What does subscription based (digital only) content mean for the future of entertainment?

Kamikaze Revy

Bwana ni mwokozi wangu
Supporter
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
29,757
Reputation
9,383
Daps
76,212
Reppin
Outer Heaven
On this episode of "Revy takes a break from trolling" we dive into the question:
What does subscription based content mean for the future of entertainment? :jbhmm:

:DAIGOYANKEE:It's clear that the way we consume entertainment has completely changed. There was a time you had to wait to get the paper, or watch the news on TV to get an idea of what was going on in the world. I remember growing up the only way I knew about other video games was from Nintendo Power, EGM, Game Informer, etc. The internet killed print magazines and made it so a lot of information became more accessible to us. Along with the internet came the explosion of piracy. That connection the internet provided put companies in a losing battle when it comes to protecting their assets. It became painfully obvious that companies were going to have to find a different way to make money on their investments.

IMO the biggest change was the smartphone. It made it so we didn't have to wait until we got home to find new information, or be entertained. We began to consume information and entertainment at a pace never seen before. This presented a great solution for companies (one that we are seeing take over the market): Instead of using advertising to be a vehicle for the product which we are going to lost money on anyway, use the product to be a vehicle for the advertising.

The success of free to play games, microtransactions, and dlc, was all the proof companies needed, to see where they had to take their business to be successful. Consumers have an insatiable thirst for new content, and have shown that they are less willing to pay up front for that content. They pay in other ways though, one of the biggest ways being with their time; and time is the asset companies have been leveraging with consumers. It would seem the transaction between companies and consumers is: "You want this form of entertainment for free? Here you go; but if you want it free of any time wasters, you're going to have to pay this small fee".

So here's the question: "What does subscription based content mean for the future of entertainment?" MS Game Pass, PS Now, EA Access, all take away the ownership factor from our entertainment, which if any of you remember, was a sore spot for companies against Game Stop sales (and the used market in general), where they saw their games being sold multiple times but they only got money for the original sale. The trade-off is although consumers do not have ownership of the product, they are given access to a much larger library. This also presents different challenges though. In the music industry we are seeing a huge battle going on in regards to how artists are compensated for streams. What is a stream worth? This leads me to look at the shift we are slowly seeing in the console gaming market and wonder: "Will we see a similar battle in the near future with game companies?" How will they be compensated? Because one thing should be troubling to you as a consumer and even more so if you're a creative, if creatives are not compensated fairly, the content we consume will suffer greatly.

Will all games eventually move to a subscription based model, or a free to play model? Will the price of games decrease but include massive amounts of DLC? What happens each time a person plays a game on a subscription, or streams that game, how are companies compensated? These questions are important because if the creatives are not compensated fairly, they will be left with no choice but to ramp up on microtransactions, dlc, commercials; basically leverage time against the consumer in order to make up for potential lost revenue which ultimately destroys the experience.
 

Kamikaze Revy

Bwana ni mwokozi wangu
Supporter
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
29,757
Reputation
9,383
Daps
76,212
Reppin
Outer Heaven
I can see this shyt happening. Hell I just made a post in the photography thread about how I hate that we have to pay monthly for Adobe products now. I can also see clowns and shills defending this practice
They're doing it everywhere we look.
Avid has been pushing subscription based pro tools and waves has been pushing subs for their plug ins.
Piracy + A drastic shift in consumer behavior caused all of this IMO and I think it's only going to get significantly worse.
The days of owning a product (or a license to the product) are rapidly coming to an end and unless they sort out how to keep creatives happy by compensating them properly we can expect nothing but microtransaction/dlc/advertisement/sub-based, cheap quality entertainment.
 

Atsym Sknyfs

Superstar
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
9,271
Reputation
1,535
Daps
15,586
Reppin
Brooklyn, NY
Its already started...
MS office . adobe . autodesk ... a lot of companies are on this model now.. it'll be a matter of time where we spend 69.99 for a sports game via a yearly subscription that always updates but we're allowed to continue our saves.

only think I hate about it is if you don't pay you loose access ... you should be able to access the last version purchased..
 

Ciggavelli

|∞||∞||∞||∞|
Supporter
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
28,006
Reputation
6,572
Daps
57,355
Reppin
Houston
Once you get past the need to own something, the subscription based services start to look very intriguing. It’s the future. Music did it, TV is doing it, and gaming is starting it. It’s the future, regardless of what anybody wants.
 

Kamikaze Revy

Bwana ni mwokozi wangu
Supporter
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
29,757
Reputation
9,383
Daps
76,212
Reppin
Outer Heaven
Once you get past the need to own something, the subscription based services start to look very intriguing. It’s the future. Music did it, TV is doing it, and gaming is starting it. It’s the future, regardless of what anybody wants.
It's definitely the future but my concern is that while companies are raking in profits like never before, creatives and consumers are being hurt by it. Take me for an example: you know I have my recording studio business, and I'm an artist myself. What financial incentive is there for me to make music? I don't have the pull to secure any sponsorship, and money for the music itself is gone. So it puts me in a position where I pretty much have to accept that if I put out music, I won't see a dime from it. That wasn't always the case for creatives. I remember pushing CDs out of my backpack and making decent money. Now....who is paying for music anymore? Most people would rather stream it for free on an adsupported platform, and those platforms are raping creatives right.
I can see the same happening for the video game industry.
 

Ciggavelli

|∞||∞||∞||∞|
Supporter
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
28,006
Reputation
6,572
Daps
57,355
Reppin
Houston
It's definitely the future but my concern is that while companies are raking in profits like never before, creatives and consumers are being hurt by it. Take me for an example: you know I have my recording studio business, and I'm an artist myself. What financial incentive is there for me to make music? I don't have the pull to secure any sponsorship, and money for the music itself is gone. So it puts me in a position where I pretty much have to accept that if I put out music, I won't see a dime from it. That wasn't always the case for creatives. I remember pushing CDs out of my backpack and making decent money. Now....who is paying for music anymore? Most people would rather stream it for free on an adsupported platform, and those platforms are raping creatives right.
I can see the same happening for the video game industry.

I question your assertion that streaming has raped creatives. TV has moved to a streaming platform, and TV is the best it ever has been, in terms in quality. Likewise, music is still good, and relies heavily on streaming. These artists are creative as hell right now. If the past offers the best prediction for the future, then gaming will be fine with the subscription based services too.

And as a consumer, streaming is amazing. I have every single song that I would ever want, at lossless quality, for $28 a month. For those that love music, this is fukking amazing. I have access to every single song...ever. :wow:
 

Dominic Brehetto

Rest In Piss To Your Cousin
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
31,723
Reputation
4,291
Daps
88,459
Reppin
Family
I question your assertion that streaming has raped creatives. TV has moved to a streaming platform, and TV is the best it ever has been, in terms in quality. Likewise, music is still good, and relies heavily on streaming. These artists are creative as hell right now. If the past offers the best prediction for the future, then gaming will be fine with the subscription based services too.

And as a consumer, streaming is amazing. I have every single song that I would ever want, at lossless quality, for $28 a month. For those that love music, this is fukking amazing. I have access to every single song...ever. :wow:
I think he means raping them financially not creatively.
 

Dominic Brehetto

Rest In Piss To Your Cousin
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
31,723
Reputation
4,291
Daps
88,459
Reppin
Family
I think the Xbox Game pass idea is fascinating.


A game like sea of thieves which was sure to flop might have a new lease on life with game pass.

With a subscription model more people will take chances on games they normally wouldn't.

On top of that if Microsoft is getting that steady cheque of income studios feet aren't held to the fire for every release. That constant pressure of every game needing to be a hit or face closure would be mostly gone.


That would be a very good thing for the industry.

As long as we are still given the option to outright buy,I see subscription as something great. I still buy albums I love on vinyl and cd. But streaming let's me access everything and take chances on music I usually wouldn't fukk with.


Games being given a wider audience to shine on is only a good thing in theory.

Remains to be seen how adopted this will be but that game pass news was incredible to me and the best thing microsoft has done in a while. They basically stole sonys entire idea and made it a hundred times better.
 

Ciggavelli

|∞||∞||∞||∞|
Supporter
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
28,006
Reputation
6,572
Daps
57,355
Reppin
Houston
I think he means raping them financially not creatively.
:ohhh:

Okay, from that perspective, I also think he is wrong about being raped financially. I actually think streaming lowers the costs associated with putting out a project. You don't need to have a record company behind you to be popular. Streaming has democratized "making music." Anybody can put a project up to be streamed. Hell, my Max B: LOAL compilation is on most streaming services. What makes that crazy is, I literally made that shyt in my apartment in Phoenix. Like me, a random person, can do shyt and it can end up on mainstream streaming services. That's pretty crazy to me
 

Dominic Brehetto

Rest In Piss To Your Cousin
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
31,723
Reputation
4,291
Daps
88,459
Reppin
Family
Imagine if the wire was on CBS instead of hbo. That show would have been cancelled season 1 and would have had to make huge concessions to the creative process.

But hbo being subscription meant they could let the show be what it wanted,ratings be damned.

The creativity aspect of games could sky rocket under a subscription model. We could finally see big studios break the chains of AAA vanilla sameness and take risks :wow:
 

Atsym Sknyfs

Superstar
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
9,271
Reputation
1,535
Daps
15,586
Reppin
Brooklyn, NY
Imagine if the wire was on CBS instead of hbo. That show would have been cancelled season 1 and would have had to make huge concessions to the creative process.

But hbo being subscription meant they could let the show be what it wanted,ratings be damned.

The creativity aspect of games could sky rocket under a subscription model. We could finally see big studios break the chains of AAA vanilla sameness and take risks :wow:

but that depends on how many subscribers there are... Are we subscription based per game / per developer / or per console ???

HBO subscribers weren't all watching the wire .. but the channel had enough subscribers to let it ride out... channels like CBS, ABC and etc get their revenue from commercials.. and their motto is is the show's ratings sucks .. nobody gonna see my commercial and therefore by my product.
 

Dominic Brehetto

Rest In Piss To Your Cousin
Supporter
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
31,723
Reputation
4,291
Daps
88,459
Reppin
Family
but that depends on how many subscribers there are... Are we subscription based per game / per developer / or per console ???

HBO subscribers weren't all watching the wire .. but the channel had enough subscribers to let it ride out... channels like CBS, ABC and etc get their revenue from commercials.. and their motto is is the show's ratings sucks .. nobody gonna see my commercial and therefore by my product.
Well yeah,as I said in my first post Microsoft would have to be getting a steady cheque from the subs to be able to do that (or any company).

And yeah I'm just equating ratings (tv) to sales (games)

We read all the time about games selling 2-5 million and that not being enough :francis:

So if a studio could release games and not have to worry about sales because they have enough subs than that's a win for gamers and studios.

It's the same way a lot of creatives are flocking to Netflix en masse because theirs little to no pressure and they get creative freedom..imagining a situation like that for game studios is :ohhh:

That would be a great thing for the industry. Because I can't say it enough the current model for AAA games is not sustainable.
 
Top