The Debate Over Microsoft’s Game Pass Price Increase

Microsoft recently faced allegations from the US Federal Trade Commission regarding their decision to increase the price of Game Pass. The FTC claimed that this price increase resulted in a “degraded” experience for consumers, which was seen as a potential risk following the acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Microsoft, on the other hand, dismissed these claims as “misleading” and argued that the new changes actually provide more value to subscribers.

The controversy began when Microsoft announced a price increase for the PC Game Pass, raising the monthly subscription fee from $9.99 to $11.99. Additionally, they introduced a new ‘Standard tier’ for Xbox Game Pass console players, which is cheaper but does not include day-one access to new games. This move prompted the FTC to criticize Microsoft for offering a “degraded” experience to consumers.

In response to the FTC’s allegations, Microsoft emphasized that the discontinued Game Pass for Console did not include multiplayer functionality, which had to be purchased separately. The new Game Pass Ultimate offers more value by including access to new games on their release date, such as the upcoming Call Of Duty title. Microsoft also argued that the FTC did not focus on the subscription service itself during the trial, instead highlighting concerns about potential competition issues.

While legal implications are debatable, some consumers feel that the price increase without the day-and-date feature for new games does indeed constitute a degraded experience. The inclusion of multiplayer in the lower tier is not seen as a significant improvement, especially for PC gamers who already have access to multiplayer without additional subscriptions. This has led to dissatisfaction among some subscribers who believe that they are paying more for essentially the same service.

Overall, the debate over Microsoft’s Game Pass price increase reflects a larger issue of consumer perception and value. While Microsoft defends their decision by citing additional benefits for subscribers, critics argue that the changes ultimately result in a less appealing subscription service. As the gaming market continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how companies navigate these challenges and adapt to meet consumer expectations.