• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Companies should stop being anti-consumer with subscription services (gamepass/spartacus)

.Pennywise

Member
Yeah I totally agree. They better start shutting down all this subscriptions services and sell each game at 70 bucks. NOW THAT is pro consumer.
 

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
I too hate that I played through Halo and Forza last year as part of a dirt cheap subscription rather than paying $120. Sucks that I don't own the racing game that will be superseded in a few years (where it will remain on GP).
 
Last edited:

Fbh

Member
LOL so unless everyone just bows down to MS and puts all their stuff on Gamepass they are being "anti consumer"?

I agree that game subscriptions will probably go the same way as TV/Movie ones, with every major publishers launching their own service. And just like with TV/Movie subscription there's this secret technique called "you don't have to be subscribed to all of them at all times".
 

Topher

Gold Member
The phrase "anti-consumer" is thrown around way too much these days, imo.

If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF
 
Last edited:

VAVA Mk2

Member
I like paying $5 a month for a crazy large library of titles, varied in genre, and a mix of big budget AAA games and indies. What I can't get there (which gets smaller by the day), I purchase on a digital storefront either on that console or a PC.
 

Three

Member
Oh, NOW you see where subs are headed and it's anticonsumer. Not before?

I think this is a parody. It must be.
 

Saber

Member
I'm a loser because I enjoy game pass?

You're a loser to make a thread about "anti-consumer" clickbait, only to tell people one company should bend to the knees of another because Sony doesn't have Gamepass and, because you enjoy Gamepass, that is anti-consumer.
 

Daymos

Member
The word "should" implies pride, as in you're standing in front of gamepass saying THIS is the way to go, step aside!

I'm over on the other side with my pile of dusty old physical games, I've got no pride though cuz I know my way is dead.

Have fun with your streaming wars. I'm just gonna get some popcorn and watch it all happen at this point.
 

Kokoloko85

Member
If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.

I dont think Sony or Valve would reject a 1st party version of xbox gamepass on their machine. Just their 1st party games, not the 3rd party games. It would be like EA play Etc.

Its the 3rd party titles that will take away from the 3rd party sales on PSN/ Valve etc, not worth it for them. And we dont know if its worth doing this model for the companies, if it makes more money for the company than regular sales etc
 

Sosokrates

Gold Member
Lol. Gaming has never been better and more affordable.

If theres fuckery customers will vote with there money.
Gamers aren't shy of voicing there opinions, any fuckery will be memed and shat on like thanos throughing a planet at ironman.

If subs get to £high people will just stop subbing.
 
"Don't hate the player, hate the game". You can't simply be mad over companies picking the most successful strategy for improving the revenue stream. I think I understand what you are trying to say because the most recent example of this is the appearance of cloud gaming services, while GeForce Now was in beta, it had an enormous collection of games to play, including "Grand Theft Auto V", but now since cloud gaming is not a background thing anymore, every license holder wants a certain percentage of the audience to themselves, which is why new cloud gaming services and platforms are emerging at a very fast pace, and this is not a consumer-friendly approach, because the content is king and we naturally gravitate towards a better content, we have no choice but to subscribe to multiple cloud gaming services if we want to enjoy that content.
 

yurinka

Member
Sony now wants their own subscription, which is understandable given the success with game pass,
Sony already have 2 existing game subscriptions subscriptions, if Bloomberg isn't lying again what they are doing is to merge them into a single service with different tiers (like GP) and to include here a few extra things. Btw, they are more successful than MS here too, this merged sub will start with aprox. the double of subs than GP.

I am pretty certain, that Microsoft and Sony will not only pay for day one third party games on their services, but probably also pay third party games to be exclusive on their services.

If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.
Game Pass won't be published on PlayStation, and Sony won't put their games day one on their own subscription. From time to time they'll include some indie or AAA at launch, as did until now.
 
Last edited:

The_Mike

Member
You're a loser to make a thread about "anti-consumer" clickbait, only to tell people one company should bend to the knees of another because Sony doesn't have Gamepass and, because you enjoy Gamepass, that is anti-consumer.
The moderators accept people calling me a loser, but I will be polite against anyone calling me slurs.

Because I'm probably the only one who's gonna get banned for calling other people slurs.

I did mention in the beginning, that I would have meant the same if spartakus came first. I edited it out because a mod changed the title, so I thought it didn't fit anymore.

Like I said in my example, Netflix went to shit after hbo and Disney made their own platforms. And the same will happen now.

But given I'm not a Sony shill it's okay to call me a loser. Nice Gaf.
I'm not following you here. You enjoy Game Pass, but if Sony creates their own version of Game Pass then that is being anti-consumer?

Come On Reaction GIF by MOODMAN
Yes because two services will probably end up turn many games into third party exclusives on the services.

I believe you didn't read the entire post.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Yes because two services will probably end up turn many games into third party exclusives on the services.

I believe you didn't read the entire post.

No, I read it. It just doesn't make any sense to praise one service and call another "anti-consumer". If you don't like the road that subscriptions are taking us down then call them out equally. You can't have it both ways.
 

Saber

Member
The moderators accept people calling me a loser, but I will be polite against anyone calling me slurs.

Because I'm probably the only one who's gonna get banned for calling other people slurs.

I did mention in the beginning, that I would have meant the same if spartakus came first. I edited it out because a mod changed the title, so I thought it didn't fit anymore.

Like I said in my example, Netflix went to shit after hbo and Disney made their own platforms. And the same will happen now.

But given I'm not a Sony shill it's okay to call me a loser. Nice Gaf.

Yes because two services will probably end up turn many games into third party exclusives on the services.

I believe you didn't read the entire post.

You still didn't explain why Sony is anti consumer in this case. Because it will create a new service instead of accepting the service you enjoy and preach so much?

What happened to Netflix was innevatable. When the market sees a trend, it goes with the flow. Its aways being like that in games as well, Battle Royals everywhere, microtransactions, lootboxes and now NFT.
 
Last edited:

The_Mike

Member
You still didn't explain why Sony is anti consumer in this case. Because it will create a new service instead of accepting the service you enjoy and preach so much?
It was poorly worded.

What I meant is having subscriptions like these to each separate platform will eventually hurt both player bases.

Third party games will get exclusive deals on each side, hurting the users.

As of now, I get bust 1st and third party on game pass. But when this start up I will probably end up with a worse product
 
What were people expecting when major consolidation of 3rd party was happening. I moaned but a huge portion of people are cheering this on for some reason.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Dont see a problem with GP or PS Now. They are options. You can still buy games for $60 or $70 if you want.

Just like movie sub plans. You can still buy a BR or digital download of your fav movie for $20.
 
Gamepass in its current state is a subscription that values your money a lot.

Microsoft first party titles day one, and a big catalogue of third party games. Some are even there day one.

Sony now wants their own subscription, which is understandable given the success with game pass, but this will hurt these subscription based services.

Just like are seeing both Microsoft and Sony acquiring companies to the left and right, we will now see the same that happened into TV streaming series.

Netflix had everything at the beginning. Then hbo and Disney wanted to make their own services to gain 100 percent revenue.

I am pretty certain, that Microsoft and Sony will not only pay for day one third party games on their services, but probably also pay third party games to be exclusive on their services.

If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.

These companies should stop ruining this for the gamers. It's anti consuming and I am sick of it.
The beauty is, you don’t have to subscribe to gamepasss and can simply buy the games that are on it. Also if you do subscribe to gamepass, you can buy the games at a discounted price. It’s not anti-consumer at all.

If you subscribe, you get to play a wealth of games. If you don’t, you can buy the games. It’s not a bad thing to have options that fit your budget.
 

reinking

Member
Gamepass in its current state is a subscription that values your money a lot.

Microsoft first party titles day one, and a big catalogue of third party games. Some are even there day one.

Sony now wants their own subscription, which is understandable given the success with game pass, but this will hurt these subscription based services.

Just like are seeing both Microsoft and Sony acquiring companies to the left and right, we will now see the same that happened into TV streaming series.

Netflix had everything at the beginning. Then hbo and Disney wanted to make their own services to gain 100 percent revenue.

I am pretty certain, that Microsoft and Sony will not only pay for day one third party games on their services, but probably also pay third party games to be exclusive on their services.

If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.

These companies should stop ruining this for the gamers. It's anti consuming and I am sick of it.
Not only do you seem to think Sony does not have a subscription service you do not realize that PS Now lunched before Game Pass. If you want to argue Sony is more focused on subscription models due to the success of Game Pass, carry on warrior.

I am surprised how many people think that MS and Sony are all about getting Game Pass on Sony platforms. It ain't happening. Just like PS Now will not be on Xbox platforms. Such a lazy take that people have come up with and zero evidence to point to this ever happening. I could see Sony putting PS Now on Sony TV's long before any signs of adding to a competitor's console or service. Why would MS want that anyway? Unless they truly plan to get out of making consoles.
 
It's not anti-consumer, it's just more expensive. If you want to play everything, you gotta pay up.

The alternative is that one service has a monopoly, and then everyone is fucked because a monopoly means everyone gets ripped off.
 

Magic Carpet

Gold Member
I'm one of the few that is paying month to month for Gamepass. I just checked my bank statment and with tax it comes to $16.23 a month.
that is $194.76 a year.
That 194.76 gets you 2.99 games at $60. (65.10 with tax)
That 194.76 gets you 2.56 games at $70. (75.95 with tax)

This is the most consumer friendly thing I have on my gaming budget.
 

MikeM

Member
No one needs to sub to these services. So long as these games are sold in stores and are available on sub services, I could careless.

Now, should they only release games on sub services, then I see a problem.
 
Dont see a problem with GP or PS Now. They are options. You can still buy games for $60 or $70 if you want.

Just like movie sub plans. You can still buy a BR or digital download of your fav movie for $20.
OP doesn't have a problem with GamePass, it's "pro-consumer". His problem is with PS Now or Spartacus, that's "anti-consumer" because it adds competition to GamePass.

You can't make this stuff up.
 

laynelane

Member
No one needs to sub to these services. So long as these games are sold in stores and are available on sub services, I could careless.

Now, should they only release games on sub services, then I see a problem.

I hope that day never comes. Having options for subs, purchasing games - physical and digital, etc. is good and it would be great if it stays that way.
 
The only anti-consumer thing is the auto opt-in for automatic renewal in the hope you forget to cancel it and just keep on paying. Other than that it is actually something pro-consumer.
 
Last edited:

iHaunter

Member


Sony shouldn't create a service because that would "ruin" Gamepass, but instead should integrate Gamepass into the Sony ecosystem? Is that really your point?

Really dude?
Why make more money on your own platform when you can make money for someonbody else.
 

The_Mike

Member
I can't tell if the OP is a poorly executed joke or for real?
My post was poorly worded and apparently because people are more interested in that instead of the topic itself is sad.
No. It's because instead of enjoying it you write essays about it. Although I'm sorry I called you a loser I feel bad about that.
I can enjoy it and list my concerns as well. Only a sith deals in absolutes.
It's The_Mike The_Mike - he's 100% serious. If it's Xbox, it's great. If it's PlayStation it's horrible. Even if it's the exact same thing.

Usually people aren't this transparent with their double standards. It's pretty laughable.
Go advertise for PlayStation somewhere else instead of putting words in my mouth.

My thread were badly worded, I've said that several times, and you twist my thread into your fanboy agenda.
 

8BiTw0LF

Gold Member
Are Netflix, HBO Max, Amazon Prime or Disney+ anti-consumer subscriptions? I remember a time where I bought a lot of VHS movies to get around 6-10 hours of entertainment a month. I also bought games that were extremely pricey (for the time), so only once every 3 months or so. Used to buy 2-3 Compact Discs every month for my trustworthy DiscMan.

I may have spent around $200 every month on entertainment.

The 90's, ey! Such a great era to be a consumer...
 

Roni

Member
Thanks to Milton Friedman a company's job is to make money, exclusively, anti-consumer is OK as long as next quarter is in the black.
 

Thirty7ven

Sony make cringe trainers.
Thanks to Milton Friedman a company's job is to make money, exclusively, anti-consumer is OK as long as next quarter is in the black.

If only people would be more knowledgeable of history, maybe we could live in a world that isn't at the mercy of shareholders of all people.
 

jakinov

Member
Gamepass in its current state is a subscription that values your money a lot.

Microsoft first party titles day one, and a big catalogue of third party games. Some are even there day one.

Sony now wants their own subscription, which is understandable given the success with game pass, but this will hurt these subscription based services.

Just like are seeing both Microsoft and Sony acquiring companies to the left and right, we will now see the same that happened into TV streaming series.

Netflix had everything at the beginning. Then hbo and Disney wanted to make their own services to gain 100 percent revenue.

I am pretty certain, that Microsoft and Sony will not only pay for day one third party games on their services, but probably also pay third party games to be exclusive on their services.

If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.

These companies should stop ruining this for the gamers. It's anti consuming and I am sick of it.
1. Your thread title using the term "anti-consumer" is absurd. That's a dumb term gamers like to throw around anytime busineses aren't bending over backwards to entitled gamers.
2. Netflix never had everything at the beggining. Never. That's a stupid misconception people have. It always cycled out content because revenue and licensing cost were cheaper because streaming wasn't big yet and streaming was just alt-revenue to advertisement revenue on traditional linear TV.
3. WarnerMedia and Disney want to make their own consolidated streaming service because they were major content distributors way before Netflix was and had distribution channels which also included streaming. What they wanted to do was adapt their busineses to the changing times. Instead of paying an HBO subscription and watching this on a schedule you got to pay that subscription and get access to a bunch of other content on-demand too. Disney and WM also have a shit ton of production studios that they used to be able to feed regularly by getting them to create content for their own distribution channels. Netflix model does not allow for WM and Disney to be fed. They would have had to gut their entire divisions and then hope Netflix is willing to pay for the shows they want to make. Which over time Netflix has an interest not to do because they can make shows in-house a lot cheaper with their own production companies who don't need to make a profit. Netflix isn't YouTube or Spotify where there's a bit of reward for anybody who tries. Even with Spotify the music industry has said the per play revenue is shit because the moeny isn't there from subscriptionsand that musciains actually make most of thier money elsewhere e.g. going on tour. Disney and WM werne't going to stop being distribution companies because Netflix was the first to get popular, they are going to adapt. Just like retail stores aren't going to give up because Amazon got popular.
3. Sony and Microsoft will not pay for a game to be exclusive to their service because they make money from direct sales too and it's cheaper deal not to cut off their partners revenue streams. A fully console exclusive is a whole other thing which you are SOL either way unless you have both consoles (or PC) not much new to streaming.
4. Your last part about letting compeittion come in and sell stuff on their turf is absurd and really goes back to you wanting companies to bend over backwards to make the least amount of money possible because you want everything dirt cheap. What are you sick of really? You are sick that companies create new value offerings but that they aren't doing it in the cheapest way possible for you against their own interests? Our societies is about trading goods andd services for prices that we agree upon, but somehow gamers have created this standard where if games companies have an inch to give and they don't give that inch to consumers they are assholes and they throw around the word "anit-consumer".
 

Punished Miku

Gold Member
There's already more games than you can play.

Sub up for the stuff you want. I don't watch all the movie / TV streaming services. You're going to eventually have to just let some of it go. You can always sub up for a month or two and catch up on secondary services. Keep the one you like best every month, and add additional stuff sparingly.
 
This is all moot anyway. PS gamers on GAF have been saying gamepass is awful, and gamers by and large consume their games differently compared to music and movies. They said PlayStation gamers don't like 'renting' their games or having their games curated for them.

So whenever spratacus releases it will be the biggest flop in PlayStation history, and will hold no weight in the industry. Unless those gamers weren't being sincere in their criticism.
 

aclar00

Member
Gamepass in its current state is a subscription that values your money a lot.

Microsoft first party titles day one, and a big catalogue of third party games. Some are even there day one.

Sony now wants their own subscription, which is understandable given the success with game pass, but this will hurt these subscription based services.

Just like are seeing both Microsoft and Sony acquiring companies to the left and right, we will now see the same that happened into TV streaming series.

Netflix had everything at the beginning. Then hbo and Disney wanted to make their own services to gain 100 percent revenue.

I am pretty certain, that Microsoft and Sony will not only pay for day one third party games on their services, but probably also pay third party games to be exclusive on their services.

If Sony just accepted game pass on their platform and got a cut of the sub, purchases etc.

These companies should stop ruining this for the gamers. It's anti consuming and I am sick of it.

So you want Sony to have Gamepass, take a cut of it and then what, not expect the cost to be equal to or even surpass the cost of Gamepass plus a separate Sony service?

This is inevitable, however unfortunate it may be. Those of us not so keen on services believe this will happen. Not only will you essentially be renting games, but youll be at the mercy of possibly annual price increases and competitive services not having the games you want.

Also, in an ideal publisher's world, EA, Take Two and others will have their own streaming services as to not have to pay premium streaming fees on top of console fees.

However console fees could end up being a thing of the past. You might just be buying your controller of choice for your Roku box or cell phone to stream games from PC servers. Not "owning" games anymore and only having to dish out fpr new hardware once your old device is no longer supporter for some unknown reason.

This is why software will be more key....if Sony were to allow Gamepass on PS and not create their own service, then you might as well say goodbye to Sony and they become solely third party publishers if you will because having a service will at the very least continue to have them be seen as a brand similar to having a console.
 

Fbh

Member
Thanks to Milton Friedman a company's job is to make money, exclusively, anti-consumer is OK as long as next quarter is in the black.

Which is why competition is one of the main factors keeping companies "pro consumer". Which itself makes the entire premise of this thread kinda dumb.
 

RiccochetJ

Gold Member
It's not anti-consumer, it's awesome. I want these companies to compete to get my attention and dollars. Just like I think it's awesome that all these different companies are competing with their streaming services. There are so many fun shows coming out on each service that I doubt we would have seen if it was just Netflix. I find it fun to rotate services once one of them has built up a decent backlog of things I want to check out.
 

Roni

Member
Which is why competition is one of the main factors keeping companies "pro consumer". Which itself makes the entire premise of this thread kinda dumb.
The premise of the thread I understood was that moving away from owning the console + the game disc with the data for the game was better than renting access to the game on a computer you don't own for a limited time over an also payed internet connection.

Though this may open the market for new players, those players by and large will be competing in the streaming format, which is covered above.
 
Last edited:

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
What I meant is having subscriptions like these to each separate platform will eventually hurt both player bases.

It won't hurt because even if people have to subscribe to multiple services to access a wide variety of games, they're still getting every game on those services. Game Pass is already nuts but I will continue to buy PS5 games because those aren't going to appear on Spartacus day one. If they do, though, along with a Playstation back catalogue at my fingertips? You bet your sweet white ass I'll pay for that too.

If you're talking about hurting people on one platform only, then they're already missing out on everything outside of that ecosystem (often by choice) and the situation doesn't really change at all.

There may be a dozen different streaming services for movies, but if my choice is to pay for a few of those each month or go back to buying individual films for $10-20 each? It's not even a question. Not even close to a competition.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom