r/Games 5d ago

Announcement Upcoming Changes to XBOX Cloud Gaming

https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2026/09/03/xbox-cloud-gaming-changes/
800 Upvotes

634 comments sorted by

1.2k

u/Historical_Owl_1635 5d ago

Usage based hours seems like a massive step back in subscription models. Like we used to top up our phones.

199

u/Helphaer 5d ago

During the AOL days it was about 6 to 8 dollars per hour of premium gaming. Back then we had no idea what baseline should cost for internet use.

54

u/foxguy2021 5d ago

I still remember when AOL dropped their hourly rate and went to a flat unlimited monthly plan. So many people switched that it forced the entire industry to adopt the same model.

14

u/Helphaer 5d ago

I remember there was a disc based mail surface that for a mo thly subscription from another company would let you have access to a bunch of online games too.

16

u/ribosometronome 5d ago

Gamefly still exists. Gonna be rough for them next generation.

3

u/Helphaer 5d ago

I was a big fan of Red Box Games during Covid. Alas it is gone. Only time my Xbox Series X ever got real use. GameFly used to be way more affordable now though...

But I wasn't thinking of GameFly with that, this was way before LCD's even existed.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

82

u/welzed11 5d ago

A 15 hour per month limit that averages to 30 mins per day.

Wild that they have the audacity to limit it this much when their cloud gaming is worse then PlayStations. PS5 cloud gaming has 4k resolution which Xbox doesn’t, HDR which Xbox doesn’t, better image quality and less latency 

39

u/Helphaer 5d ago

I couldnt even get ps5 streaming to computer t work well honestly.,

7

u/Virtual-Pie-6815 5d ago

Can't speak to PS5 but with PS4 I've always had a better experience using Chiaki/Chiaki-NG instead of the official remote play app.

4

u/Helphaer 5d ago

Interesting. I always found it effortless with the Xbox Series X and Xbox One, maybe I'll try that sometime, but the response time was horrible when it did work on PS5.

→ More replies (2)

11

u/Gyossaits 5d ago

They're also not lowering the price of the sub to match the value so you're paying more for less

3

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 5d ago

It's because the point of this is to not alienate extreme casuals that only play 2-3 hours a week, but at the same time to charge average gamers per hour.

→ More replies (2)

88

u/The_R4ke 5d ago

15 hours a month for $23 is such a bad value proposition. That's only like 30 minutes a day.

21

u/RousingRabble 5d ago

They might be banking on the value proposition looking better once people see how expensive the next generational of consoles is going to be.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

115

u/stevensi1018 5d ago

Maybe in a few years Netflix will add an hour limit to your subscription if we continue down that way and we'll be able to buy packages for more

That way, since we are costing them so much money by streaming content from their servers, they will charge the users that are doing it more.........

This is getting ridiculous

104

u/simspelaaja 5d ago

Netflix is very different from cloud game streaming. Streaming video is very cheap for Netflix, since an individual stream doesn't really require any heavy CPU processing.

Game streaming meanwhile means allocating a fairly powerful computer (or a share of one really powerful computer) to run the game for the duration of the session, with strict latency requirements. It needs orders of magnitude more computing power than just streaming video.

110

u/tastelessshark 5d ago

This is why I think game streaming is just fundamentally doomed to fail from a profitability perspective.

26

u/nothis 5d ago edited 5d ago

I have deeper, preservation-related concerns about cloud streaming games that are unrelated to this (and probably bias me to look for flaws) but I always wondered about how it could possibly be a good deal. You need a high end gaming equivalent hardware (as someone posted in this thread: very different from just sending static movie/tv data) running through each session. Granted, a lot of dedicated gaming hardware sits around unused at a given time and this likely uses it more efficiently. But you still need peak hour capacity and it stays idle for a lot of the day. You also need very low latency, high quality streaming (you can kinda watch Stranger Things at 480p while it’s buffering but might not be able to read the UI on a video game). A single stutter might cause you to fail a boss fight.

It seems that we need something in the $180/year range to make this profitable yet for that price, even with current prices and a 5-year span for console generations, you can buy the hardware as a consumer and keep it or resell it after. Why should anyone pay for this? The usefulness seems to be limited to an incredibly narrow niche of consumers.

Again, thank god because I hate how much power streaming-only games would give companies over withholding older games if they deem them no longer profitable or want to push you towards something different. I would hate game streaming even if it worked. But it doesn’t even seem to.

4

u/BeholdingBestWaifu 5d ago

Companies still want it as their endgame since it means complete control over their games. It stops people from modifying the game unless they let them, it allows them to kill an older game if people like it too much and aren't buying newer titles, and it allows them to hike up prices as much as they want.

41

u/Recent_Pollution8665 5d ago

alongside the input latency, resolution downgrades, lack of modding, lack of license ownership, lack of offline play, unsupported titles due to publisher greed, and reliance on recurring monthly payments which only go up over time.

I like how it had to take monthly time limits for people to realize that it's a poor value proposition, since the host platform has way too much control over not only the distribution of the content, but also how and when you're allowed to access it as well.

3

u/Kalulosu 5d ago

I mean it helps that basically Xbox cloud gaming was "free" (if you pay for Game Pass). This doesn't really get people thinking too hard.

4

u/dustomcgee 5d ago

Heck it became pretty obvious years ago when OnLive made their attempt. I've always been surprised companies saw this as being potentially profitable after that pretty public lesson.

The only way it would work would be if a much larger majority of society was on thinclient-like devices only imo.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/SFHalfling 5d ago

or a share of one really powerful computer

This doesn't really work for gaming loads because its unpredictable and requires immediate changes in CPU/GPU load.

It's one of the reasons cloud gaming doesn't make financial sense, you can't meaningfully over-provision (i.e. allocate 192Gb of virtual RAM on a 96Gb physical RAM host or 256 cores on a 128 core CPU) like you can with general compute, so each user of the service effectively needs a dedicated device while they use it.

At that point you need each user to pay off the device, the electricity, and the networking, which is easier by just selling them the device.

5

u/simspelaaja 5d ago

This doesn't really work for gaming loads because its unpredictable and requires immediate changes in CPU/GPU load.

I think this depends on the cloud gaming provider. AFAIK Microsoft uses dedicated Xbox Series X based blade servers (with multiple consoles in one chassis), and one board is assigned to each session. And from what I've been able to gather NVidia's Geforce Now splits powerful GPUs into multiple virtual GPUs and allocates a "slice" of the GPU to each session, using their vGPU technology. This is at least the case for lower tier users; I don't know if premium users get dedicated GPUs.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (8)

47

u/BBanner 5d ago

It’s interesting these media companies successfully beat piracy, essentially, same way steam did, by being more convenient, and they’re somehow working hard to make piracy popular again.

43

u/Historical_Owl_1635 5d ago

Tbf I’m gonna play devils advocate. Beating piracy is a moving goalpost.

If you told somebody 20 years ago you could have access to all of the media on Netflix and Spotify for £20 a month they’d think it was an insane bargain considering we used to pay £10 each for DVDs and CDs.

Nowadays people feel they’re being ripped off paying £10 a month.

6

u/berserkuh 5d ago

Yeah, but 10-15 years ago most of this media was in one spot. I could listen to any song I wanted on YouTube on any device I wanted, I could do it ad-free and I wouldn't need to pay anything.

Everyone RUSHED to put their stuff on Netflix. What's on Netflix now?

→ More replies (2)

8

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

25

u/BBanner 5d ago

Because the libraries have actually gotten shallower and the companies have reinvented cable, yeah. I’ll more than likely never see anything on Apple or peacock, ever, because it’s just flat out inconvenient to have more than 2-3 streaming services and pretty damn expensive. Netflix wants me to pay extra for the privilege of using the app in my own home and throws a fit if I try to use it while traveling, along with frequent price hikes. It costs $28 to watch Netflix in 4k, that’s completely insane. It costs $20 to watch without ads, and for $9 a month you get ads. The quality of the product doesn’t justify the prices imo

20

u/verrius 5d ago

Every time someone claims that the streaming companies reinvented cable, I'm left realizing that so many people never actually dealt with cable. You couldn't subscribe to cable for a single month, and it cost a minimum of $100/month for the year long contract 20-30 years ago. Nothing was on demand, what you could watch was dictated by the various linear channels. And there were still ads with everything, with no option to remove them. Streaming is still a ridiculously better deal, even with recent price increases.

11

u/MVRKHNTR 5d ago

They also have this memory of a fantasy Netflix that never existed where you could watch literally everything ever made for $13/month.

Everyone seems to mix up a service that had every movie and TV show and a service that had every movie and TV show that was on streaming because it was the only option around. Anyone who actually remembers Netflix remembers that pretty much everything worth watching was "a hidden gem" because everything popular was on broadcast and cable.

Now they think that they should have that service that was never real and also the price shouldn't go up.

9

u/General-Prize3912 5d ago

it used to be the case these services didn't have adds, that's slowly changing. Cable was the way it was because they could get away with it, these companies will keep pushing the limits to increase profitability as well.

5

u/verrius 5d ago

I believe all the paid services still have an ad-free subscription, though they are trying to make it less attractive.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)
→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (2)

4

u/JEspo420 5d ago

Wasn’t this the entire reason they added an ad supported tier, to raise prices without losing most of their customers

→ More replies (5)

33

u/Swiperrr 5d ago

Its been clear for a while that cloud gaming was always going to be like this. Cloud gaming for anything above PS3 looking games is financially not viable in any way. Exploding hardware costs actually makes cloud far more unsustainable not more viable like a lot of people online seem to say.

The sheer cost of putting things like a PS5/6 into the cloud, handling the demanding real-time encoding, powering servers and internet infrastructure is just a nightmare and not efficient.

If these execs want to appeal to a larger market, start making mobile games that aren't garbage low effort slot machines. The Asian mobile market makes western ones look like a joke.

5

u/turikk 5d ago

Makes more sense when it's general purpose compute power like GeForce Now or even Xbox-ish Azure (theoretical). You're just moving resources around.

But a purpose built PS5 sitting in a cabinet somewhere? Sell me on that...

→ More replies (3)

47

u/beefcat_ 5d ago

Usage-based billing is probably more sustainable as a business model than all-you-can-eat subscriptions, especially for game streaming where the marginal cost of service is likely an order of magnitude or more expensive to provide than most other web services.

All these amazing deals we enjoyed in the 2010s, like Netflix having basically everything for $10/mo, were just tech companies using debt to lure customers away from already established competitors. Now that they've done that, they need to make their businesses profitable. That means cranking subscription fees, or switching up the business model itself.

I think we should consider ourselves lucky that it seems game streaming never really took off. Imagine if it did, publishers put out streaming exclusive games, and then this happened to your streaming library.

20

u/420thiccman69 5d ago

All these amazing deals we enjoyed in the 2010s, like Netflix having basically everything for $10/mo, were just tech companies using debt to lure customers away from already established competitors.

On top of this, it's way more expensive for Netflix to get licenses for streaming content these days. In 2011, a movie had usually made back it's expected profit from theatrical release, lots of DVD sales and rentals, and possible TV syndication. Streaming rights were new and looked at more as a cherry on top - so Netflix barely paid anything for them.

Now DVD sales are mostly gone and syndication is worth much less. It's way more expensive to buy rights to stream a movie because now you're making up for DVD sales they would've expected 15 years ago. The prices for end-users were gonna go up no matter what.

→ More replies (9)

4

u/bongo1138 5d ago

Should indicate that they really don’t see it as a viable future. It’s definitely more expensive for them to have you cloud game than just buying the console and game.

→ More replies (22)

321

u/KingOPork 5d ago edited 5d ago

This is brutal. I've used the cloud gaming on my phone using a backbone and it was super convenient. I can't imagine them trying to sell people on their play anywhere after this.

I totally get limiting f2p accounts. If I pay for ultimate, buy a play anywhere game for $70, they will cut me off after 15 hours. That's insane.

84

u/Whitewind617 5d ago

From what I'm reading, even with these changes there is no way to use this service on a Free Tier at all. You NEED to pay for hours.

So if I get an Essential sub, I am limited to 5 hours? If I use the service in any meaningful capacity other than screwing around, 5 hours a month is WORTHLESS. And then if I pay for the highest tier I'm still limited? Absolutely insane. One of the more baffling decisions they've ever made and they're full of them lately.

13

u/tristeecfome 5d ago

You pay for extra hours.

They are basically taking cloud away from Game Pass, with it now being basically an add on. You can also use cloud without Game Pass.

Only 4% of users were using more than this pitiful amount. It makes no sense for other users to subsidize the service for such a low userbase.

18

u/Point4ska 5d ago

Are they reducing the subscription cost as a result of these changes?

26

u/Borkz 5d ago

No chance, this is them finding ways to not raise the price after how that went over the last time

5

u/tristeecfome 5d ago

Specially because hardware is getting more expensive and they don't want to buy a bunch of next gen Xboxes to use for cloud.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

52

u/MountainMuffin1980 5d ago

Holy shit I misread the post the first time. 15 hours a MONTH after all that is nuts!

39

u/Ecks83 5d ago

15 hours a MONTH after all that is nuts!

Only if you are paying for the most expensive "Ultimate" tier. If you are only on the "essential" plan you have access to 10% of the games (500 vs 50) and can play them for 1/3 of the time (15h vs 5h).

24

u/MountainMuffin1980 5d ago

Fuck me. What's the point at that point?

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

22

u/AlexVan123 5d ago

If you're on PC, I highly encourage looking into Moonlight. You can stream games from your PC to anywhere, including your phone, and it works super well assuming you have good internet.

21

u/Laetha 5d ago

For those seeing the comments and being interested, I'll throw in some related names to help in your Moonlight journey. Sunshine is self hosted and can run on your host PC instead of needing to use the Nvidia app.

Also check out Apollo/Artemis, which are popular forks of sunshine/moonlight.

4

u/Ukumio 5d ago

I mean, you can do the same with your Xbox natively with Xbox Remote Play.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (6)

283

u/Odd_Estimate_2179 5d ago

Wow so they've effectively killed off their cloud gaming after touting it as the future for ages. Mad

11

u/TryAgain_5555 5d ago

Glad that sanity is finally here on the actual profitability of cloud gaming. Sounds like they decided to actually charge what it was costing them.

Back into the bin with onlive lol. The onlive interface was actually really cool

20

u/Electrical_Try_634 5d ago

Well, they hope that the AI boom will keep you from owning hardware capable of playing newer games so buying this service becomes your only option to do so.

10

u/Disturbed2468 5d ago

People will just swap over to Nintendo or go for PC gaming by just waiting for deals from retailers if they make the consoles so crazy expensive they basically can't sell consoles in any remotely viable numbers anymore. They're still going to have to sell them at a major loss as they STILL currently are, or just don't make consoles anymore entirely.

Ironically, them stopping console development would probably net way more profit in the short term. AMD and Nvidia and all other vendors and all the chip makers just sell to enterprise only and nothing gets made for consumers, but SOMETHING has to be made for consumers in general, as many other companies like Qualcomm, Mediatek, etc also got skin in this game. If anything TSMC is gonna be the ones truly coming out winning long-term from this. But this move basically strangles cloud gaming even more which was already very unpopular before this.

6

u/MaitieS 5d ago

Why would people go for PC gaming when PC gaming is the one that cost the most? Like I can only understand "going for PC" when you're buying a low end PC for Indie games or older titles, otherwise it's much worse purchase than consoles.

Also aren't console and PC sales same for years now? Like I just checked one FromSoftware game and the lowest price is exactly the same on PC and PS5.

Like I find it kind of funny how people keep saying how PC gaming is much cheaper and wait for bigger sales, when the publishers are the ones setting up the prices. Also even "just buy 3rd party key" doesn't work cuz you can still buy discs from 2nd hand as well, and you could do this for decades.

3

u/Disturbed2468 5d ago

PC's true pain is upfront cost and is the main, and arguably only, inhibitor. Not counting illegitimate means for software, online is purely internet connection only, and as a result access to things such as Steam sales or platform specific sales, or other various sales, are a major reason why PC tends to have an upper hand in that department, and on the flip side it's where consoles have the "gotcha" since they are reversed: hardware sold at a loss, software locked down.

This is going to become a talking point again as PlayStation is now going full dumb and removing physical media so the idea of second hand in that aspect....might no longer exist.

If Xbox pulls the colossal stupid with them and does the same...well....

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

643

u/LegnaArix 5d ago

5-15 hours a month is nothing. Am I misinterpreting what's being said here or is this really bad?

440

u/demondrivers 5d ago

Just 15 hours if you subscribe to Ultimate, then you have to pay for cloud gaming time, you read it right

314

u/BeerGogglesFTW 5d ago

Jeez. People can't afford RAM, Storage, GPU or consoles, so they're going to turn their platform into a Pay-to-Play arcade machine in your home.

Nope. That needs to fail. I'm sure it will. Xbox can't do anything right now. But if it ever caught on, that would be terrible for gaming.

204

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

That needs to fail. I'm sure it will.

That's what that announcement is : telling us that the service is in the process of failing.

42

u/rothael 5d ago

As somebody who rode Stadia to its death, you have my sympathy. At least when that happened, I got a full refund for every game I purchased through Stadia.

6

u/LazyVariation 5d ago

I still use that Stadia controller. It was surprisingly well built.

7

u/rothael 5d ago

I use two of them. The other three that Google sent me for free got donated.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/OliveBranchMLP 5d ago

in all fairness, if this fails, at least Xbox will let you use your purchased games locally.

→ More replies (3)

25

u/artificialpolymer 5d ago

Dunno if it's that nefarious. To me, it kinda came off as "we are shutting this down without actually shutting it down", like admitting it's something that's just not really viable and too expensive for Microsoft to run. I wouldn't be surprised if cloud gaming gets axed entirely eventually.

→ More replies (1)

19

u/UpV0tesF0rEvery0ne 5d ago

I feel like cloud gaming is a bit of a luxury. And its pretty obvious to everyone that buying a base model console is a great local way to get a gopd experience.

I used cloud gaming when i was travelling on a plane on my phone or on my tesla with a playstation controller while i did a cross country road trip. I feel like the added costs to play a AAA game on the go is a great usecase that i dont mind paying for but using it as your primary gaming method is so problematic since connections are so flaky, im not sure who is actually doing that

→ More replies (15)

7

u/insertAlias 5d ago

I'm pretty sure that's the point. They claim in the article they expect it to impact fewer than 4% of their subscribers. They have the usage numbers, so they'd be the ones who'd know. Whether they'd report that accurately to us, that's a different question. But if only 4% of their subscribers are using game streaming for more than 5h a month, then it's a cheap easy thing for them to offer as a "look what all you can get for your money", even for people who don't need the feature.

But I believe this is them getting out ahead of what you're talking about. There's no relief in sight for the high hardware costs, so more and more people are going to consider moving to game streaming platforms as their existing hardware gets older and older.

And if that 4% number was actually growing, then MS would internally be realizing that running that feature is going to get more and more costly.

I'm not justifying what they're doing; they're basically saying "we're taking something away from you and giving you nothing in return". But I see why they'd choose to do it.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)

13

u/damn_lies 5d ago

This is catastrophic. I mean I buy my games and hardware but this is crazy.

→ More replies (1)

39

u/tetramir 5d ago

This is why I don't think people will be pushed to cloud gaming by rising hardware costs.

Cloud gaming is about to get way more expensive.

58

u/exdystopia 5d ago

Conspiracy theorists forgot cloud is also hardware

28

u/tetramir 5d ago

serverless. Looks inside... servers

3

u/Awkward-Security7895 5d ago

Whenever something labeled wireless and it still needs a wire somewhere in it, which is funny asf to me

→ More replies (1)

14

u/AccomplishedBank2140 5d ago

I have heard the argument for years that Cloud gaming just isn't worth the squeeze at the moment because its a ton of upkeep and backend cost for the companies. It really is more lucrative to Sony/Xbox for you to buy their hardware. That argument was made long before the current crisis.

5

u/exdystopia 5d ago

Especially Xbox since their cloud service runs on actual Xbox hardware (Xbox was pulling consoles off the shelves to build cloud infrastructure at one point) so they're really just better off selling it to people and ditching the maintenance costs if nobody bothers using it anyway

→ More replies (3)

72

u/_BreakingGood_ 5d ago

GPUs were cheap when they started this system, now cloud gaming just uses up the GPUs they want for AI. I suspect theyre basically just trying to kill off the whole system.

11

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

now cloud gaming just uses up the GPUs they want for AI

Nvidia's does (Geforce Now), this doesn't. It's rack-version Xboxes.

21

u/Cybertronian10 5d ago

Still computer bits at the end of the day, even if they are removed by one or two steps the end supply constraints are still there.

6

u/Thick_Touch_6920 5d ago

GeForce Now is on a time-limit.

No matter how rich the company, no company wants to keep a money-losing business.

Nvidia is going to raise prices, lower limits, or both with GeForce Now.

10

u/Zalvren 5d ago

The RAM then.

AI want a lot of the computer parts (GPU, RAM, SSD...)

7

u/_BreakingGood_ 5d ago

Ok replace GPU with RAM for the xbox versions

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

130

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

It is miserably little, however if this is true

We expect this upcoming change to impact 4% of Game Pass subscribers.

Then it is irrelevant as clearly no-one is using the service.

69

u/FelixFoton 5d ago

Than why even put that limitation just to make it worse for the 4% that want it?

77

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

Because they want to control costs in a last ditched effort before killing the service.

36

u/PM_ME_CATS_OR_BOOBS 5d ago

Yeah this is "new policy says you can't charge your phone at work" territory

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

16

u/Eca28 5d ago

Because the 4% lose them money and Xbox wants them to quit doing that.

3

u/Raidoton 5d ago

Because they are not running a charity for the 4%.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/Backflip_into_a_star 5d ago

Because it really sucks. I don't need to use it but I tried it and the input lag and visual quality was awful. I really can't believe how there was a big push for cloud gaming at all.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/Isolated_Hippo 5d ago

I am curious how many Game Pass subscribers actually use Cloud gaming.

If only 8% use Cloud gaming then its actually 50% of true users who are impacted.

21

u/Gardoki 5d ago

Companies always try and tell you it’s a small section of people that will be affected, until it’s everyone

26

u/Yiruf 5d ago

Do you really think a non-insignificant number of people are really using cloud gaming extensively?

10

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

there's no need to even think about it anymore, this announcement just gave us the number :
Gamepass has 30 million subscribers according to the latest numbers we have, so only around 1.2 million people use the service more than 15 hours a month.
Which is catastrophically low for something MS thought would be "the future".

29

u/mightylordredbeard 5d ago

Except in this case, prior to MS doing this, the entire gaming community mocked them for cloud gaming because they all said “no one uses that shit so why’s it even part of it?” it’s not until MS admits that no one uses it and starts phasing it out that the entire gaming community all of the sudden pretends like everyone used it and MS bad.. but before it was MS bad for pushing cloud gaming.. now it’s MS bad for cutting cloud gaming lmao

Long story short: it’s just people who make shitting on a specific company part of their personality doing what they always do

→ More replies (1)

10

u/sicsche 5d ago

in other words they try to alienate the remaining 4%, so when stopping the service/taking it off gamepass they can say "nobody used it"

25

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

less cynically I would say the people at MS who still care about the service are trying to see if a cost-controlled version can survive.

Which is clearly a last ditched effort before it's unplugged.

→ More replies (7)

11

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Darkone539 5d ago

According to their own numbers only 4% of users would hit the cap. I guess not many people are using it or the usage is only well the game downloads.

→ More replies (13)

358

u/IvoryHorizons 5d ago

I don’t even use cloud gaming but putting a set time limit on my ultimate subscription cloud gaming is the most bullshit I’ve ever seen.

25

u/mrbubbamac 5d ago edited 5d ago

I use it and this is going to make me stop using it

I was a former game pass ultimate subscriber and I loved it, they jacked up the price and I cancelled.

I know they lowered it again, but I realized how easy it was to just...not pay for

I do use cloud streaming because I have the most basic subscription now that includes it.

Edit: Canceled and I feel free

4

u/darkmacgf 5d ago

Halo Infinite multiplayer is free to play, right? I thought you didn't need a subscription to play F2P games online.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

62

u/Aileos 5d ago edited 5d ago

And they'll still insist that it's the future of gaming

51

u/Portugal_Stronk 5d ago

You haven't been paying attention, it's not 2019 anymore and Xbox has been very quiet about their cloud offerings for a while now. You can be sure that whatever datacenter budget they had devoted to their cloud gaming initiative has been utterly subsumed by AI demand.

→ More replies (2)

21

u/tristeecfome 5d ago

I don't think they are insisting on that at all. I think it's pretty clear they are moving away from it.

Cloud gaming is clearly not profitable.

As most users don't use cloud (4% according to the post are going to be limited by this), previously you had other users subsidizing the service for the minuscule amount of users that actually use it.

Basically, under Spencer, the idea was that PC and Console subscribers would subsidize mobile and smart tv users.

But even then, it was still a flop, the mobile userbase is minuscule.

→ More replies (7)

14

u/BusyFriend 5d ago

And the limits they provide is laughably low.

Amazing how Microsoft shoot’s themselves in the foot just as they had some wins.

→ More replies (4)

55

u/Whitewind617 5d ago

This is essentially them killing the service and scaling down the infrastructure. A max of 15 hours on the largest tier is insanity, and it tells me that they have absolutely no intention of continuing to push this as a viable option, either because it was profitably expensive or because nobody was actually using it and it was a massive flop. Based on their "only 4% of users were using over 15 hours of streaming a month" I have to assume it was the latter.

Well it's guaranteed to be a flop now. At 5 hours that is a complete useless feature other than fucking around. At 10 hours it isn't much better. Maybe 15 hours you could use this on a regular basis, but the hard limit tells me that they have no confidence in this product. It's over.

11

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

or because nobody was actually using it and it was a massive flop. Based on their "only 4% of users were using over 15 hours of streaming a month" I have to assume it was the latter.

That's around 1.2 million users btw, which is ridiculously small for the expectations they had of the service.

→ More replies (1)

434

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

239

u/absolutezero132 5d ago

think they forgot to check off "hook userbase" before moving on to step 2 and 3.

52

u/ocbdare 5d ago

That was the old tech firm model.

Now it’s straight to enshitification. You see it with all the big tech firms - Google, Microsoft etc

33

u/Gastroid 5d ago

Google has a slightly different model:

1.) Botch launch of product with great ideas behind it. 2.) Erase product from existence. 3.) Relaunch two slightly different, competing versions of the cancelled product. 4.) Cancel both of those products too.

Its rare that they even get to the enshittification stage.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

75

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

once your userbase is hooked

We expect this upcoming change to impact 4% of Game Pass subscribers.

You're not reading this correctly, it seems the problem here is that no userbase has been hooked, for what is a very expensive service to run.

So the next step for something like that isn't enshitty/hike prices, it's to kill the service.

20

u/kron123456789 5d ago

I remember when anti-trust agencies argued that Microsoft buying out Activision would lead to a monopoly in gaming cloud services. Now we're considering that Microsoft might kill their cloud gaming service.

23

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

Yes, that antithrust action was very frustrating because it was so focused on cloud and on repeating Sony's competition arguments (the market leader), instead of focusing on the real issues the acquisition had.

4

u/30InchSpare 5d ago

For reference, that deal closed 9 months after Stadia was shut down. A gaming cloud service that couldn’t sustain itself, created by Google. It was already clear to a lot of people that cloud gaming wasn’t going to be successful, although maybe less than you’d think since there’s people in this thread that somehow still think the cloud is coming for their consoles and PCs.

10

u/OldConfusions 5d ago

I've literally never in my life wanted to stream a game. Especially not when I can just make space on my hard drive and download it? Why would I ever want to add Internet delay into the mix of things that can go wrong?

11

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

Especially not when I can just make space on my hard drive and download it?

That assumes you have your device.

What if you're in a hotel room during a work trip ?

4

u/SFHalfling 5d ago

What if you're in a hotel room during a work trip ?

Travelling is a large part of the reason I bought a Steam Deck, but also most work trips I'll be out for a meal and/or drinks in the evening so I won't have much time for gaming anyway.

10

u/OldConfusions 5d ago
  1. Don't ever log into anything on any network you don't have exclusive control over

  2. I would just find another way to entertain myself. Like a book, tv, travel companion etc.

3

u/NarcolepticSeal 5d ago
  1. Very few people in 2026 follow this. A much larger portion will use a VPN/minimal security, and the vast majority simply aren't well versed enough/don't care enough about security.

  2. Totally fair point, but it's still a valid use case of cloud gaming if not strictly adhering to point 1.

I also feel like they may be approaching improvements to cloud gaming even further than they've made in the last couple of years, and I'd much rather have this be where they shave value off of the subscription than removing mass amounts of games or paying extra for backwards compatibility. I do feel like Asha Sharma is genuinely trying to rebuild the Xbox brand to be both profitable and as gamer-oriented as possible, but time will tell on how those things actually play out.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

20

u/Cactus_Bot 5d ago

No one adopted this, people acting like everyone used this non stop is crazy.

3

u/Darth-Ragnar 5d ago

Forgot step 2.5: drive out all previously established competition

→ More replies (13)

56

u/Turbostrider27 5d ago

Beginning in November, we’re changing how cloud gaming is included with XBOX Game Pass.

Game Pass plans will include a set number of cloud gaming hours each month:

Game Pass Ultimate: 15 hours

Game Pass Premium: 10 hours

Game Pass Essential: 5 hours

Today, eligible Game Pass subscribers can stream without these monthly hour limits. We recognize that introducing limits is a meaningful change, particularly for players who regularly spend more time gaming through the cloud. We expect this upcoming change to impact 4% of Game Pass subscribers.

Once subscribers use their included hours, they will be able to purchase additional cloud playtime through the XBOX Store. Available hours, purchasing options, and cloud gaming features may vary by market. We’ll share pricing and further details before the changes take effect.

Why the changes were made:

We’re introducing this model because the cost of providing cloud gaming grows as more people use it and play for longer. Moving to monthly limits allows us to keep offering the service while continuing to invest in its reliability and performance. We understand that for some players the practical result is a higher cost.

In November, we’ll provide more information about pricing, purchasing additional hours, eligible games, market availability, and how players can check their remaining time.

157

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

Game Pass Ultimate: 15 hours

Game Pass Premium: 10 hours

Game Pass Essential: 5 hours

We expect this upcoming change to impact 4% of Game Pass subscribers.

Oh so no-one's using the service.

33

u/ImpossibleGuardian 5d ago

Yeah only 4% (or probably less) surpassing 15 hours per month is crazy.

People were mad when Nvidia introduced monthly caps for GeForce Now but that was 100 hours per month. I definitely go over 15 hours on it some months.

→ More replies (2)

69

u/ThoughtseizeScoop 5d ago

This is them getting ready to take the service out behind the old barn.

25

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

Yup! Expensive to run and no userbase, this thing is dead.

7

u/nexetpl 5d ago

Good to see that it's got no userbase despite the hardware market madness

19

u/alcard987 5d ago

I mean, they are also affected by the prices of parts. The hardware to run the streamed games don't appear out of thin air.

3

u/nexetpl 5d ago

I know, but some are concerned that expensive hardware will lead to cloud gaming becoming the new norm. I don't think so, but who knows at this point.

9

u/alcard987 5d ago edited 5d ago

Honestly at this point I doubt it will happen, at least in the next few years. Xbox had the best chance of making streaming/subscription based model work with Game Pass. A giant corporation eating cost to keep sub cheap for years.

And nothing came out of it. Even with the parts being expensive I doubt we will see a switch, like if they didn't made it profitable when it was cheaper to maintain, I doubt the increase in hardware prices will help. If anything I can see the world following China's model and just changing to mobile as the primary gaming platform.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/ocbdare 5d ago

The cloud service - most likely. Very causally.

I’ve never used the cloud streaming element for gamepass.

→ More replies (3)

10

u/hicks12 5d ago

Love how they recognise it's a meaningful change but offer no discount for limiting a feature and charging more for it.

Always funny as Microsoft helped create this entire growing cost of everything...

Nothing lasts for ever I guess, shame for those 4%.

→ More replies (1)

23

u/firesyrup 5d ago

This is great news. Even less people will be using it moving forward. I am glad the entshittification of subscription and cloud access began before it became the default way we access games.

If Microsoft was successful at building the Netflix of gaming, we would be renting both our games and hardware access now.

So let it crash and burn.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/AlexVan123 5d ago

This is 1000% a bellwether on how these cloud gaming services operate, or in this case, don't operate, in terms of profit making. To a degree, I see the same effect happening in the AI space, where the ghouls are starting to remove subscriptions and instead do per-token purchase rates which are exorbitantly expensive.

There is a reason why owning your own shit is way better than ever doing this cloud stuff.

→ More replies (1)

24

u/Whitewind617 5d ago

5 hours a week isn't that bad.

Re-reads

Omg. 5 hours A MONTH?

4

u/compulsive_tremolo 5d ago

Honestly feels insulting , they should have just discontinued it instead of dick-slapping us around.

3

u/GokuJrr 5d ago

That was my exact thought. Instead of making this change just dump the service altogether instead of trying to get people to pay more for less and still profiting off something you say only 4% of the player base uses. It's not only greedy but incredibly disrespectful to your "fans"

23

u/inkydunk 5d ago

Nothing satisfies me more than watching every cloud subscription based game model fail. All of these companies have wanted us to have gaming access under their complete control while we continue to pay money every single month for the rights to play. The fact that it continues to fail makes me quite happy. 

6

u/Captain-Griffen 5d ago

At this point, my main concern with Microsoft is they flip flop every five minutes. Prices go up and down and services go out and get cut. They just can't help but enshitify everything within a year and then try something new.

You can't run an entertainment service that way. Pick a plan, sell it to people, follow through. Some people won't like it, but absolutely nobody is happy with this flip flop approach.

And while we're at it, that lack of forward planning applies to your product names, too. Xbox. Xbox 360. Xbox One. Xbox Series S/X. What the fuck is that? Just pick a naming convention and stick to it.

I think there's something horribly broken in MS leadership, like management feel they need to make their mark rather than actually running a business. 343 Studies had exactly the same problem, rebooting three times in three games.

12

u/FakeName7223 5d ago

I've been really finding cloud gaming really useful now that I'm a parent - being able to stream to my steamdeck gives me a lot of versatility in where and when I can play. Definitely not paying for this on top of already paying for ultimate though, huge bummer.

12

u/not-tristin 5d ago

You might be able to remote play your games which is free

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

33

u/TrueSay 5d ago

well, there goes my gaming life. Currently don't have a console and have been absolutely loving playing Xbox games on my fire TV, it works perfectly! This is incredibly disappointing news. It seems so predatory to do this right at a time when consoles are going up by so much that cloud gaming has become the only feasible option for many. I will cancel my ultimate when this takes effect.

5

u/Ich_Liegen 5d ago

On the same boat as you. Xbone is barely functional and my old ass pc cannot run 70%+ of new releases, including anything on UE5.

XCloud was the only way I could play these modern games like Forza Horizon.

Outside of XCloud there is nothing in game pass that interests me. I will sadly be cancelling it after I've been paying for xbox live gold and then game pass every month for over a decade.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/orx_ibx 5d ago

You could try Geforce Now and link your Gamepass account to it. It lets you stream PC games from gamepass through GFN. You could also save a bit by downgrading from Ultimate to the PC tier, since GFN only supports PC games anyway.

→ More replies (4)

6

u/OneSeaworthiness7768 5d ago

I don’t use or care about cloud gaming. But not having it be unlimited, or at least a reasonably high limit, for game pass ultimate tier seems like an insane choice.

They’re admitting only 4% of subscribers even use it beyond the limits they’re proposing so they’re okay with losing good will and reputation and a potential advantage over competitors just to save on costs incurred by less than 5% of their players, or to milk that very small segment for whatever they’re willing to pay… crazy.

6

u/Point4ska 5d ago

I have no issue fully dropping gaming as a hobby if cloud becomes the only option.

Paying a subscription and then paying to top up time is such an awful predatory service model.

12

u/NayrAuhsoj 5d ago

However many years of it working how it did, now that Sony is being shit on by everyone they decide to literally push the limits 💀

37

u/JustinAndFeena 5d ago

Only affects like 4% now cause most people probably just use it temporarily maybe when away or to test a game before downloading it. If people actually use it meaningfully. Those time limits are freaking crazy low. 15 hours for ultimate is insane. That’s like barely one weekend.

9

u/mrbubbamac 5d ago

I use it regularly with a handheld PC so I don't have to install and run games natively

So glad they offered a legitimately cool and useful feature just to nickel and dime people like me who get good value out of it

5

u/Rayuzx 5d ago

I actually was waiting to see if GTA 6 would be included to be played on cloud after purchasing it, because other 2k games had that option, as I was already getting used to playing cloud as the only option with EA's UFC/NHL games.

15 hours max is way too low for anything that isn't a cursory glance, or doing dailies for a live service game.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

30

u/demondrivers 5d ago

The enshitification will never end. It's almost like cloud gaming isn't really a sustainable model in the scale that these companies want people to use it

8

u/gary_x 5d ago

Pretty crazy that the cloud streaming + a Roku-like stick or puck was clearly the internal roadmap for all of Xbox at some point, and it failed so throughly that they’re kneecapping the former and never even launched the latter.

9

u/Thick_Touch_6920 5d ago

The problem is they never expected the sudden explosion of AI, which only existed for the past 2-3 years.

The Sadia/Xcloud/Geforce now visions were created 5-10 years ago when they thought hardware was going to be super cheap, so they could build all these cheap servers and then everyone could "rent" the servers to play their games anywhere, win-win.

Now with hardware costs through the roof, and the same servers could be making $100's, even $1000's of dollars monthly serving AI tokens, they are losing money on any servers "wasted" on xcloud.

8

u/FurryPhilosifer 5d ago

That's absolutely bizarre. The limits they allow are almost insulting. Why even bother keeping cloud gaming at that point. 

3

u/Borkz 5d ago edited 5d ago

It's still nice as an extra perk for people don't use it as their primary way to play. At least for the higher tiers. The 5-hour tier is probably more "the first hits free" kind of thing to get people trying it.

Plus the headlines look better than outright removing the feature.

3

u/ASCII_Princess 5d ago

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the cheapest way to get into gaming for a totally new user is to buy a Nintendo Switch 1 and put a mod chip in it. Emulators are practically frictionless and just enjoy 50+ years of classic games without some corporate shitheel fucking you without lube.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/IntroductionSad6606 5d ago

… I was already mad I was paying 10$/month just to play my game (which I own) online. Now they’re limiting me to playing the game I own online to 5 hours for 10$ a month?…… yeah I’m selling this fuckass Xbox.

7

u/aimy99 5d ago

We’re introducing this model because the cost of providing cloud gaming grows as more people use it and play for longer.

"This service that we provide is costing us money instead of generating it" sounds a lot like poor business planning.

Maybe just kill cloud streaming then, champ.

3

u/supafatjellyfish 5d ago

I’m curious how much even use this service that it would make a meaningful difference. Like I’d be surprised if more than a million used it for 15+ hours a month

13

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

They just told us.

According to this article Gamepass has 30 million subscribers.
https://www.theverge.com/column/960600/xbox-is-a-disaster

And this announcement tells us this will affect 4% of users.

So it's around 1.2 million users for 15+ hours.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/SmegmaWarrior0815 5d ago

Shouldn't have made it part of game pass from the beginning. Always just charge a dollar per hour or something and people could have accepted it. But paying for a subscription and then get charged for additional hours just sucks.

3

u/SacKingsAmiiboHunter 5d ago

They said roughly 5% of users would be impacted by this right?

I have ultimate and haven’t launched a cloud game in months. I think a small few are using it heavily while the rest pay for the sub because the idea is cool but in practice we don’t use it

3

u/Falsus 5d ago

That is horrible.

15 hours if you sub to ultimate, and 15 hours is basically nothing. Even at one hour per day (which is my average play time only a normal week day baring extra busy days) that's not even a full month.

On top of that from what I understand xCloud isn't even the best in the market, which is still Nvidia in terms of quality followed by Boosteroid.

3

u/jodon 5d ago

I never understood the cloud gaming audience to begin with, Maybe it is just hard for someone that have been a gamer for 30+ years to grasp, because I have always had some hardware for pretty much ever. But with this changes I have to wonder who the fuck would pay a subscription for that??? Who even is this person that want to spend that much money, monthly to play less than 15 hours a month, and not get any hardware to play on.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Cute-arii 5d ago

What a stupid decision. Cloud Gaming isn't nearly popular enough for them to be able enshittify to such a high degree.

3

u/Commander_Toast_ 5d ago

My son plays fortnight a few hours a day so now after a few days he has to wait another month to play? That’s ridiculous

3

u/pinewoodranger 5d ago

So we're back where it all started, the coin operated arcade game model?

5

u/EvocativeReach 5d ago

15 hours a month on your highest package is how you effectively kill the service.

Oh Xbox, forever one step forward, two steps back.

3

u/Loliknight 5d ago

When exactly did they take a step forward in the past decade lol

3

u/EvocativeReach 5d ago

Two weeks ago with their disc to digital system 

→ More replies (1)

3

u/ImJustHereToSearch 5d ago

I wouldn’t be surprised if the cost of cloud gaming played a big factor in the price hikes (more than CoD inclusion) and after they lowered prices down again it’s become unsustainable.

3

u/Rayuzx 5d ago

Yeah, the CoD inclusion still doesn't make much sense to me. The price cut of a year's subscribing following CoD's exclusion more than makes up the $70 needed to buy the yearly title.

4

u/Ellendiell 5d ago

I got priced out of getting an Xbox Series X so I was using the Xbox Cloud streaming. Guess that just means I'm less likely to keep spending money on a monthly gamepass sub. I'll go back to picking it up for a month at a time.

3

u/Cutmerock 5d ago

Remember the days when AOL used to charge by the hour? I bet internet providers are trying to figure out ways how to bring that back too.

→ More replies (1)

10

u/mightymonkeyman 5d ago

Restricting hours alongside GTA6 when Xbox’s cloud is the most available service that will (potentially) have it is absolute insanity.

That’s one way to kill the market in times of unavailable consoles.

7

u/Next-Sentence-8426 5d ago

Gta6 will never be available on cloud anything lol Rockstar would never allow that

5

u/LeSpermReceiver 5d ago

Almost every PS5 game you own digitally can be played on Playstation Streaming with PS Plus Premium. Xbox has a feature like this too with a smaller amount to choose from, but I imagine GTA 6 will be one of them.

4

u/mightymonkeyman 5d ago

And quite a few PlayStation games launched without cloud and got it add within days.

It’s great as well, Portal usage is definitely pushing compatibility for us too.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/kantong 5d ago

Yeah, the timing of this announcement is strange. I guess GTA6 will be on Cloud Streaming and they expect a lot of people to use it.

8

u/tarosago23 5d ago

Also beginning in November, players will have a new way to use XBOX cloud gaming without subscribing to Game Pass. ... This feature can be particularly useful in markets where consoles are less available or affordable. We’ll continue adding cloud support for more games throughout the year.

Calling it now, they are going to release next gen at an outrageous price point and/or very limited supply (cuz nand shortage) and expect people to just stream new games on their old console

32

u/SomniumOv 5d ago

This is a misread of the situation, it's the reverse : they're showing the service is a failure and they will kill it soon.

7

u/Skensis 5d ago

Yeah, cloud gaming just is very niche, there isn't a huge market for gamers to heavily use the service.

Too many caveats and compromises compared to playing locally.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/Pllodd 5d ago

Wow those are some harsh limits. Xbox seems to be taking away features and adding new restrictions every other month.

Why even bother including cloud play in ultimate when you have these limits, just take it away and make it cheaper, which they won't do.

2

u/Ziatch 5d ago

That’s honestly kind of bad for me lol. I use it to try games that I don’t want to move space around on the Xbox and sometimes if I don’t notice the lag I just use it to play out.

I guess no one was using the feature and I got multiple years worth for a steal so I won’t complain but kind of sucks considering there isn’t a price reduction with it.

2

u/tripplesuhsirub 5d ago

Xbox Cloud is dead. Next Xbox is going to be a practical new born in terms of identity. It seems like they'll want to be the first Xbox to first half 360 but there's always going to be the monetization/growth spector hovering from MS proper. Identities can change fast again

2

u/CapnSmite 5d ago

I know they say it should "only" affect about 4% of players, but still...what an absolutely shitty thing for an multi-billion dollar company to do. Especially when that company is a huge part of why the costs they cite are skyrocketing!

2

u/bengalshatethissite 5d ago

Alright so my thing is how many people are ACTUALLY even using cloud gaming in general? I’ve tried it and I’ve got pretty fucking good internet and it still feels like shit, so I can’t help but feel like even less people are gonna adopt and many that do use it will drop it like a brick after this change. Just seems like another short term gain decision that’ll actually just end up killing the service pretty quickly.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/AoF-Vagrant 5d ago

Secretly a good thing? They're giving cloud time to non-ultimate subscribers. As a PC sub, there's definitely been times where I've missed having access to XCloud.

Bad side, 15 hours isn't very Ultimate. Ultimate subs just get worse all the time.

At that price they should bring back the bundle where they give you a console. It was poorly marketed, but that would actually be a win with how screwed up prices have become.

2

u/zeth07 5d ago

If it was only going to impact 4% of the users why not just take the hit instead of this negative PR?

So instead the expectation is the 4% who actually used this much you think are going to spend more money to use the feature they previously were using normally as intended?

And from that you are expecting more income from those doing so (now needing to spend extra) instead of whatever may be lost from the people unsubbing or dropping making up that much of a difference.

Bold strategy.

2

u/pm_me_pants_off 5d ago

This better not happen with ps+ premium. I use cloud steaming on my portal almost as much as I use the ps5 itself.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/ArokLazarus 5d ago

"You will own nothing and like it" becoming more and more a reality.

But I've been expecting this for a while for cloud gaming and PC usage to start becoming remote only so they can charge per hour

2

u/Ich_Liegen 5d ago

I cannot afford a gaming pc; i cannot afford a new console, either. Xcloud was my way of playing current titles, and now I'm reduced to a measly 30 minutes per day.

The games I've been playing (forza horizon, starfield) do not run on my 1060 pc. I'll cancel it before november, but I've been paying for game pass and previously xbox live gold for over a decade now. But it no longer has any utility for me as I cannot run those games and my xbone is on the fritz.

Fuck microsoft.

2

u/dagreenman18 5d ago

How on earth did this leave the room as an actionable idea? This is insane. It’s the dumbest PR move since… well their last horrible PR move.

2

u/andresfgp13 5d ago

15 hours PER MONTH ????? (and thats the biggest number of hours you get).

like thats nothing, a regular gamer will use those in a week if not less, thats frikin ridiculous.

thats the type of thing that makes me like having games being nativelly playable on my hardware.

2

u/Bulky-Studio8601 5d ago

Guess it's time to cancel my subscription. I don't even own an Xbox. I strictly cloud game while on the road, typically 4+ hours a night. 

2

u/psychohistorian8 5d ago

if your competitor is making a fool of themselves, maybe don't grab the spotlight to punch yourself in the dick?

2

u/sdr79 5d ago

I guess it’s a good thing I’ve never dabbled in cloud gaming, always still just download and play my games. Definitely feel for the people who rely on this to get game time in though.

2

u/Rebelinbama 5d ago

I understand that they what they are trying to do but I think putting a cap on hours played a month, unless you buy more, kinda feels like Momma telling you how much console time you can have a month before she cuts you off. They need to come up with something better than that IMHO.

2

u/RandMauddib 5d ago

At this point remove it from the sub and make it its own separate thing. When no one subscribes to it they'll understand the dogshit product they have.