I've been a super happy Game Pass subscriber from basically the start to now, but I'm planning to end my subscription in July. Part of the appeal of Game Pass for me was the idea that it worked toward stabilizing game launches, lowering the financial risks for dev teams with a "bird in the hand" style offering. Obviously, there's a ceiling for both total number of games that can fit in the tent and/or dollar amounts shared for each release, but I thought of it as a model where gaming could be lower-stakes: Both for me to try things out, AND for the developers risking their livelihoods.
If Tango Gameworks, after releasing one of my all-time favorite games, which landed as a critical hit (and a relative sales success) with effectively zero marketing investment isn't viable under the Game Pass system? Then that's a failed model. Maybe things will get better after more "readjustment" (just ruin more lives with short-sighted closures, am I right?), but this is the kind of decision that rots any appreciation I had for the whole initiative. By Microsoft's own public account, Hi-Fi Rush had exceeded all their internal expectations and metrics. That's the strongest case I've observed that their whole Game Pass model isn't viable, and that Xbox leadership is fundamentally incompetent.
If Xbox leadership can't credibly tell their studios that they want them to take necessary creative risks to create excellent games, that's already a miserable environment to work in. If they can't confidently say studios will be safe WHEN THEY MEET STATED EXPECTATIONS, then Xbox is worthless as a "parent" entity. Looking in from the outside-in, leadership simply can't say it and mean it; If anyone in management said it to me after seeing Tango's closure, I'd know they were lying to my face.