"If we look at what consumers have pushed other industries for: if we look at what consumers forced the music industry to provide, if we look at what consumers have driven as a result of television and movie subscription, if you look at us - there's absolutely a time somewhere at some point in the future where the consumers say, 'Hey, this is how we want to interact with you: we want to give you a monthly or annual subscription and we want access to everything you make.' They get to drive the time and place for it, and a lot of it is technology dependent, but absolutely we can see a future where that might be the way we deliver games." - EA label vice president Andrew Wilson
there's absolutely a time somewhere at some point in the future where the consumers say, 'Hey, this is how we want to interact with you: we want to give you a monthly or annual subscription and we want access to everything you make.'
I'm being misquoted.
I'll sue your ASS off, EA.
-- I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo Now this is entertainment!
foolm0ron posted... I feel like this topic is supposed to be casting the statement in a negative light which is funny considering he is absolutely correct
I find it hilarious how people are so frightened by the ideas of monthly fees. Everything that guy said is true. If I could pay $10 a month for unlimited access to EA games, I totally would.
--
There was a signature here. It's gone now. Your face is bees.
This isn't bad on its own but it's going to wind up being a hilariously s*** deal if every company decides to do their own subscription service and we're paying like ten bucks a month for eight different companies.
I think it's weird how people get so bent out of shape about companies like EA charging for online play for used games, but then think a service where you never own anything is OK.
Personally, I don't like either. I like to actually own things, and I can't see that changing.
Paratroopa1 posted... This isn't bad on its own but it's going to wind up being a hilariously s*** deal if every company decides to do their own subscription service and we're paying like ten bucks a month for eight different companies.
That's probably the way it would be. Either that or way more a month, along the lines of cable/satellite TV prices.
Paratroopa1 posted... This isn't bad on its own but it's going to wind up being a hilariously s*** deal if every company decides to do their own subscription service and we're paying like ten bucks a month for eight different companies.
Yeah, that's the deal breaker.
It's like buying a game and 1/3 a month.
-- I like how each new topic you make reveals such varied facets of your idiocy. - foolmo Now this is entertainment!
Silvercross posted... I find it hilarious how people are so frightened by the ideas of monthly fees. Everything that guy said is true. If I could pay $10 a month for unlimited access to EA games, I totally would.
Monthly fees for game access would turn me off of gaming entirely because in order for a monthly fee to be worth something, I have to actually spend a decent amount of time using it. Take EA for example. I probably average less than an hour a week playing their games. I wouldn't value an all access subscription service any more than $1/month. An all-access service just wouldn't appeal to anyone who only games 2-5 hours a week... It's just too much!
Even still, I thought gaming was moving away from this. More and more MMO's are moving towards micro-transactions(as opposed to subscriptions) for their games. I'm pretty sure DLC will be the new business model moving forward, and that subscriptions will fail.
--
My Japanese alter-ego. Hey all this is Bartz btw.
From: Biolizard28 | Posted: 7/25/2011 3:53:07 PM | #013 Paratroopa1 posted... This isn't bad on its own but it's going to wind up being a hilariously s*** deal if every company decides to do their own subscription service and we're paying like ten bucks a month for eight different companies.
Yeah, that's the deal breaker.
It's like buying a game and 1/3 a month.
not to mention game developers generally don't make that much good games to even make it worthwhile
I mean you'd be paying a subscription for a service that doesn't get new releases for months.... you're essentially just buying games you don't own >_>
--
SegMlCassieIsAmazingjhsux~>[64T2jampXDpikaness is awesome!8forgaMike RSmurf is too!
This still has too many kinks to work out to happen in the near future anyway. You can't charge monthly, because then people will just pay for one month of the year then cancel their subscription, unless the price per month is obscene.
You could make it per year, but then you have to ensure that you have titles that everyone wants to play every year in order to justify the subscription or no one's going to bite.
The whole idea just doesn't sound financially beneficial at this point.
From: KingButz | #014 Even still, I thought gaming was moving away from this. More and more MMO's are moving towards micro-transactions(as opposed to subscriptions) for their games. I'm pretty sure DLC will be the new business model moving forward, and that subscriptions will fail.
This is a very good point, too. The quote seems a bit out of touch, as it seems to me personally like subscriptions are on the way out. Netflix is the only thing these days I can even fathom paying monthly for, and I'm even reconsidering them after they hiked their prices.
This makes sense to me, ESPECIALLY for a company like EA that largely trades on annual releases that make the previous iteration pointless. For some companies it might not make as much sense, especially if their annual output is not as high or if they don't put out the same kinds of games all the time. An annual subscription to Rockstar games wouldn't make a lot of sense since they only put out like one game a year anyway, and an annual subscription to Capcom might not be worth it because maybe you like Street Fighter but not Resident Evil, or vice versa.
But companies like EA that have a fairly large slate of titles that get put out every year, so a subscription makes sense. You know what you're getting and you get a decent amount of stuff. And I know I'd like to have access to the up-to-date version of Madden every year without ending up with six or seven of them sitting on my shelf with no resale value and no reason to go back to them.
From: Biolizard28 | #019 Actually, the microtransactions thing is very true. Isn't WoW even free to play to a point?
It's free to play up to level 20, but the game at large is still on the subscription model. They've become bloated with microtransactions over the years, though, so I could see them adopting the free-to-play model at some point in the future.
WoW's got so many millions of people they really don't need to go free to play. That free to level 20 thing is just like when a cocaine dealer lets you use cocaine until level 20 so you'll pay him for end-game cocaine content.
-- For your BlAcK TuRtLe. At least Kupo has class and doesn't MESSAGE the people -Dr Pizza
From: Silvercross | Posted: 7/25/2011 4:00:24 PM | #017 I'm under the assumption that the monthly fee would be in addition to the ability to "buy" retails games, which I don't see a problem with.
Also, the online pass thing absolutely doesn't bother me because I don't think I've bought a used game in 10 years.
Why on earth would you pay a subscription to access games when you're still buying the games? >_>
From: GuessMyUserName | #025 Why on earth would you pay a subscription to access games when you're still buying the games? >_>
The same reason people buy dvds despite having netflix. Fear that the movie might be kicked out of streaming, extra content over at the retail release, that kind of thing.
From: Haguile | Posted: 7/25/2011 4:15:41 PM | #026 The same reason people buy dvds despite having netflix. Fear that the movie might be kicked out of streaming, extra content over at the retail release, that kind of thing.
but Netflix includes movies and TV shows from tons of different people. This is a subscription service for just EA.
Seriously, people need to stop comparing Netflix with this hypothetical service.
From: GuessMyUserName | #027 but Netflix includes movies and TV shows from tons of different people. This is a subscription service for just EA.
Seriously, people need to stop comparing Netflix with this hypothetical service.
True, but can you really not imagine EA doing a "you can only get X games also they get taken down sometimes" subscription service?
Also, this hypothetical service could hypothetically have games EA publishes as well as the ones they develop. In that case, maybe they would have contracts with the developers for only a certain amount of time, which would be a good reason to buy a physical copy.
BlackMageJawa posted... Because it's worked so well for GameTap.
Basically this. The success of Steam and (to a lesser extent) GoG, and the relative failure of Gametap means that gamers definitely aren't ready for a subscription based service. I think Gamefly is about as close as you're going to get for the time being, and that still relies on physical media.
From: Haguile | Posted: 7/25/2011 4:26:46 PM | #028 True, but can you really not imagine EA doing a "you can only get X games also they get taken down sometimes" subscription service?
doesn't change that purchasing the games greaaaaaaatly hinder the value of the service
I mean you're talking about a service that provides like 3-5 new titles worth playing a year, if you're buying one, it greatly damages the service's worth.
with Netflix, you've got tonnnnnnnns and tonnnnns of movies and TV shows. Buying 1 still leaves a loooot of other stuff.
ea has an insane back catalogue. depending on what games they offer on a service, and how much they charge monthly, I'd be interested for a few months every year.
EA is one of the few companies I'd be willing to do this for... they're probably my favourite publisher out there right now.
It's like you guys forgot they publish Bioware games or something. That plus their sports games, Battlefield, Dead Space, NFS, The Sims.. Not to mention their partners project for games like Alice and Shadows of the Damned.
It's like you guys forgot they publish Bioware games or something.
Aside from the fact that everyone but me loathes Bioware after one iffy game, they're pretty much the only EA games I like, and I'd much rather be able to kid myself that my money's going to the guys and gals in Edmonton than... er... wherever the EA execs live.
Plus Bioware make, like, one game a year. I'd much rather buy that one game, and know I'll still be able to play it in ten years time, than rent it for £120 a year and have it go bye-bye when my wallet empties.
--
"I'm Commander Shepard, and you're standing in the biggest library in Citadel Space. Look me up."
GuessMyUserName posted... From: Silvercross | Posted: 7/25/2011 4:00:24 PM | #017 I'm under the assumption that the monthly fee would be in addition to the ability to "buy" retails games, which I don't see a problem with.
Also, the online pass thing absolutely doesn't bother me because I don't think I've bought a used game in 10 years. Why on earth would you pay a subscription to access games when you're still buying the games? >_>
You're missing the point.
You have the option to pay a subscription fee.
OR
You can continue buying games as normal.
--
There was a signature here. It's gone now. Your face is bees.
I wouldn't be interested in something like this. If it's an either or thing fine but subscription setups for any kind of art or entertainment media don't interest me. I'd rather have a dedicated copy of something, and know that no matter what happens I can still play it a decade from now if I want to.
Buying games being an issue was brought up because you don't own any games with the subscription. If you do want to own the games you'll have to buy them, and if you're buying games there's no point in the subscription.
GuessMyUserName posted... Buying games being an issue was brought up because you don't own any games with the subscription. If you do want to own the games you'll have to buy them, and if you're buying games there's no point in the subscription.
Is it really that hard to comprehend? You either buy the games and play them, or you pay a fee every month to play them. Buying the games isn't necessary if you pay the subscription.
--
My Japanese alter-ego. Hey all this is Bartz btw.
Is it really that hard to comprehend? You either buy the games and play them, or you pay a fee every month to play them. Buying the games isn't necessary if you pay the subscription.
I think what GMUN is saying is that people value owning something. there's no lack of comprehension going on here, just valuing different stuff I guess. I can't speak for anyone else but having a dedicated copy of something and not being at the mercy of the subscription service is pretty important for me.
From: KingButz | Posted: 7/25/2011 5:16:36 PM | #040 Is it really that hard to comprehend? You either buy the games and play them, or you pay a fee every month to play them. Buying the games isn't necessary if you pay the subscription.
but you don't own any games. If you ever decide "I don't want to pay for this subscription service anymore", you can't access any of those games. People still want to own stuff.
I mean if it's a service that offers a LOT and gets tons of new stuff all the time like Netflix, then it's worth it. If you have Netflix, there's a movie you want to own forever, you buy it, and you still got tonnnnns of other stuff on Netflix to make it worth having. For an EA service, you want to own a game, you purchase it, the EA subscription service doesn't offer much to you anymore.
Buying the games isn't necessary if you pay the subscription.
Until you stop paying, and have nothing. If I spend £120 on a year's subscription, in 12 months time I have no games. If I spend £120 on games I actually want, I have four or five favourites that I can keep coming back to year after year.
--
"I'm Commander Shepard, and you're standing in the biggest library in Citadel Space. Look me up."
I don't see why you guys are assuming that once you pay the fee, you pay it forever.
In my mind, I'm picturing a $10-$20 a month subscription fee to play whatever you want. Let's say it takes you three months to play all of the EA games you want, well then you just stop paying.
In total, you've payed about the same as you would for one game, but instead you got to play all of the EA games you wanted until you didn't want to pay anymore.
Or you could just buy a game. Saying that you shouldn't compare this to Netflix is odd when it would work in nearly the exact same way, just with less content. You can always stop paying once you've gotten your fill.
--
There was a signature here. It's gone now. Your face is bees.