Gears 5, Gamepass and AAA Problem

Hello Everyone

After putting over 11 hours into Gears 5 competitive multiplayer and completing a 17 hr, 75% completion campaign play through. I firmly believe Gears 5 is a fun, great game. However the game is being held back by its progressIon system and some technical issues.

Firstly the ranking system doesn’t make sense. I win most of placement matches and I hold a positive K/D, yet I keep earning a rank of bronze 1 -2 (I high low to mid Onyx in Gears 4! ) for TDM. TDM is hurt by a lack of maps, which I think stems from the AAA practice of drip feeding content. Maps could have easily been ported over from Gears 4, Hence, Reclaimed, Dam and Foundation are present in Gears 5. The lack of characters and skins to unlock through general play is also tied to drip feeding content and the tendency of AAA devs to cater to casuals.

I believe gears 5 lacks readily characters due to the hero mechanics in arcade and horde. I believe hero mechanics are only present to make the game more accessible to casuals, who likely wouldn’t buy the game outright or play it long-term. Also believe the lack of characters is again tied to drip feeding of content and encouragement of MTs purchases.

Gears 5 has aggressive MTs due to its high budget and the fact that game launched into gamepass, at least that’s my conspiracy theory… I don’t think putting AAA first part my games into gamepass is good for intentional sales, Thus l feel the MTs are there to make back profit and bait casuals and gamepass subs into buying characters, skins and others cosmetics. Gears 5 progressiob system is intentionally unrewarding to players due to gamepass and drip feeding of content.

Please share your thoughts and opinions.

According to Phil Spencer Gears 5 sold more than Gears 4 so I don’t think Game Pass is a detriment to triple A games.

There are optional cosmetic microtransactions to fund the free post launch content since there isn’t a season pass or dlc map packs to buy.

1 Like

Can you link where Phil Spencer states that Gears 5 sold more than Gears 4 ?

But if Game Pass didn’t exist, how many more people will have bought the $60/80 version as opposed to the $1 Game Pass?

There are many people who have done this. My friend did this. Would he have bought the game outright if it wasn’t for Game Pass? Absolutely.

Gears 5 is going to sell well for Xbox regardless of whether it is on Game Pass or not.

It just seems like a wierd business decision. EA doesn’t put its latest fifa title in EA Access until 7/8 months in. Then again, that’s EA.

Great for consumers. Not so great for AAA titles.


The Fifa games (and other sport titles) that the EA makes are created with the permission of a license.

Indeed they are.

But how they decide to sell said games is up to EA. I wouldn’t imagine Fifa will be that bothered as long as they receive the money for the licencing.

He mentions it here in this interview with Eurogamer.

Microsoft is playing the long game with their Game Pass service. The goal is to get millions of subscribers paying $10 or $15 a month.
If they can get a sizable number subscribers hooked on the service they can bring in a huge amount of monthly revenue and keep gamers in their ecosystem next gen.
These one dollar deals won’t last forever, eventually people will be paying the full monthly price.

They consider the potential revenue worth sacrificing some immediate revenue from game sales.

1 Like

Indeed. They do it because they can.

Microsoft is a software company first, and their bread-and-butter has always been computer applications. The VAST majority of what they earn comes from selling software like Windows or Office, with Xbox being just a small part of their overall operations.

Giving Gamespass away for $1.00 might seem like a steal for consumers and a risky business decision for themselves, but they’re thinking long term. They can take the hit for now, but once they’re comfortable with charging people the full price, that is a massive amount of potential profit for them.

The odd-50 million or so Xbox Ones in the wild. The 100s of millions of computers running windows software. And, once xCloud gets underway, billions of android devices. Even if a fraction of those users take advantage of their services, that’s hundreds of million dollars – every month.

Not to mention that all of those active accounts will look good in those shareholder meetings.

They’re in a good place right now, which is why they can basically give away their games.

Though, I find it rich that Phil says this solves the monetization issue. Yeah, I wonder how long that’ll last.


I thought the part where he mentions he sees the feedback on the economy in Gears 5 was interesting.
Perhaps we’ll see some further adjustments to the microtransaction prices. Not a big deal to me either way but I think it would make some players happy.

I don’t trust them. It’s doubtful they’d be willing to lax such a system considering how well it has worked for them.

Phil Spencer at least comes off as sincere so we shall see…

They definitely won’t get rid of the store but I could see them making adjustments to the pricing and I think the season 2 Tour of Duty will be more rewarding from a cosmetics standpoint.

It should be. They don’t have Campaign skins(except the Onyx Guards) to throw at us now, and I’d say they’ve heard people on how many banners, bloodsprays and whatever else was in the first one.

But to me it would seem the main drawing points of Operation 2 would be newer maps, and characters(hopefully the remaining Campaign ones in December) for those who are into Horde. And Escape. And whatever fixes/improvements come with it.

1 Like

Yeah, the maps and characters are the drawing point for me as a huge horde fan. Hopefully at least 4 hero characters playable in horde/escape and however many villian characters for swarm multiplayer.
Then at least 4 more characters half way through the season.

Why would a casual player/ someone that doesn’t play all the time waste money buying something that they will hardly ever use?
Why would you buy the game outright when you get it for nothing via game pass? there is no extra benefit.

“Impulsive “ spending, people who see a gamepass game as being “free” may buy additional content for a particular title and then buy the game at a discount.

1 Like

Phil Spencer actually confirmed in an interview at XO19 this week, that Gears 5 outsold Gears 4, DESPITE being on Game Pass. That was also the case with Sea of Thieves - it beat their sales projections, despite being on Game Pass.

You’ll also be happy to hear that in the interview, without being asked, Spencer says they are listening to feedback on the game, and specifically name drops feedback on the game’s economy. Ryan Cleven also mentioned something oblique to the effect of the Gears 5 in-game economy being discussed internally right now, with more to say in the near future (paraphrased).

The combination of Cleven saying that, and the head of the entire Xbox Division also calling it out specifically, makes me think large changes will be coming down the pike soon. It also means the head of Xbox has been made aware of the negative feedback surrounding the multiplayer portion of Gears 5 in general.

As for the progression system, I’m reasonably confident that Operation 2 is going to be a lot better re: rewards. Octus and Cleven have cumulatively mentioned about a hundred times that they’ve heard the feedback on the rewards from Operation 1 loud and clear. So if they are just as bad, then it’s basically just trolling at this point, haha.

1 Like

There are a few items I disagree with you on. Primarily the time table it takes to make maps. Whether it’s a new one or an old one. It’s not as simple as hey this map exists, let’s load it into the game. That is not how it works. There is a substantial amount of work required to bring anything into a new game. Of course a new map would take longer as you need to have assets created for the new map and then play tested so nothing funky happens I just wanted to point out it’s still a time consuming endeavor.

With that said, the lack of maps is pretty sad. They said some would be coming in operation 2 if I am not mistaken. The realization of it may be one or two maps is pretty disappointing.

It seems as it is just so unorganized over there. In the few insights I’ve recieved from Ryan. I give them credit for trying to avoid certian scenarios that were problematic in gears 4 but they tried to address and neutered 5 in the process. That was a mistake and now they are back peddling in order to.fix it. I do feel bad for them but it’s also like come on get a grip. You know what the supposed to be about dont mess with the formula.

Hopefully they steer the the right direction but it’s going to take time unfortunately.

I don’t understand why the Coalition didn’t focus on porting over content from Gears 4 . Had characters, maps and skins been ported over from Gears 4, Gears 5 would have been a much more content rich game.

Honestly, and they will never admit it. Looking at what the game is and how it functions I feel as if there was something that set them back and Microsoft didnt want to hear about delays so they nixed things in lieu of content because the release was bad content wise. Its the only thing that makes sense because I find it hard to believe they felt 6 new maps (we had district in beta) was going to be sufficient with the game out 3 months and all that have been added are classic maps. I like the classic maps, I am not complaining but something seems off about this whole ordeal.