Some gaming exec are very skeptical about these new subscription services from Microsoft, EA, Google and Apple etc. Microsoft are making a big push to become the 'Netflix of gaming'.
CEO Take-Two Interactive:
Video games are not like TV and movies,
Strauss Zelnick says.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/gta-red-dead-ceo-skeptical-of-subscription-models-/1100-6466866/
The top executive at Take-Two Interactive, the parent publisher of Rockstar Games and 2K Games, has weighed in on two major video game industry trends: subscription and streaming. CEO Strauss Zelnick said today on an earnings call that he is skeptical of subscription-based models but more optimistic about streaming, at least in some scenarios.
Starting with subscription services, Zelnick said Take-Two as a company is open-minded because it wants to "be where the consumer is." Take-Two could get on board if it makes sense from a business and creative perspective--and that might not be so easy.
"You have to find that intersection in business models that serve the customer successfully and also serve everyone else who participates in the value chain," he said. "And that may prove to be a little challenging for subscriptions in this space because people do consume video games differently than they consume linear entertainment."
Zelnick said the average American household spends around 5 hours each day and 150 hours per month consuming linear programming like TV and movies. For interactive entertainment like video games, the average American home spends 1.5 hours daily or 45 hours monthly playing games, he said. A subscription service makes sense with TV and film content because people largely watch many different programs or movies that they can roll through quickly and move on to something new. This makes an all-you-can-eat model like Netflix appealing, Zelnick said.
But with video games, which people spend relatively more time with, a subscription model might be a tougher sell, Zelnick said.
"In the case of video games, it is possible that the average user in those 45 hours might be playing 1, 2, maybe 3 titles; certainly not 70 titles," he said. "In that event, if you play 1, 2, or 3 titles and you play them for months in a row--which often happens in [the video game world]--then a subscription model may not be such a great deal for the customer."
Zelnick went on to say that he is no soothsayer, and overall, Take-Two wants to release games where the consumer is. "This all remains to be seen; we're open-minded," the executive explained. "We want to be where the customer is. But I don't think it is a foregone conclusion that subscription will be as massive for interactive ent as it has proven to be for music and motion pictures and television. But we'll see."
*SNIP*
Quotes from David Brevik, the founder and former President of Blizzard North (1992-2003):
https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-brevik-4707933/
David Brevik @davidbrevik
https://twitter.com/davidbrevik/status/1110239294264737792
I'm very worried about the future of the gaming market. All of these services where developers get paid by the minute are going to have radical impacts on design motivations and predatory practices. If you thought Free-to-play was bad, you haven't seen anything yet.
There is no way to stop this. These changes are coming. When mega-companies like Google and Apple are making this a corporate initiative, gaming is going change forever.
Marcello Lins @MarcelloLins
Care to elaborate! I'm genuinely interested in your take about this new monetization model. What exactly worries you?
David Brevik @davidbrevik
Spotify had a profound impact on the music industry. Imagine a world where authors didn't sell books, but you subscribed to a service and they got paid a penny by the page read instead. It would change everything.
From Mike Rose, Indie developer & GDC speaker
https://www.linkedin.com/in/raveofravendale/?originalSubdomain=uk
Mike Rose @RaveofRavendale 6. feb. 2019
https://twitter.com/raveofravendale/status/1093167950360690691
Little thread of potential horror:
I am getting very, very worried about the future of Netflix-like subscription models. In the last 6 months, I have been contact by over a dozen different services, who all want to put No More Robots games on their upcoming platforms.
But here's the catch:
None of these platforms want to pay anything upfront. Instead, they want to pay us "per number of hours" that their users play our games, compared to how many hours their users are playing games overall. Which is obviously going to be *shit* for indie devs.
Now here's the real problem: If bigger studios begin adopting this style of platform -- which they already kinda are with things like Xbox Game Pass, Discord Nitro etc -- it forces smaller devs into a position where they may *have* to start being a part of these platforms.
So let's say in 5 years, if Netflix-style subscription models have become the norm, and no-one is paying for games anymore, a la what happened with both music and TV... how are indie devs even making money anymore?
They're not, is the horrible answer.
So yeah, I'm honestly super worried about this upcoming trend -- and this is coming from someone who owns a publisher, and can potentially maximize sales by selling multiple games at once.
If this trend takes over, I don't know how dev studios are even going to survive.
To clarify: From a consumer standpoint, I *love* sub models. I currently use Netflix, Now TV, Amazon Video, Spotify, Xbox Game Pass...
It's not that I'm rallying against them -- I just think we could do with having a real conversation about how they should be implemented best.
*SNIP*
As @rje has pointed out, if you are currently subscribed to PlayStation Plus, Xbox Games With Gold, Twitch Prime, and Humble Monthly, you have already received *28 free games* in February alone.
Fast-forward three years. Can you honestly say you'll still be buying new games?