Microsoft defends Game Pass price changes, tells FTC that adjustment offers multiplayer for less

Official Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 art.
(Image credit: Activision Blizzard)

Following criticism from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of Microsoft’s planned price and feature changes to its Game Pass subscription service, the software giant has responded to allegations of product degradation. In a letter to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court, Microsoft argues that its new least expensive Game Pass tier is a better product for gamers, not a degraded one, because it includes multiplayer functionality.

On Thursday, the FTC submitted a letter to the Ninth Circuit Court accusing Microsoft of product degradation following its Activision-Blizzard acquisition. At issue was Microsoft’s removal of day-one new release access to subscribers, something gamers had under the less expensive console-only Game Pass base tier. Under the new Game Pass Standard tier, $4 per month more expensive than the previous entry-level plan, gamers get multiplayer functionality but lose out on included access to new games.

The FTC alleged that constituted “the hallmarks of a firm exercising market power post-merger,” something the FTC claims it was worried about from the beginning of the merger talks. For its part, Microsoft doesn’t agree. The company pointed out in its own letter to the Circuit Court that under previous pricing, what its new Game Pass Standard offers was actually more expensive.

"It is wrong to call this a 'degraded' version of the discontinued Game Pass for Console offering,” Microsoft wrote. “That discontinued product did not offer multiplayer functionality, which had to be purchased separately for an additional $9.99/month (making the total cost $20.98/month)."

Microsoft also pointed out that Game Pass Ultimate would offer more value to subscribers than it previously did. With the merger, Game Pass Ultimate will now offer day-one availability to new Activision-Blizzard games like the upcoming Call of Duty: Black Ops 6. Before the merger, gamers weren’t afforded that benefit at all; if they wanted to play Call of Duty games the day they were released, they had to buy them.

Microsoft also pointed out that the FTC didn’t seem too concerned about its Game Pass subscription offering when it was trying to block the merger. Instead, FTC arguments centered on “the theory that Microsoft would withhold Call of Duty from Sony's console.” That fear turned out to be unfounded, as Microsoft and Sony entered into a 10-year contract to keep Call of Duty titles on PlayStation.

The FTC is appealing the decision that allowed Microsoft to purchase Activision-Blizzard, and the dialog of letters is another episode in that ongoing saga. Whether the Ninth Circuit Court will reverse the merger remains to be seen.

Jeff Butts
Contributing Writer

Jeff Butts has been covering tech news for more than a decade, and his IT experience predates the internet. Yes, he remembers when 9600 baud was “fast.” He especially enjoys covering DIY and Maker topics, along with anything on the bleeding edge of technology.

  • hotaru251
    so if someone plays no online games then it is still a degraded tier as they no longer get day 1 games.

    and thats just console & does nothing to combat fact MS said day 1 were going to be for all gamepass tiers in past.
    Reply
  • Alvar "Miles" Udell
    I think more people than not will be happier with included multiplayer instead of day one games, especially if they are added in a somewhat timely manner (<6 months), given how new released games tend to have issues for a while that impacts the gaming experience.

    Do find it odd they didn't do this kind of objecting when streaming services raise prices and cut features, or when Google removes features from Google One you paid for and can't get a refund or price compensation to adjust for, but Microsoft being so evil and big and the devil they have to go after them...
    Reply
  • ezst036
    I don't think Microsoft's pricing is unreasonable, nor the tiered levels.

    Everything is subject to inflation. Do we think software developers get paid minimum wage, or never deserve raises?

    *Developer gets hired* - well, sir, this is your pay level. For the rest of your life!
    Reply
  • thisisaname
    ezst036 said:
    I don't think Microsoft's pricing is unreasonable, nor the tiered levels.

    Everything is subject to inflation. Do we think software developers get paid minimum wage, or never deserve raises?

    *Developer gets hired* - well, sir, this is your pay level. For the rest of your life!
    Given the number of stories going around about how if you want a good pay rise you have to change jobs it is not far from being the truth.
    Reply
  • OLDKnerd
    I am not going to play any game where i can not choose what server to join, or for that matter host myself.
    And i am not going to play any game that have the traits of pretty much all FPS games today.

    So. I will probably never play multiplayer games again, so THX a bloody lot game houses and gamers of the past 20 years.
    Reply
  • eldakka1
    ezst036 said:
    I don't think Microsoft's pricing is unreasonable, nor the tiered levels.

    Everything is subject to inflation. Do we think software developers get paid minimum wage, or never deserve raises?

    *Developer gets hired* - well, sir, this is your pay level. For the rest of your life!
    Yes, everything is subject to inflation.

    But there are also multiple downward pressues on price as well:
    1) competition;
    2) efficiencies of scale;
    3) increases in productivity (whether due to workers working harder or changes in technology that enable a worker to increase output);
    4) supply/demand;
    5) price decreases in various inputs used in the product/system caused by those inputs themselves being affected by 1-4 above and also this point 5 (being recursive).

    If prices remain stable for a long time - despite inflation - and then a decrease in competition (i.e. aquisitions taking competitors out of the market) is followed by a near-immediate increase in prices, then that is decent evidence of anti-trust activities.

    PS: thinking about it, points 2 and 3 above are basically the same thing, as an efficiency of scale is another way of saying increased productivity.
    Reply
  • Geef
    Too bad there isn't an option to check boxes for price.
    I want to do X and Y but not Z so it will cost me $#.
    Reply
  • watzupken
    ezst036 said:
    I don't think Microsoft's pricing is unreasonable, nor the tiered levels.

    Everything is subject to inflation. Do we think software developers get paid minimum wage, or never deserve raises?

    *Developer gets hired* - well, sir, this is your pay level. For the rest of your life!
    It is not unreasonable for MS to increase price, but the increase here is way over inflation. Is MS passing most of the increase to the developers? I doubt that.
    Reply
  • slightnitpick
    Alvar Miles Udell said:
    Do find it odd they didn't do this kind of objecting when streaming services raise prices and cut features, or when Google removes features from Google One you paid for and can't get a refund or price compensation to adjust for, but Microsoft being so evil and big and the devil they have to go after them...
    The FTC is not involved in these decisions; it is involved in signing off on, and objecting to, a merger.
    Reply
  • hotaru251
    ezst036 said:
    Everything is subject to inflation. Do we think software developers get paid minimum wage, or never deserve raises?
    i really hope this is not a serious statement...

    if you think the increased profit is beign spread out to the developers you are crazy.
    the profits going straight to the top w/o a penny going to the lower end.
    Reply