Subscription Gaming Services - Yea or Nay?

Video Game Subscription Services?

  • Yes. I'm all for it!

    Votes: 2 16.7%
  • No. I want physical copies of my games.

    Votes: 8 66.7%
  • Huh? I'm still rockin my Commodore 64 on 1200 baud dialup.

    Votes: 2 16.7%

  • Total voters
    12
Wayde Robson

Wayde Robson

Audioholics Anchorman
Would our Audioholics gamers subscribe to any of the popular subscription gaming services?

I might. Despite somewhat condemning them in this article, I really only mean to condemn how they could be used, I don't want them to replace physical media. I may even be inclined to use them if I found the right offer from a game publisher's streaming service. I already use Steam. But I have no intention of ever using a cloud service like Stadia. It just doesn't offer a benefit. I actually enjoy building my own gaming PC and they're cheap enough where I see no benefit to replacing it with a cloud service.

Here's mainly why I don't like them so far.

Video Game Ecosystems in the 2020s

image_large2.jpeg
 
WookieGR

WookieGR

Full Audioholic
The gaming industry (and digital streaming in all forms) is fueled by the dumbest & laziest people, for PURCHASES, not rentals. Mostly millennial's with no concept of ownership or value of hard earned money. It's been almost two decades now that the PC gaming market went 100% digital and I am appalled that no one has ever filed class action law suits against any companies for locking in your games into an out of reach virtual filing cabinet. As long as I am denied my legal rights to sell, loan, trade or give away my purchased items when i no longer want or need them I will continue to fight digital purchasing. It's a complete lack of dignity to buy something at full price that will reside on a cloud server somewhere that you are forced to keep till the day you die or someone decides to flip a switch preventing you from accessing it or even reliant on a stable internet connection at all times. Digital streaming in any form is an ok supplement to the things they accompany in reality but today's generation of consumers do not reside in reality. Not to mention the complete dismantling and obsolescence of the entire retail and buy-sell economy/community.

It's a completely different story if you want to test something as a demo or to rent for an extremely low fee without the intent to actually own it. You do NOT own anything digital no matter how much you pay for it. However, I can see something like Xbox Game Pass being the best of both worlds since you rent the games for a monthly subscription and actually download the full the content without loss of quality. You get the full experience of what your PC or console is capable of without the nasty side effects or low resolution streaming of a video simulation of what you are believe you are playing.
 
Last edited:
Wayde Robson

Wayde Robson

Audioholics Anchorman
It's a complete lack of dignity to buy something at full price that will reside on a cloud server somewhere that you are forced to keep till the day you die or someone decides to flip a switch preventing you from accessing it or even reliant on a stable internet connection at all times. Digital streaming in any form is an ok supplement
Totally agree WookieGR!

I think you're on to something about the younger generations being somewhat indoctrinated into "subscription services". It won't be long before the Millennails that actually remember buying discs will be replaced by younger gamers that don't. I wonder what other things we used to be able to call our own will be transformed into temporary-use propositions with no rights of ownership. Jobs, like that of Uber driver, could be moving that direction in the new "gig" economy.

It reminds me of feudalism.
 
WookieGR

WookieGR

Full Audioholic
Totally agree WookieGR!

I think you're on to something about the younger generations being somewhat indoctrinated into "subscription services". It won't be long before the Millennails that actually remember buying discs will be replaced by younger gamers that don't. I wonder what other things we used to be able to call our own will be transformed into temporary-use propositions with no rights of ownership. Jobs, like that of Uber driver, could be moving that direction in the new "gig" economy.

It reminds me of feudalism.
The entire Home Theater landscape is mutating. I've also got a beef with people claiming they have "home theaters" when it's just a 55" tv and a soundbar in a living room with their kids crap and dogs toys all over the floor. There are no mentors, no leaders, no actual set of rules in place for an industry built and designed for a target audience with 3 minute attention spans. I get it that people like their convenience, but it is literally killing the chances of sustaining the highest quality experience for those that can appreciate them because people use convenience as a way of life.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
The discussion per usual Wayde's agenda is somewhat skewed and confusing [on purpose?].
a) The issue of DRM protected digital game purchases [aka fake purchases]
b) game streaming as a subscription

Regarding
a) I am generally ok with Steam and I feel strongly about it, I'd buy only DRM free GOG games
b) Burn it with fire. It will never work perfectly due to network latency. Even 5-10ms latency would be a show stopper for most reaction-based games.
 
Last edited:
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
The discussion per usual Wayde's agenda is somewhat skewed and confusing [on purpose?].
a) The issue of DRM protected digital game purchases [aka fake purchases]
b) game streaming as a subscription

Regarding
a) I am generally ok with Steam and I feel strongly about it, I'd buy only DRM free GOG games
b) Burn it with fire. It will never work perfectly due to network latency. Even 5-10ms latency would be a show stopper for most reaction-based games.
Agreed about streaming, however 5 to 10ms would definitely not be a showstopper. I can't tell the difference from playing on a server with 20ms to 50ms latency, and I play some very fast reaction games. Once latencies creep near 100ms, it can be felt, but games are still playable even at 100ms, even games like Quake deathmatch. However, I doubt that streamed gaming will ever be able to deliver playable games that need fast reaction in reasonable latency times. I don't even know if it would be possible with a heavily compressed picture, but if you have to sacrifice graphics to do that, what is the point? The only advantage that I see to streaming gaming is that it makes cheating much harder to do.

On the other hand, consider the kind of games most people play, and the way that games are often being played these days, on small displays, streaming might make sense for many types of gaming. It will never be sufficient for those who want the most immersion, but for someone who wants to play a polygon intensive game on their phone or pad, maybe it's a good solution.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
Lan Multiplayer isn't the same thing as game streaming. Your stuff gets rendered locally, only control data is exchanged vs streamed which now has to deal with both video delivery react to controls - essentially doubling the lag.
 
Pogre

Pogre

Audioholic Slumlord
I thought about game pass on XBL but just... I dunno. I don't like the idea of it.
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
Lan Multiplayer isn't the same thing as game streaming. Your stuff gets rendered locally, only control data is exchanged vs streamed which now has to deal with both video delivery react to controls - essentially doubling the lag.
I get what you are saying, but even if you doubled 10ms, that is still only 20ms which is really fast. But a high-quality, low-latency stream is difficult to do.
 
Wayde Robson

Wayde Robson

Audioholics Anchorman
The discussion per usual Wayde's agenda is somewhat skewed and confusing [on purpose?].
a) The issue of DRM protected digital game purchases [aka fake purchases]
b) game streaming as a subscription

Regarding
a) I am generally ok with Steam and I feel strongly about it, I'd buy only DRM free GOG games
b) Burn it with fire. It will never work perfectly due to network latency. Even 5-10ms latency would be a show stopper for most reaction-based games.

Sorry, I'm not sure what's confusing. But there are a lot of somewhat confusing things covered in the article. I quickly realized I was probably covering too many topics as I was writing it. It started life as an article about Stadia, essentially to talk about how much I hate it. But, I hate the whole idea of Cloud gaming.

I found the whole streaming services more and more interesting as I researched it.

But streaming services or full game access for a monthly fee (not including DLCs/mods etc)... isn't necessarily a full "cloud" gaming experience. Most streaming services, including Xbox's and PlayStation's let you download (some) of their games to play on PC, so latency shouldn't be an issue. The "pure" cloud gaming services, like Stadia, those should be burnt in a fire.

Digitally purchased games - These, unfortunately will often contain DRM too. I use Steam, I haven't actually used GOG, but it seems like a better deal since it lets you purchase DRM-free. I only learned about Steam's "licensing" rather than "selling" games while researching this article. I'd never read the user agreement.

But, the worst DRM-crime IMHO, is when they maintain files required to run the game on the server-side, even if you purchased it. So, the digitally downloaded "copy" of the game isn't the full game. I have no experience with it myself, but I read this technique was used by UBISoft on Assassin's Creed II. The game required a persistent Internet connection even to play the single player campaign. That is just a step too far, it should be considered fraud.

But even Assassin's Creed II has been cracked, some group figured out the server-side game files and wrote something to download them locally so it can be played 100% offline.
 
Wayde Robson

Wayde Robson

Audioholics Anchorman
Agreed about streaming, however 5 to 10ms would definitely not be a showstopper.
I'm not sure that small amount of delay would be noticed, even in quick-reaction games. There must be a hard latency number where it's considered imperceptible to a human.

I had a serious Conan Exiles addiction for awhile there, it's an online-only multiplayer game. It probably got me too used to "some" lag, just under 50ms ping to the game's servers was pretty much the best you could hope for. If I was pinging 30-40ms to a server, I honestly didn't even notice any delay at all. Although, it would probably have been in PvP vs another human. I think your brain can acclimate to some, very slight delay, where it's filtered out of perception. That was definitely me in CE.

I never did get much into PvP in that game though. I may yet. It's really a great game!
 
T

tonyspizza

Enthusiast
Would our Audioholics gamers subscribe to any of the popular subscription gaming services?

I might. Despite somewhat condemning them in this article, I really only mean to condemn how they could be used, I don't want them to replace physical media. I may even be inclined to use them if I found the right offer from a game publisher's streaming service. I already use Steam. But I have no intention of ever using a cloud service like Stadia. It just doesn't offer a benefit. I actually enjoy building my own gaming PC and they're cheap enough where I see no benefit to replacing it with a cloud service
Subscription? No way. I want a copy of the game on my shelf.
What you posted sounds a lot like me. I like to build PC systems and I tweak / add / redo / upgrade when and where I can. Although right now, I've been using the same PC for a solid year now. I don't have any personal reason to upgrade atm. While consoles are fun and I own 10 of them, I normally game on my PC.

I do pick up titles from Steam and GOG on occasion. However, it will never replace owning a copy in my hand. The down side, is the industry has been slowly going digital for many years and its getting harder to find physical copies of some titles now, especially if they are an Indy studio looking to reduce distribution costs. That is probably the only good thing about digitally 'owned' games. Indy studios can cut their costs and get games to the market.

One thing I am finding out now is that many of my older favorite Windows XP PC titles won't play on my PC, even with compatibility mode set up and what not. So I'm looking at building an XP box, just to play that stuff. Then, its like, what hardware (mobo, gpu) XP even support and what was the best GPU on an XP system? I'll have to go figure it out so I have the 'best' old system lol. I always keep a couple of DVD/CD ROM drives for my PC on hand, in case one craps out and how many more years will they keep making them? I know that laptops don't ship with optical drives any more, or its rare.
 
diskreet

diskreet

Audioholic
Glad this popped back up. With Microsoft buying ZeniMax, GamePass Ultimate offers huge value if you have an XBox or gaming PC. I used it before to get access to games I'd never normally buy, but want to play eventually (e.g. Metro series). For someone like me that doesn't have the time to game a ton, it was great.

Now that I can play even more top tier games both on Xbox and on mobile, it's phenomenal value. If the rumors are true there's one more big acquisition announcement coming (Sega, something else huge?) then it's going to be a no-brainer for anyone that wants access to a ton of different games they wouldn't normally buy. I think games are starting to understand why Microsoft is going this way, but as someone that it works well for, it's just unmatched.

I think its fair to pay $15/mo for tons of games and a couple times per year spend full price on a couple additional AAA or indie games I absolutely want to experience right away. (Cyberpunk 2077 is on that list for me).
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Slumlord
Sorry, I'm not sure what's confusing. But there are a lot of somewhat confusing things covered in the article. I quickly realized I was probably covering too many topics as I was writing it. It started life as an article about Stadia, essentially to talk about how much I hate it. But, I hate the whole idea of Cloud gaming.

I found the whole streaming services more and more interesting as I researched it.

But streaming services or full game access for a monthly fee (not including DLCs/mods etc)... isn't necessarily a full "cloud" gaming experience. Most streaming services, including Xbox's and PlayStation's let you download (some) of their games to play on PC, so latency shouldn't be an issue. The "pure" cloud gaming services, like Stadia, those should be burnt in a fire.

Digitally purchased games - These, unfortunately will often contain DRM too. I use Steam, I haven't actually used GOG, but it seems like a better deal since it lets you purchase DRM-free. I only learned about Steam's "licensing" rather than "selling" games while researching this article. I'd never read the user agreement.

But, the worst DRM-crime IMHO, is when they maintain files required to run the game on the server-side, even if you purchased it. So, the digitally downloaded "copy" of the game isn't the full game. I have no experience with it myself, but I read this technique was used by UBISoft on Assassin's Creed II. The game required a persistent Internet connection even to play the single player campaign. That is just a step too far, it should be considered fraud.

But even Assassin's Creed II has been cracked, some group figured out the server-side game files and wrote something to download them locally so it can be played 100% offline.
Looking back I feel like my original response has a bit too much shot from the hip and I honestly feel like I should give a proper response to this subject in much deeper details.
But as before I strongly feel that the original articles bundle two separate subjects under one umbrella:
a) Digital "ownership" and/or The first sale doctrine
b) Cloud gaming (as in rendered in the cloud, delivered as video streaming)

a) There are hundreds of articles dedicated to this exact subject - Do you really "own" the digital purchase you just clicked on the "buy" button. (spoiler - you aren't - you just clicked on purposely mislabled "rent" button)
If you like to learn more about this won't be the worst place to start:
In essence, the only thing which makes a physical video game media purchase - the actual purchase is the first sale doctrine. It allows you to sell the product you bought, regardless of copyright ownership of the product. Without it, ANY digital product would be licensed not ever "purchased", regardless of delivery method, digital download of physical media.
As has been mentioned early even this right has been eroded by games that require cloud servers to be operational for any usage. There should have been a huge class action, not bickering on the internet.
Probably we have AT&T and the Supreme Court to thank for practically killing Class Action suits by forcing arbitration instead. I am still in shock how this was allowed in the first place as it allows big companies to have free get out of court cart until this decision is reversed (if ever).

b) Cloud gaming - again, until shown otherwise I would strongly believe that inherit network latency (ie Input lag) and less than ideal (understatement of the year) internet infrastructure in the US will be the gatekeepers of mass adoption of any cloud gaming services. Not to mention also their confusing licensing schemes.
 
Wayde Robson

Wayde Robson

Audioholics Anchorman
a) Digital "ownership" and/or The first sale doctrine
b) Cloud gaming (as in rendered in the cloud, delivered as video streaming)
I'll explore those links, thanks for the heads up.

I think several years ago now, I had this epiphany about the way software and "ownership" seemed to be going. I worked/work in software most of my adult life. Mostly in marketing but that got me working alongside brilliant people from CEOs of startups to software developers who are so talented they can instantly switch sides in our local software hotbed here in Waterloo, Ontario Canada. But the way I saw it is that the recurring revenue stream is the golden goose everyone is looking for out of their software company. I've mostly worked for B2B companies looking to extract monthly/annual licensing or support fees. But it's really become obvious to the general public in B2C subscription services.

What I didn't expect to see start to metastasize was that workers (generally starting out, low skilled work) would obtain a form of employment from the same model, think Uber Driver, and maybe even Amazon/Shopify retailers.

The epiphany was the kind-of the philosophy behind it and what it might be doing to our society or what we think of as a society where "ownership" isn't really a thing anymore, we just "rent", and employment becomes a different condition as well as we become more of a "gig" economy. That "gig" economy exists at both the low and high levels... as I've seen among brilliant developers who are able to switch high-paying jobs at the veritable drop of hat. I've also spent years working gigs myself in marketing, although not as well paying as the really brilliant software engineers.

Maybe I'm too fascinated with about reading medieval history, but I see a correlation between this kind of life and serfdom of the past, particularly where it applies to the "low end" of the gig economy, renting everything, even entertainment people used to "collect" as records or movies on tape or disc. I don't know if I like it all that much. But I use it, I subscribe to Netflix, but still retain my own local music and movie collection, maybe I'm just old fashioned.

I just wonder what the future holds for the classic American ethics of private property, freedom of speech and maybe even capitalism itself. In modern political discourse, it's easy to find populations for whom the very word "capitalism" represents all the evils of society, rather than the vehicle that has brought untold prosperity to the most impoverished nations on Earth.

But at the same time, I don't want to dismiss the "millennial" complaints against what they see as "evils" of capitalism, as I see the future for my own children in a first world nation where kids are coming out of University with mounds of debt, little hope of home ownership as Chinese money causes spiraling housing costs in our cities, and then either relying on questionable government "health care" or having none at all as in the US. I think we have legitimate problems to solve here. I just wonder how these new ethics forming around technology are going to play out.
 
diskreet

diskreet

Audioholic
@Wayde Robson you're hitting on what I've heard called the sharing economy. I too worry about the economic impacts my kids will face when the record with inequality causes effects on every facet of their life. This was a wake up call for me, and our policies since this was published in 2016 appear to me to accelerate further inequality:

You also describe a concept that I find fascinating around people owning less. On one hand an economy of rent extractors will damage entire generations from ever having any forward mobility (which were already getting deep into, see link above). On the other hand there are huge efficiencies to be gained from reducing the unused time of high-capital investments like vehicles. As a car enthusiast it pains me, but it clearly makes sense. Here's a great dive into Rifkins theory around the upcoming Third Industrial Revolution:

With much of that inevitable I just see more and more evidence we need extremely strong leadership to navigate our society through these problems. I watch in horror as the increasingly old and out of touch politicians in the US fail to rise up and tackle even the easiest problems, let alone the enormous ones.

As for your kids, maybe the view capitalism as I do: great for non essential services when it is well regulated. But the rampant crony capitalism is obviously not benefiting average Americans. Everyone loves to mock millennials for being lazy or ignorant. The truth is they can actually define socialism, understand how a social democracy benefits the whole society, and have a deeply personal understand of how out-of-control capitalism does wonders to reverse robinhood every penny out of the least fortunate.
 
Last edited:
Wayde Robson

Wayde Robson

Audioholics Anchorman
@Wayde Robson you're hitting on what I've heard called the sharing economy. I too worry about the economic impacts my kids will face when the record with inequality causes effects on every facet of their life.
Glad I'm not the only one. Sometimes I think maybe I'm deluding myself connecting so many dots. But at the same time, I see basic values shifting ever so slightly among the younger millenials, according to different surveys I've read about among college students. I wonder how much longer Americans can be said to value concepts like "private property" and all that it entails, including free speech, rule of law etc. Not sure how it all connects exactly to the "new economy" we're facing, but all of these values would seem to me to be a package deal, IMHO. Anyone from my generation, GenX, pretty much unanimously agrees on these as basic cornerstones in what we call a liberal democracy.

When young adults basically own nothing, and rent everything, what do you value exactly? Who knows, maybe there's some other kind of awakening coming that we can't even imagine yet.

Will definitely check out those links, thanks for the heads up!
 
T

tonyspizza

Enthusiast
@Wayde Robson you're hitting on what I've heard called the sharing economy. I too worry about the economic impacts my kids will face when the record with inequality causes effects on every facet of their life. This was a wake up call for me, and our policies since this was published in 2016 appear to me to accelerate further inequality:
If I'm thinking of the same thing, I've heard it called the 'gig' economy. We are of course starting to deviate from the OP and I don't want to assist too much with it. However, the continued polarization of wealth is going back to historical norms. i.e. The way its always been in modern human history, except for short periods of time.
 
T

tonyspizza

Enthusiast
For someone like me that doesn't have the time to game a ton, it was great.

Now that I can play even more top tier games both on Xbox and on mobile, it's phenomenal value. If the rumors are true there's one more big acquisition announcement coming (Sega, something else huge?) then it's going to be a no-brainer for anyone that wants access to a ton of different games they wouldn't normally buy.

I think its fair to pay $15/mo for tons of games and a couple times per year spend full price on a couple additional AAA or indie games I absolutely want to experience right away. (Cyberpunk 2077 is on that list for me).
This is a viewpoint that is consistent with those who are willing to be the subscription service. I agree, it is nice to have access to tons of games.

The caveat, is that you don't own any of the titles from subscription. They are 'rented'. This is one reason why I still buy hard copies of games that I enjoy. I can put it on my shelf, or sell it and not infringe on copyright. You can never sell or 'resell' your digital games.

I think the industry needs to be more transparent and call the subscription services what they really are, temporary rentals.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top