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

[Ciggavelli]

And as much as thecoli complains about the state of music, I don't get the "" from dudes on here simply because they don't wanna get up and put a disc in and out.

We are sold convenience to the point where we won't have to get off our couches and the price is privacy and the little bit of ownership we have.

Ehhh...I guess, but it’s happening whether you like it or not. It’s the future.

If you are worried about not having access to a game, I think you should look at the PC gaming world. That shyt has been all digital for a long time now. That doesn’t stop the pirates though. shyt, I can get any game I want in torrents. From the 90s to now, too. It’s all good. Don’t be afraid of change.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

I wouldn't mind.

I have a few Xbox consoles in my home.

Spoiler: Benefit

The ability to switch rooms as seamlessly as possible, play with my kids with game share, and not have to account for the space that physical discs will take up as well as maintaining their upkeep is a pretty big plus for me

My gut tells me Phil Spencer is thinking Gamepass and its effect on single player IPs will be a chance for Msft to bow out of the blockbuster IP race that Sony has perfected and carve out a lane for Msft to perfect a first party approach that resembles high quality independent developer IPs.

Essentially less of Triple A Xbox SP titles being as blockbuster-esque eating up 100 mill+ budgets. That nuanced lane will gamble on creative developers taking chances on episodic or compact - in comparison to an Uncharted- but high quality single player and story driven IPs.

The idea is there can be a liberal amount of rope thrown to a development team of 20 or so developers to run with an idea that could work with a Triple A budget and 100 member team but is stuck in pitch stage because boring suits don't want to take a chance on eating such an expensive flop.

Spoiler: I type a lot but if you're interested

The goal would look like a lot a dozen Cupheads, State of Decays, and Limbos giving gamers highly enjoyable and - most importantly - comfortable completion achievability. I'd call it digestible games. If it's a work of art and enjoyable? You'll finish it and feel fulfilled.

The blackjack gamble is, you might bust and have a plethora of unfulfilling glorified mobile games dressed up as console exclusives. But, with this model, you have more chances at hitting 21 with a masterpiece from a quality small development team. MSFT will be aiming for the Hellblade blueprint where 20 developers with full autonomy could give you an amazing cinematic experience at a fraction of the budget of a Halo or Last of Us.

You'll see more consumers actually getting those 100% completions of a developers work of art and hungry for the next installment or IP idea.

shyt could re-define what Triple A is.

Of course, this is optimistic. It could very well be marred in red tape and end up with prettied up and rushed 2 hour campaigns of exclusive trash.

I won't miss physical discs regardless.

@Kamikaze Revy again, great thread. I understand your concern about the blow to creativity of the developer in the same way music streaming is considered tantamount to climate change for music creators .

But, breh, think about it from a different perspective for a moment.

Spoiler: A little more in depth

I've secretly hoped for the day that streaming kills the profitability of music.

Crazy, right?

Not really. I'm an artist and I know you are. I know that feeling of the itch or the weight of an idea or song or spoken word or piece that is taking up space in your head and you just have to get a pen and pad or get in the studio and record it so it's free.

A fukking meteor could be on its way to earth but if that song has been prisoner in your head, you're recording that shyt with no fukks given.

That tells me that artists; real artists; the nikkas that LOVE their passion will create even if they'll never make a dime from it.

Those true music lovers? They'll find it.

If the music industry were to collapse today, it would leave only those who aren't trying to just secure the bag left.

The CardI B? She'd be just fukking with the IG comedy. Everyone trying to sound like what's hot right now? They'd give up on it and be back to trying to scam nikkas with wakeupnow schemes.

But you? nikka, you still be making music. And so will the other passionate artists.

Y'all will who have to have a day job. But music would be as pure as it ever was.

Same with games, best believe there would be a lane for the passionate creators to carve out a great lane with this game pass shyt.

My two cents.

The problem is games generally cost much more than music to create.
Anybody with a lap top and a decent microphone can make near professional quality music with the right skill set.
Game Devs are not going to be able to absorb the loss and put out the games for free without putting in some kind of DLC/Microtransaction/advertisement mechanics which can hurt or even destroy the experience altogether.
The art of it all would get lost. They would be forced to put important content behind pay walls.
This is the main difference between music and games. The situations are the same, but the outcomes are very different because of the costs of development and how we consume the different forms of entertainment differently.

 

[DPresidential]

The problem is games generally cost much more than music to create.
Anybody with a lap top and a decent microphone can make near professional quality music with the right skill set.
Game Devs are not going to be able to absorb the loss and put out the games for free without putting in some kind of DLC/Microtransaction/advertisement mechanics which can hurt or even destroy the experience altogether.
The art of it all would get lost. They would be forced to put important content behind pay walls.
This is the main difference between music and games. The situations are the same, but the outcomes are very different because of the costs of development and how we consume the different forms of entertainment differently.

No, I definitely understand your point.

As disappointing this generation seems to be on paper... I'm actually enjoying it way more than I imagined.

I'm going to view the future a bit more optimistically, but again, I see the concern you have.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

No, I definitely understand your point.

As disappointing this generation seems to be on paper... I'm actually enjoying it way more than I imagined.

I'm going to view the future a bit more optimistically, but again, I see the concern you have.

Yeah this gen has been dope to me too.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

@GoldenGlove
Thread is dead.
Might be time to take it down or merge it into the Mortal Kombat thread.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

Apple ‘On Schedule’ to Terminate Music Downloads by 2019
Apple is scheduling a complete phase-out of music downloads from the iTunes Store by early 2019, per sources at the company.
Apple is aggressively scheduling a phase-out of music downloads from the iTunes Store, according to multiple sources tied into the platform or working at the company itself. The termination has been in motion since 2016, when sources first tipped the story to Digital Music News.

At that stage, the plan was to sunset music downloads ‘within 2 years’. Now, plummeting download sales may be creating pressure to make good on that aggressive schedule. “More and more, [downloads] are legacy,” one source told DMN over the weekend. “That part is obvious.”

Apple has told DMN that no such phase-out plan exists. One source has repeatedly insisted that the plan not only exists, but that it is ‘on schedule,’ or even ahead of the original schedule.
Apple 'On Schedule' to Terminate Music Downloads by 2019

Just some more info to back up my concerns about a subscription based future.
Creatives are the first to suffer, and then consumers.
Consumers just haven't realized it fully yet.
I didn't quote the whole article but it's a decent read if you have time.
Apple 'On Schedule' to Terminate Music Downloads by 2019

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Just some more info to back up my concerns about a subscription based future.
Creatives are the first to suffer, and then consumers.
Consumers just haven't realized it fully yet.
I didn't quote the whole article but it's a decent read if you have time.
Apple 'On Schedule' to Terminate Music Downloads by 2019

Why do consumers and artist suffer in this case?

Consumers clearly would rather stream than download. It's a connected world. No need to store large amounts of data be it digital or physical.

 

[Wiles]

I refuse to play episodic games

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

Why do consumers and artist suffer in this case?

Consumers clearly would rather stream than download. It's a connected world. No need to store large amounts of data be it digital or physical.

I described my concern in this thread being that while consumers will prefer the cheap route, the art itself is cheapened, which in turn "hurts" the consumer.
Streamers aren't transparent with compensation, and have been raping artists financially.
From a consumer stand point, the age of getting high quality, uninterrupted content is soon coming to an end.
I argue, that the art of music for example, is hurt by subscriptions that have to be supported by ads.
The way albums are put together is an art form in and of itself that does not include contingencies for "Well between track 4 and 5 there's going to be a Geico commercial".
We see the same happening with games: Episodic releases, games that are supposed to be "FULL" games but ship broken or light on content only to be later "fixed" by DLC, we also see micro transactions completely ruining the experience of an otherwise great game (see star wars battlefront 2 fiasco).

I agree with you that there's no need to store massive amounts of data. Consumers have proven that for convenience they are willing to make certain concessions.
My stance is pretty much an old man on a porch yelling at kids about "back in my day"...with the exception to that being, that I genuinely think my concerns are valid, even if I'm being a little pessimistic and possibly being concerned too early.

Again, my concerns are from a content quality stand point: How artists are compensated which will affect the art they are able to create, and how the delivery of art will be impact which will affect the consumer.

 

[winb83]

Why do consumers and artist suffer in this case?

Consumers clearly would rather stream than download. It's a connected world. No need to store large amounts of data be it digital or physical.

Because consumers won't own anything. They'll be perpetually paying subscription fees to enjoy any media for life. There's value in ownership. You can do with media you own as you see fit. When paying sub fees the content provider has full control over how you use that media.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

Because consumers won't own anything. They'll be perpetually paying subscription fees to enjoy any media for life. There's value in ownership. You can do with media you own as you see fit. When paying sub fees the content provider has full control over how you use that media.

You can argue that we've NEVER "owned" the content, but I 100% agree with the spirit of what you're saying.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Because consumers won't own anything. They'll be perpetually paying subscription fees to enjoy any media for life. There's value in ownership. You can do with media you own as you see fit. When paying sub fees the content provider has full control over how you use that media.

You never own the music. Just the right to play it. There's value to having virtually endless access to data without needing local storage space.

And obviously consumers find more value there, than they do being able to stack their CDs up in a room

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I described my concern in this thread being that while consumers will prefer the cheap route, the art itself is cheapened, which in turn "hurts" the consumer.
Streamers aren't transparent with compensation, and have been raping artists financially.
From a consumer stand point, the age of getting high quality, uninterrupted content is soon coming to an end.

This isn't true. With things like Tidal consumers have more access to high quality uninterrupted content than ever before.

And how are they raping artists? Without streaming services consumers would just go back to illegal downloads. Streaming services and digital downloads have given artist MORE avenues to reach consumers and monetize their work not less.

I argue, that the art of music for example, is hurt by subscriptions that have to be supported by ads.
The way albums are put together is an art form in and of itself that does not include contingencies for "Well between track 4 and 5 there's going to be a Geico commercial".

Nobody is making albums like this

We see the same happening with games: Episodic releases, games that are supposed to be "FULL" games but ship broken or light on content only to be later "fixed" by DLC, we also see micro transactions completely ruining the experience of an otherwise great game (see star wars battlefront 2 fiasco).

A few bad examples don't spoil everything. There are plenty examples of episodic games or DLC that are great and have been very beneficial to consumers and creators.

I agree with you that there's no need to store massive amounts of data. Consumers have proven that for convenience they are willing to make certain concessions.
My stance is pretty much an old man on a porch yelling at kids about "back in my day"...with the exception to that being, that I genuinely think my concerns are valid, even if I'm being a little pessimistic and possibly being concerned too early.

Again, my concerns are from a content quality stand point: How artists are compensated which will affect the art they are able to create, and how the delivery of art will be impact which will affect the consumer.

Seems all the arguments agains digital/streaming content are realiant on some future doom and gloom scenario. Same things have been being said about digital content since wav. files. And always consumers and creators have found a happy medium.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

You never own the music. Just the right to play it. There's value to having virtually endless access to data without needing local storage space.

And obviously consumers find more value there, than they do being able to stack their CDs up in a room

The convenience of streaming doesn't even need to be debated.
What I think is up for debate is the consumer experience, the experience the artist intended for the consumer, and how artists are compensated.

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

This isn't true. With things like Tidal consumers have more access to high quality uninterrupted content than ever before.

And how are they raping artists? Without streaming services consumers would just go back to illegal downloads. Streaming services and digital downloads have given artist MORE avenues to reach consumers and monetize their work not less.

I already discussed how I feel creatives are being raped. Up until recently, artists were able to forecast the potential profit of their projects. Today, the compensation structure isn't transparent and streaming services have way too much power. The answer to this could be that artists or record labels create their own streaming platforms but that can be a whole separate thread.

Nobody is making albums like this

I didn't say anyone was. Re-read what I wrote. I'm saying that creatives create with a certain experience for the consumer in mind. None of them create with ads in mind, which alter the experience they intended for the consumer.

A few bad examples don't spoil everything. There are plenty examples of episodic games or DLC that are great and have been very beneficial to consumers and creators.


Seems all the arguments agains digital/streaming content are realiant on some future doom and gloom scenario. Same things have been being said about digital content since wav. files. And always consumers and creators have found a happy medium.

I admit, I'm pessimistic and may be more concerned than I should be. Real art finds a way to exist regardless of the platform.
I'm pointing out hurdles artists are having to deal with today that didn't exist before streaming.