've bought so many Games digitally or physically because I tried them on Game Pass.

As long as I still have the option to purchase games I love in some way then I'm happy.

Translation: "We not want give up ANY sales by offering it on game pass. The end."

@Widey85 I bought it too because of the hype but I really struggle to get to grips with games as expansive as this sometimes. So many incidental moments can be missed that you're never able to return to. It's massively frustrating.

It's why the push towards everything being open world and massive frustrates me. I still can't get to grips with Zelda BoTW and ToTK and would much rather play a traditional, linear Zelda over both of them.

I don't think we will ever have a "subscription-only" future. It truly doesn't make sense.

Even though streaming has been the dominant way people consume TV/film for years, an ability to make an actual purchase still exists (whether it be physical media or through Vudu, Prime Video, etc.)! The same will still apply to games.

@BacklogBrad That's not what he's saying at all. Basically as the platform holders MS and Sony have ultimate control over what games release on Game Pass or PS Plus. It's simply not possible for all games to be released on these so MS and Sony can pick and choose which games do.
If sub services become the dominant way that consumers access their games then any games that aren't released into the sub service is doomed to failure. You already see a number of people saying that they will wait for a game to release on Game Pass if it's not already releasing on GP at launch and that could start to happen a lot more often, potentially causing a lot less sales for a lot of games.

@Kevw2006 they are currently in a spot where they don't need the subscription services but if one of their games doesn't sell then I think they would come running and gladly accept money to put a game on a service. It a lot easier to frame it as some moral stance when your release just won game of the year. If It was sub service or take a loss and scale back the studio, they would see services as the easy choice.

Every game published has people in suits doing the cost analysis- every game in the past, present and future. So the only thing news worthy is Larian pointing out that if you have a masterpiece then it will not go to Gamepass until it reaches a certain saturation point. Fair enough and I totally support that… the industry as a whole is trying to figure out their place in the market….

@BacklogBrad I don't disagree with what you're saying, at the moment they have the luxury of that choice and they are currently in the position where they dont need to rely on a sub service l. However, what he is speaking about here is a future where they don't have that choice and the only means they have of success is getting having their games added into a sub service no matter how good their game is. He means becoming even more reliant on the platform holder for success than they already are, he is specifically making his comments in to a response about a subscription based future, not the current environment.

@Kevw2006 I don't feel his comments align with the reality of the subscription services. Gamepass, which is probably the best one, has plateaued at 15% of xbox's gaming content and services. The number comes directly from Phil Spencer and he finished it with "I don't think it gets any bigger." Not even the biggest champions of videogame sub services, Microsoft, are under any disillusions that it will be the only way to consume videogames.

A major perk of the gamepass service is that you receive a discount on purchasing an actual copy of the game. A hot tip for those that only want to own games, treat it like a Costco membership. Pay $11 for a month and use the 20% discount on the games you want and save more than the $11 it cost then cancel. You could buy only Forza horizon 5 for $59.99 or pay for one month of gamepass for $11 and buy it at a discount of $48. You would save one dollar and get a free month of gamepass, or if you bought more than one game the savings would be higher.

Then I will never try your game. Never play a BG and likely now never will.

If they want to better compete with subs then release more demos. I don't view game pass as a game sub, I view it as a demo sub. I try out games and if I like them I eventually buy them. (Or sometimes I use it to play games i own but don't want to have to keep the disc in the system to read the license. ) At the end of the day it is about giving consumers options. If they want consumers to give them money then they need to give consumers options for accessing their games. Because there are thousands of games made every year to compete for our limited dollars.

I agree, I don't think subscription services should just take over. But I am more a person who likes options. So people get choice which way they prefer. I do respect their decision and I do think they should have freedom to make games they want to make. It just is down to them to choose. Lucky for them, they don't need extra publicity, since they made game of the year. But subscription is indeed nice to have as option, since it dies incentive people to give more gane's a try. And that can add quite a lot of visibility to game that would otherwise be drowned.

Quality 3rd party games are never on gamepass at launch ,it's just 1st party and indie garbage.

@BacklogBrad you make a quality game you don't need a subscription service.

@Mephisto2869 All it takes is one badly received release to change their current standing.

Larian is no stranger to relying on Kickstarter to fund a game (which isn't really popular with gaming consumers anymore) so sub services might someday be a good fallback for them to reach the funding they require.

I think most who subscribe to GP, subscribe to GPU as it also allows users to try and buy games on PC also. And it's a very reliable service. Another factor is the cost of living. I don't think as many people have much disposable income as they used to, and paying a little over £10 per month is a very sensible option for a lot of folks.

I don't care I already own it and now the save issue is solved ....off I go

We already have seen what gets picked and what doesn't. IF it has good graphics/story/basic combat and thrills of atmosphere people like it.

If people (companies or gamers depends on if a publisher, themselves or crowdfunding of course) are interested they will fund their game and get the sales. Not everything has to run on a subscription and if it does and people go nope well that's what DEMOS are for, for people to go nope no interested not a subscription for people to treat it the same way and drop off in the minute they don't like it even if the gameplay footage from a let's player they trust is more likely or just no commentary videos and just seeing what they like besides how it feels to play being the difference yes.

I couldn't care less and just buy them cheap, or if I'm interested enough, but I"m gameplay focused with everything so story is fine there or not. Atmosphere is nice but doesn't bother me. I play a variety of genres but am picky still. Open worlds hate but only few I ever enjoyed based on side quests not the main story and even then it was what you do in them not oh this boring type or eh mechanics use case.

Hack n slash/tactics I just love and never grew up with. I tried turn based and action based RPGs and they are so long, so unenjoyable so hence I didn't play Baulders Gate 3, not because it's a bad game I just have no interest in the gameplay but respect the game it is and the team clearly show their passion.

So to see some games flop usually particular projects aka I knew Aveum (fantasy shooters sounded cool, Hardline as a cop one I was like well we haven't gotten a SWAT game in years and most are multiplayer, military and bland right now, the atmosphere doesn'ty interest me in them), Forspoken (cared about the combat and level design) and Balan (Rayman 3 suits experience, yes not the chao like garden or oh Nights/Sonic like, or the creators, I thought the suits were cool) would flop, is sad for me as a gameplay fan and everyone else going nope it didn't have this and this and this and I'm like ah. Great. Thanks gamers.

I think subscriptions are a nice option but the main method no thanks. I can get them for $5 or $18 years later (unless Nintendo games (third parties I got cheap) I got many Wii U games at probably understandable prices when Switch was starting 2018+ that I got a Wii U) (I'll get a game if I'm desperate, I may get them cheaper as well because I can't afford it probably or hear about it but if I don't I'll get it years later when I 'do' hear about it which for many has happened, for retro games sure but I mean for even newer gens just hearing about them later or whatever bargain bins or just hearing online/researching developers and publishers or genres on wikipedia/metacritic or youtubers covering games, I look in many places for old and new games with ideas I find exciting to experience gameplay wise).

I don't get FOMO or have to play the latest thing most of the games for this year are what RPGs and horror I don't care about. But for many people they are highlights and that's totally fine. I'm very particular on game design and what genres I care for. If it's RPG it's Tactics. If hack n slash well some I've been eh on, others enjoyed a lot.

If it's platformers, racing, shooter, action adventure it's very particular settings or game mechanics (ah yes racing a genre that used to do mechanics nowadays other than Milestone with Ride 4 or just Gravel as another rally game but a tv show spin on it besides annual rally games (cough Forza Motorsport 1 & 2 region system expanded upon come on Turn 10, or Codemasters with their games with OnRush was just a Motorstorm with new modes, Grid has been good to keep experiencing, WRC 2023 has the Sega GT car builder like wow thank you Codemasters, thank you.

The rest have been boring, service like and barely interesting mechanics. FM8/Series X is fine but I mean a position selector excited me, not the online, not the career mode, a position selector mechanic. I haven't played it because it doesn't appeal to me and the offline has probably eh like GT7 unlike GT Sport so why should I bother, I have MX vs ATV Unleashed to experience that in position selector and while not the same I don't have much to impress me with some modern games) they show off otherwise I'm not interested.

Same with music if it sounds boring I'm not interested, if the sound design is compelling of sounds, but especially structure I'm interested. No lyrics unless it's got a good spin on them. Movie romance for example surprised me, or some interesting concepts but most are pretty generic. Most times not interested in the words or how the person sounds could not care less. Give me the instruments or samples any day.

Not oh maybe or maybe not on a subscription (profile, data for companies, access there or taken away, streamed, temp files or removal of them by an algorithm, building games to pay for each bit, whatever possible no thanks) and also each game publisher doing the TV/Movie subscription method of all their licenses to prove something which I don't want.

I also don't care for most games anyway so like I'd subscribe to even half or 3/4 of their services. XD I'm very picky with AA/Indies let alone AAA that have lost me over the years first and third parties. Yes first party. So unless a console has a good third party that uses the controller well I couldn't care less. As in console gimmicks appeal to me. 6th gen sure I could skip pressure sensitivities buttons on PS2 (but enjoy VMUs on Dreamcast, or GBA use in some games on GameCube, the White and Black buttons on Xbox or any other consoles with 6 buttons or just consoles with features on them that I just think are cool even if they flopped) but that was fine the experimentation in games was still there on all 4 consoles console gimmicks or not nowadays nope controller gimmicks or compelling ideas and if they aren't compelling I don't care what their graphics/voice actors or story is gameplay or nothing.

Even worse these days besides subscriptions. To me some games I knew would flop I still had interest in and bought. I didn't care about no voice acting, streamer influence or who in the studio was notable.

If the game was passable of even a 5 out of 10 or even as low as a 3 I'm curious about them still, if had some good ideas I'm all for it.

You know how many racing sims exist that are great and ideas left behind, same with platformers.

Shooters well, many of PS3/360 left behinds had a good mechanic and the rest of it was safe level design, Gears cover based shooting or COD loadouts/themes and look at us of trying to have such settings or whatever else (which Killswitch started and Uncharted/Gears popularised, same with Crush and Super Paper Mario have a similar mechanic, which got noticed more clearly the bigger IP or marketing at the right time ones, the more notable studios, Killswitch was Namco US, versus Epic and Naughty Dog, who do you think people remember or know of more.....). Their mechanics I care more for then the actual rest of the game. XD

Baulder's Gate 3 is great. I do think they had a lot of patches but the quality was still there in many areas for sure.

But I do find critics or players do have really high expectations. My expectations for gameplay are very different then most's atmosphere, story, graphics and anything else.

What gets past is really tough. In terms of some trends sure, in terms of cult followings, in terms of what ambitious mechanics and ideas and many flop still because unless it's more understood, or whatever they were nostalgic for too sometimes it makes it hilarious.

I don't put my childhood games on pedestals, I may enjoy them but I keep an open mind to any games, let alone the games I started with had minigames for other genres in them so it made jumping to the genres easy not just 'I signed up for a platformer I don't want a turret or vehicle section wahhhhh' but I mean Mario/Banjo platformers or Metroidvanias make that clear in the Indie space besides Roguelikes even though Roguelikes have been around for years at different points.

I can't go anywhere without seeing some Indie 3D platformer inspired by Mario 64/Banjo and just not wanting to pick up those Indies because the movesets and NPC tasks literally don't interest me.

Where are any by Glover, Space Station Silicon Valley (makes Biomutant's character creator and lacking abilities seem weak) or Chameleon Twist having still a better tongue move and all grapple hook/chameleon or other tongue games don't have it. If there was a patent not likely nowadays I assume. Literally probably 30 or so different B grade platformers or particular third parties from the 5th/6th gen I could play and have more fun with different ideas or see where they lack in polish then care about Mario 64 or Banjo 3D platformers inspired Indies these days.

Which can be said for Namco's minigames in load screens patent is not in use.......

@Kieduss so you will never play a game unless its on game pass 😂 🤣

@CharlieChooChoo probably sick to death of social media posts, begging for it to come to gamepass

@BacklogBrad on the back of the success of bg3 ,I really don't think they will have any trouble getting funding, for any future games

@Mephisto2869 I won't play that game unless it is on GP. No intent on buying it but I do indeed buy plenty of games.

@PixelDragon You seem miffed.

@Mephisto2869 all it takes is one failure.

@SuntannedDuck2 I always feel bad for people who write a multiple paragraph comment ,only for it never to be read or even a single like,so here,have a like 😁

i actually agree with him 100%. Subscription services are nice supplementary things to have but a) i want to own my games and b) i want games made like they're meant to be owned

@Mephisto2869 Same here but I don't mind. Not everything I say is great either and does become a mess. XD Not everything can be TL:DRed or long story shortened anyway. They don't have to read them either.

But for those that do of a small percentage I appreciate them and whatever feedback I do get. And I can make posts like this that are short and to the point if I feel like it.

Only in video form do people care anyway. Not surprised but it is what it is for understandable reasons then social media or texting long paragraphs to sum up a point even though you can't always do that.

Why is it always black and white with these people? You can release your games on subscription services as well as physically at the same time and reap the benefits of both worlds. As for discoverability: How about getting your a**es up and do something about this? Magazines, social media, advertisement, word of mouth ... How do you think people got attention for their games before Steam, Game Pass and Co.?

Smart guy. I'm NeoXMahi, and I approve this message. Clearly, more developers need to speak out. Square-Enix has always gone on about their sales figures, Game Pass isn't going to help with that, and Xbox is always going to pressure them, and others, to support Game Pass to make Microsoft a lot of money, and devs get screwed, but it's a Game of the Year developer that sees that giving your game away doesn't impress and win over the crowd for Game of the Year status, instead, it cheapens your game and crushes it's value.

Xbox Game Pass is dependent on how long you play the game to make their money. Sampling games doesn't. Good job Larin Studios.

Now, if only your games were shipped on disc. Physical media, sir