There's been a lot of attention on Microsoft putting Call of Duty onto Xbox Game Pass day one, with the company doubling down on its subscription model after the ActiBlizz acquisition. While lots of other publishers are on board with the service as well, particularly when a deal makes sense, Take-Two has been strongly averse to launching its games in the library - and that stance hasn't changed in 2024.
Speaking to GamesIndustry.biz, Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick talked a little bit about Black Ops 6 launching into the service and what it might mean for Xbox. Zelnick believes that such a release model "will push consumers to that subscription service for at least a period of time" but says that it won't have any affect on how Take-Two does things.
"No, it won't affect our decisions,
Because our decisions are rational."
To be fair, we can understand where he's coming from. Take-Two, and its publishing arm 2K, tend to align with major AAA releases for the most part, and ones in big mainstay franchises to boot. We can't imagine a deal would make sense for something like GTA, Red Dead Redemption or NBA to launch into someone else's subscription service on day one.
For Microsoft it makes a lot more sense though, especially when they're the ones running the service themselves - on top of now owning the Call of Duty IP. We'll see how all of that pans out for Xbox in the long term, but what's clear is that we probably aren't going to see any major 2K games release into Xbox Game Pass anytime soon.
Do you blame Take-Two for avoiding day one Game Pass launches? Discuss these new comments down below.
[source gamesindustry.biz]
Comments 42
Launching into Game Pass wouldn't be sensible for Take Two. Certainly not for GTA or NBA2K. This is an odd question to ask Zelnick.
Well let’s hope GP sells more subscriptions else there will be another price increase next year to pay for this COD on GP and other games.
Then again COD sells loads more on PC and PlayStation, so it might not hurt to much.
They treat Game Pass as a way to release "demos" and get paid for it. It's rational (they mean profitable), because GTA is one of the best-selling games worldwide. For instance, they included one of the titles of the remastered trilogy in Game Pass for a short amount of time. Their case is exceptional and can't be compared to the rest.
@OldGamer999 "Then again COD sells loads more on PC and PlayStation, so it might not hurt to much."
There's that, along with Xbox people who will still purchase the game, those that will purchase the $30 upgrade, and those that'll buy battle passes and other MTX for CoD games.
Isn’t it like the fifth time they stated the same thing?
But there goes the folks at GameIndustry.biz asking this again fully knowing the answer to capitalize yet again on some Xbox hate.
People often try to use these kind of quotes to say that xboxs strategy is wrong for releasing their games day one in gamepass but I don't think it's comparible. If take two had their own subscription platform that they were trying to convince people is worth paying every month for, then day 1 would be a different discussion. Of course putting their biggest games into someone else's monthly subscription service doesn't make sense for them. It's different when you are the one getting the consistent heaps of money every month from the people you have hooked on the service.
It doesn't even really make that much sense for xbox to pay a substantial amount to a 3rd party for day 1 instead of waiting 6 months or so and getting a much lower price. There is probably a good reason you rarely see xbox shell out money for a big day 1 from 3rd party unless it is a new IP or indie sized game where the contract would be much lower. I imagine xbox has the data on how much impact a big new game has on subs and know what dollar amount it is that would make it worth while. Those two points probably don't line up with what the 3rd party would want very often.
@theduckofdeath
I have just back into COD play black ops 3 on PS5 as it was free ages ago.
Thought now call of duty with Xbox I would look at getting other older COD games like infinite warefare on my series x.
PS price £17
Xbox price £55
Looking at others all the COD are cheaper on PlayStation to buy.
Why would I make my series x the home of COD.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
If, indie...I mean, game pass is such a great, wonderful, and profitable thing. Why isn't EVERY publisher putting EVERY game on indie...I mean game pass, then?
@OldGamer999 There will be an increase either way. Microsoft is using the "substance abuse dealer" business model.
Give it away free at first, get them hooked, then jack prices up regularly, even when the product becomes more inferior as time goes on.
Let's be honest here, third party publishers don't get all the money from a Game sale as they have to pay to release on Console, pay to use Sony/MS hardware/trademarks etc to put games out.
If you buy GTA through the Consoles Digital store, 30% goes to the platform holder as they are the 'retailer' and of course Sony/MS also make money from selling Peripherals and Subscription services too - you can't play GTA Online without a PS+/Game Pass Core subscription. Even without MS/Sony's own games, they are still 'making' money on sales of 3rd Party releases.
An MS 'exclusive' doesn't need to sell as many to make their costs back - they own their own hardware and storefront - so that 30% lost to 'MS' as the Store owner, all the money coming in on Subs, and sales of 3rd party games through their store all help to contribute to their own game development costs and revenue.
Assuming a game costs say 200m to make and market, how many $70 games need to be sold when 30% of that is given to MS for owning the store and platform. With 35m paying $10 (minimum) a month on Subscriptions, that's 350m a month - or almost enough to cover the 'cost' of 2 x 200m games a month without needing to 'sell' a single copy to recoup costs.
Just because MS can do it, as can Ubisoft who offer 'Day 1' with Ubisoft+, it doesn't mean 'everyone' can or would want to - for some, Sales may still be their preferred option - especially if they don't have their own Platform/Store front to make money too...
Rational decisions like shutting down studios and raking in more money for yourself that could have kept them going!? Those decisions are the most rational…
What a tool.
@GuyinPA75
Maybe, but it won’t work as I believe GPU subs are almost stagnant and if they don’t release far better big AAA games, when my sub runs out next March 2025 I won’t be returning. And that will probably be the end of me and Xbox.
Just to say been with Xbox since day one console, so that’s not a good sign.
@BAMozzy what no.
Just no.
Just because you have 35m paying a subscription it doesn’t go to cover the cost of the 2 games.
There’s the cost of running the subscription. All the overheads etc. and the buying of 3rd party games.
@OldGamer999 Maybe it is a sale on PS? At different points in time, certain titles are better deals on one console or the other.
@OldGamer999 Same here. Huge Xbox fan. Bought original Xbox day one. Beta tester for Xbox live. Insider for years. Alpha ring tester for years, etc
But the decisions lately (which I solely place blame on Nadella whom single handedly is destroying Microsoft) not sure what I'm going to do next gen? Maybe go straight nintendo, since I can't stand the PS controller. No idea why there is not a great Xbox style controller for PS that is both wireless and not price gouging. Would absolutely purchased a PS to play some their games.
@theduckofdeath Your correct it is currently on sale on PS, must of forgotten to mention that.
MW3 is on Gamepass it's over £60 on PS5 even if you have their top tier sub.
@PsBoxSwitchOwner I know it doesn't exactly work like that - but getting $350m a month in revenue from that Subscription service is a LOT of revenue.
Games are built over 5 or 6yrs that over that time can end up costing 200m - that's less than 4m a month so having 30 studios, maybe requiring between 2m-4m a 'month' to keep making games - that's 60-120m of that 350m a month - leaving 230m+ on overheads and payment of 3rd party games.
That's Not the only revenue as they get 30% from all 3rd Party games/content 'sold' through their store and of course sales of their own software, services etc. They get money from Game Pass Core Subscribers who 'ONLY' Subscribe to play games like GTA, Fifa or CoD online.
That's still money coming in that 3rd Party Publishers cannot rely on to 'fund' games in development. They only have 'sales' of their games and as I said, lose a chunk of that to the Console Platform holder. MS/Sony make a LOT of money on GTA for example so Take Two need to sell more to break even.
They don't have a 'steady' stream of income coming in from other sources - like Hardware sales, 3rd Party Software sales, Subscriptions etc .
You buy GoW: Ragnarok on Sony's PS5 - that $70 cost all goes to Sony as they own the IP/Studio, the Platform, the Store but Take Two only get 70% as they only own the IP/Studio so if both cost 200m to make, Take Two need to sell more to recoup the cost. That's why Sony made so much money from CoD alone despite not 'owning' it.
When MS sell CoD or its Season Passes, MTX bundles etc on their Platform, they get 100% but ABK only got '70%' before. They still get 70% from sales on Sony as Sony take 30% as 'payment' to use their Platform which First Party Sony games don't. Take Two is not a First Party Publisher so would need to sell more to make money as each 'sale' is also helping Sony or MS's revenue...
@BAMozzy maybe when you are making a point.
Don’t just make things up?
@Rog-X And those were the prices those Studios said that they'd 'want' to release their game on MS's platform - and why those games weren't on Game Pass day/date.
As I tried to point out, these are 3rd Party Publishers that don't have other revenue streams coming in to help pay for those games. MS/Sony get revenue from selling those games through their store, selling all the digital 'extras', selling Sub services to play those 'online' components, selling Hardware (inc Controllers) etc.
The only way they can make money is to sell their Games and that is their 'revenue' stream - although both Ubisoft and EA do have Sub services (EA Play, Play Pro or Access/Ubisoft+) and both offer a Day 1 tier too.
How is that Borderlands movie shaping up? That looked like a rational decision.
@PsBoxSwitchOwner I was merely trying to 'illustrate' a concept in a way that I thought was clear and obvious. The point I was making is that MS have enough coming in every month from just 'Game Pass' to pay for at least 1 AAA games entire development cycle. If a game like Spider-Man 2 (not necessarily SM2) cost 150m for example, then with 350m coming in that month alone from GP, that's paid for a game and another 200m left over for Admin and 'other' releases in GP that month. Next month may not have a 150m First party game yet still get 350m coming in and another 350m the next month...
Take Two could release GTA 6 and say it cost 200m to make. They haven't got 350m coming in every month to make games, they haven't got sales of third party software coming in, haven't got sales of hardware/peripherals coming in and even if you play GTAO on Console, that's a $10 a month Subscription to Sony/MS, not Take Two so they have far fewer 'revenue' streams to recoup that 200m cost and with a 'chunk' of each sale going to MS/Sony for using their platform, they need to sell a lot more copies of GTA to make back that 200m development cost.
All I tried to show was that MS has a big chunk of revenue coming in every month - in theory, more than enough to cover the cost of ANY massive game. MS stated they wanted 1 AAA game a quarter - now they 'could' pay for that in 1 month and the other 2 months are for admin and acquiring 3rd Party games. Over a quarter, 350m x 3 = 1.05bn so 200m pays for the 1st party game (no need for any sales) and the other 850m is Admin and 3rd Party releases. That's before they 'sell' any additional content, season passes, DLC, MTX etc let alone all the 'other' revenue streams a platform holder and Publisher has compared to 3rd Party Publishers...
That's also why Take Two or ABK wouldn't consider Sub Services - they need 'sales' to ensure they make enough money to cover costs when they have far fewer ways to make money and of course lose a chunk of their sales revenue to the Platform Holder/retailers too...
@theduckofdeath
Just thought with Microsoft owning the franchise now they might have had a big push to make Xbox the home of COD and gone all out.
I would be and putting them all free in GPU and running adverts that Xbox console and GPU are the home of COD and all the old ones free and the new one very soon on GPU.
Dam I forget Xbox don’t advertise 🤣
@Rog-X Hence why it's essentially Indie Pass with an over priced monthly subscription that forces us (correct me if I'm wrong?) to have since is needed to play online games.
Much rather, preferred, and wish Xbox live back.
I not want to play what amounts to majority of quality that's nothing more than game boy color games. I have Gamefly. I'm more thsn set playing the games I want (including day one of ANY and EVERY big game release) plus rent new 4k Blu-ray releases.
It's just not worth what they charge. I'm not alone in this opinion either.
Different businesses models. That’s all.
We're supposed to care about TT's opinion? Yeah, no thanks.
@GuyinPA75 I would imagine you are in the extreme minority there. How much does your GameFly tier cost per month? How are the games delivered? Through the post office mail? What's the travel time, to & fro? How many titles can you hold at once?
"Rational decisions." BRB, gonna head to a mirror store to pick up Zel's Christmas gift.
Zelnick is the only executive in gaming that actually makes me think "Huh, maybe Kotick wasn't so bad, after all."
I get the business sense behind not being on 3d party subscriptions, but his continuous panning of subscriptions while nearly all his company's revenue comes from GTA5 Online which is, basically, a backdoor subscription model, his hypocritical in the worst of ways. He doesn't mean he's against subs. He means he's running a backdoor sub for a single game and that's more profitable by far than a 3rd party catalog sub.
@cburg "We bought randy Randy!" and "Rational decisions" are two incompatible statements that do not belong in the same boardroom together.
@GuyinPA75 TBF Game Boy Color games are way, way better than most of the paint by numbers AAAAAAAAA games suits like Zelnick sell.
@InheritNegative you talking about take two leadership or Xbox leadership considering they both shut down successful teams???
Anyone with a brain shouldn’t be surprised by these comments. Only Xbox can make Game Pass work cause of Microsoft’s backing. Of course no other 3rd party publisher is gonna willingly put their game on game pass day one unless Xbox offers a big bag of money. And the whole other point here is there is no way the most anticipated game of all time is gonna launch on game pass day one. If you think that would be possible you are stupid.
@NEStalgia Take it your not overly impressed with the offerings from indie pass for the price, either?
@theduckofdeath
would imagine you are in the extreme minority there.
How much does your GameFly tier cost per month
How are the games delivered? Through the post office mail?
What's the travel time, to & fro?
How many titles can you hold at once?
Then other benefits you can keep the games or movies for discounted price and new ones sent out from your queue in its place. Every 3 months earn $5 credit towards purchase. Example as of today with new release, Princess Peach keep it is $39.99 then minus $5 is $34.99 and case is mailed to you free of charge.
So compared to Indie...mean, game pass, for basically same price (most likely be even cheaper than indie pass by end of 2025) I can get day one new releases of Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo, 4k Blu-ray from any developer/publisher and keep for significant discount.
I'm sure someone is going try be smarty pants and will say can only get two games at time, but I can play 100s on indie pass. Well...a person can only physically play just one game at a time and ONLY Xbox games on indie psss. Gamefly I'm playing and watching ANYTHING I want from any console or any Blu-ray all Day One of anything.
@GuyinPA75 OK, so right off the bat, you are losing 4 days in transit on any game. Twenty-three dollars a month for two games at a time...and that is a total of two movies or games, correct?
"Indie Pass," as you call it, offers hundreds of Xbox games SIMULTANEOUSLY on console, PC, and cloud. You can play a new game as fast as you can download (or stream). Twenty-dollars a month for Ultimate and you get access to everything. That includes additional savings on all game purchases and other perks.
Payment options are incomparable. Xbox Live could be converted to Game Pass Ultimate, up to three years at a time. Personally, I've been on XBL nonstop for 22 years, so converting to GPU at the same price only added value. MS Rewards points allow you to extend that further. My membership has continued past the 3-year expiration in June 2023. The current expiration date is 12/26/2026.
The only advantage of SlowFly that you can rent any game (provided the title and a copy is available) for any console. A $5 discount when buying their dirty, booger smeared used games, is not worth it. At least when Blockbuster was around, you could use a similar mailer service and return the movies/games to the store. They scan them as returned and the mailers act as coupons for in-store rentals. Meanwhile, the next items in your queue were shipped.
@GuyinPA75 Yeah, at the old price I found some value in it. Little gems like little kitty big city I would've have never tried were nice to find. But at the new price I'll cancel. The big Microsoft games will cost about the same if I wait for sales, and heading PC,I probably won't even get it for PC. Way cheaper but again steam and 3rd pay keys mean I'll break even at best but own it, and I'm not playing all the indies much with a huge backlog of bigger games while my indies come mostly down to VR and even meta has an old Gold like sub for $60 a year for that. For me the gp math doesn't add up anymore. It might for PC, but then might as well do sales
@theduckofdeath Man, I really liked the Blockbuster hybrid mail/store system. I had forgotten about that until I saw your post.
I think both Gamefly and Gamepass have merit, depending on the type of games you play and the pace you play at. For me, having 2 at a time would be fine, playing 1 while the other is in transit. But I also like the buffet style of gamepass, and generally the types of games it serves up, so it works for me
@cburg I am not at all trying to defend the movie, but did TT have anything to do with it? Do they own Borderlands or just the publishing rights? I thought Bobandy was totally in control there.
I mean...duh?
It's obvious rational for him as a third-party publisher. He knows that GTA VI will sell tens of millions of copies, so he is in comfortable position saying that.
On the other hand it's hilarious that he is saying that considering he recently slashed entire publishing division on it's knees (Private Division). Also, he is fortunate enough to have GTA Online and NBA 2K funding his company for years on end.
Also, even if he wanted to create sub service, it isn't feasible for Take-Two considering fact that they are only able to make 2-3 games per year, which is just not enough.
Rational for him. Their main revenue stream is basically a subscription anyway. As was obvious from day 1, Gamepass will work really well for some publishers and business models, and not for others.
@GuyinPA75
“ Why isn't EVERY publisher putting EVERY game on indie...I mean game pass, then?”
Nobody ever said that would happen. Different games, different business models, different publishers, some it will work for and some it won’t.
Is this the third or fourth time I've seen this? Yeah obviously the greatest selling franchise ever doesn't need anyone to help them! But this is their way of trying to fire shots at Xbox/gp again. I find it hilarious when narcissistic peope think that their opinion is the end all be all of the discussion. But it doesn't I'm a lifelong PS guy who switched strictly for GP because that's what I'm looking for and that's what suits me! And lame recycled questions that no one was asking because everyone already knew the answer to won't change that for me. Also as far as price hikes do people live in the real world or do their parents pay their bills? everything has gone up in price. To think that the game industry is exempt from that it's just foolish. Not to mention if you know what you're doing you can have your game pass paid for with reward points every month. And I have a job but it doesn't stop me from putting in a few hours when I get home from work every night and in that time I can manage even on a bad month to pay for 2/3 of the sub so it's the least of my concerns as far as what I spend my money on each month.
Xbox Game Pass isn't the ONLY Sub Service offering Day 1 titles.
EA Play (not Access) and Ubisoft+ both offer Day 1 games from their Studios via a Subscription service. EA Play may only be on PC but its still EA's own Sub service for their 'own' games and unlike Game Pass, these don't offer '3rd Party' published games.
However, it does show that some Publishers are able to substitute Sales for a Subscription fee instead - although this is still different from a 3rd Party Publisher putting their releases into another's subscription service Day 1 as is being discussed. You wouldn't expect GTA6 on EA Play or Ubisoft+ Day 1, wouldn't expect Take Two to want to discuss releasing that into their Sub service.
Maybe one day, we will see all the big Publishers having their own Sub Service too - whether that's the 'future' gamers want or not...
Did 'rational decisions' are also the reason for how dogshat the Trilogy was at release state?
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
So is he having a dig at those who's games are day 1 on Gamepass, suggesting they make bad decisions?
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...