I sincerely doubt this is going to drive interest in Game Pass. It is not uncommon for people to play a very restricted rotation of games, and Call of Duty is just one game. Knowing people are working longer hours to provide for their families, why remain subbed to a service just because it gives you access to many games when in reality, you only care about very few and it’s very low on your list of priorities to do? It’s not just about limited interest in offerings, limited time to play is an overlooked factor. In my own experience, I cancelled Kindle Unlimited years ago because I simply didn’t have time to read all of the books I had access to. At some point, you’re losing money. Now I’m back to just buying my books or doing digital rentals from my library. I believe a similar principle applies. Those with the most time to take advantage of the service and want to, ironically, often have the lowest means to commit to it without someone else paying for it, for them. Game Pass as a service is really best intended for people who have well paying jobs that don’t require extra hours and they don’t have families to raise. Otherwise, you’re paying for a service that you can’t get much use out of, the exception being if your family also games and they game extensively. Now with a potential price hike to access Call of Duty? I think that’s a very tough sell.
Whether it is Game Pass or Plus, it seems good for the companies for you to use it less and continue to pay for it, than pay for it and actually use it. They must know this.
