• enkers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What a lukewarm take. A quick glance to the subscription video-on-demand market should be fairly informative to the future of video game subscription services.

    Right now they’re still in the honeymoon phase, that is to say the “offer better value to capture a market” phase, of enshitification.

    Not at all surprising he’s getting pushback.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not really.

      Video on demand works because the content is short and you need a large variety in a pay period as a consumer.

      I don’t just watch one show or movie in a month, it’s several. So bundling makes sense.

      It’s also fairly commoditized. I will watch what movies are available on Netflix, not like I’m extremely committed to watch a single given movie as long as the general selection is good. Maybe there’s one or two films a year I care about seeing that specific film before it rotates into a subscription service I subscribe to (and if not, meh).

      For video games, it’s maybe one title a month that I really care about playing and then I only have time for that one game. But I only really care about setting aside time for that game and a lot of the other options out there you couldn’t pay me to play.

      They are very different markets and a subscription model isn’t necessarily the future or even what’s most profitable for a company to offer (as Sony was recently acknowledging).

      • echo64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        a subscription model isn’t necessarily the future or even what’s most profitable for a company to offer (as Sony was recently acknowledging).

        It’s worth remembering that the goal of subscription services like gamepass is not to be the most profitable avenue. The goal is marketshare.

        Microsoft lost, and Microsoft lost hard. Reportedly, the CEO wanted to exit gaming entirely after the Xbox One. They didn’t based solely on the new business plan, which was to disrupt the market. Kill the existing model by offering super low-cost subscriptions (paid for by Azure and Office 365) and become the new encumbant of a new industry where you can jack up the prices and lower the cos(and quality) over a decade trying to chase profitability.

        Subscriptions are not about revenue generation as every subscription model out there lowers revenue massively. It’s about holding a larger share of the market so you can make money in other ways.

        • kromem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think you’re confusing the advantages and strategies of having a subscription and the advantages and strategies of having a loss leader.

          Not all subscriptions are designed to be loss leaders, and most of the benefits you see in GamePass (lower or even negative revenue in exchange for increased market share) is seen over and over with loss leaders that aren’t subscriptions.

          Yes, I agree that Microsoft has adjusted strategy from a focus on winning console wars to increasing software gatekeeping across PC and now apparently even competitor consoles. And that GamePass plays a large part in that.

          But it would be a mistake to assume that subscriptions in games are all going to have the same goals and focus as Microsoft with GamePass.

          • echo64@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I would argue that there are three kinds of game subscriptions right now

            • gamepass, paid for by azure/office. goal to turn the industry into a subscription service based industry like everything else has been converted into
            • trying-to-keep-up-with-gamepass: this is ps+ (extra|premium), it exists as a failing effort to keep up with gamepass. it has to make money and thus users don’t see value in it. it either costs too much or doesn’t provide enough for the cost
            • fifa subscription

            the last one has existed for a long time and doesn’t really factor into the discussions people are having today. it’s not really relevant. the other two are both a factor of each other and relevant to what we are talking about.

      • refreeze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Great take, I wish more would see the music industry like this as well.

        I used to pay for Spotify premium then realized that I hardly added more than a handful of new things to my “library” each month. I switched to budgeting the same monthly funds towards building a local library from direct purchases and bandcamp.

        It really depends on your level of consumption of new content whether a subscription service makes sense.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure there ever was a honeymoon phase for game subscriptions. They generally still push you to buy dlc/season passes. They still segment stuff into pre-order bonuses that you don’t get in a subscription. You already have titles leaving the service.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did have a honeymoon phase with gamepass. Now it’s just a thing that keeps charging the monthly fee in the background but also reminds me of the list of games I’d like to try that it has each time I open it up to consider cancelling.

        They’ve figured out how to make money from me having a backlog, I just realized. I might have to open it again and compare the amount I’d pay for x months vs the expected sales price to just buy all of those games where x is how many months it’ll take to clear my backlog. I don’t even have to open it to see that I should cancel, because x might be infinite. Hell, I could even just cancel it with the intent of starting back up if I manage to clear my Steam backlog if I want to lie to myself about eventually getting through my backlog.