[Axios] Gaming insiders spooked by pay-for-engagement plans

[Lord Fanny]

While I'm personally not a fan of gamepass fear mongering, I also find it a bit weird that so many people blindly believe MS's PR during the first few years of a really long term strategy.

No corporation cares wether gaming develops according to the best experience for the user, but solely on how they can make the biggest buck out of it. Google MS, Sony, you name it.

If Gamepass gets big enough that devs depend on it, there is a valid concern that MS will adapt policies that are detrimental to certain game styles.

Click to shrink...

I mean, pretty much. It's really not 'fear mongering,' especially since we now actively know Microsoft was doing exactly what Google is trying to do now in the beginning. They changed course, and are tailoring how they work with devs for them for now, but this isn't really about Stadia or Game Pass specifically, as much as it's the possibility of what these services could lead to. That should be the takeaway from all of this. But people can't get off their shill shack for a second to see that, and instead we get people pre-emptily defending a service before anyone even brings it up because the connection between the two is that obvious.

 

[NCR Ranger]

Making an objectively bloated crap game that millions play for countless hours is not really a thing. Sure, you might think some game is crap, but if someone is sinking countless hours to it then there has to be something there. Honestly, I don't see the problem with it. Maybe I am the odd ball, but I have never thought, "Man, this game is bloated and boring, but the developers added more content, so I guess I must keep playing."

I guess my point is if players are engaging with a game than the game has to have something that keeps them engaged. I doubt a developer can just go "oh add more padding" and watch the money roll in.

 

[Deleted member 46804]

I know games and TV watching is different but you see plenty of varying content across services like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu etc. I can't imagine "engagement" metrics like this being super successful at driving subscriptions especially because this was the model for MMO's forever and we've moved away from it. More, diverse content is what will sell these services, not games you play forever. The good news is that MS and Sony seem to be investing in diversity of experiences, not this garbage. I expect new companies entering the industry who will have a limited number of developers will push in this direction because they can't compete on the diversity front.

 

[Alpheus]

There is logic in that approach, but I think that approach regardless of how logical; is utterly incompatible with how gaming has grown over the years.

 

[Iron Eddie]

Google has already been questioned about how they control engine searches and who gets to the top, I am not in the least surpised at this.

The fact is it's about money. Always has been whether it's about getting exclusive deals, exclusive content and then charging the same price on another platfdorm without that content, reinbursement for cross-platform purchases and so on. This industry is shady as fuck already but this rewards games meant for replayability, which isn't good for others trying to compete.

 

[vixolus]

This is making a mountain out of a molehill. This is only about how Stadia wants to get Devs to give away games for free as a monthly perk (their PS+/GWG system). Stadia is not a game subscription service in the first place. It's more like the revenue sharing incentives XBL paid top publishers for years than anything Game Pass is doing

Playing a game for 8 hours for 2 years doesn't really do much for Game Pass model of time-limited offerings. Incentivizing DLC would, but that is a different argument

Click to shrink...

This.

This is like getting mad that Sony incentivized a struggling PS+ subscription service and said "We're gonna give a kickback up to a certain amount if your game we use as the monthly claimable freebie is popular with users"

It's not based on hours the user grinded away, the article said based on days the game was played. Meaning a game like FF7R, Fall Guys, Among Us, Persona 5, etc all would've been PS+ games that would've greatly benefitted from a deal like this.

Engagement is surely a vital metric for all sub services across every industry. I don't really see this as the death of game development like the kneejerk reactions in here.

You can still buy games. Devs still get paid upfront to add them or negotiate their own deal out. This is only applicable to the freebie Stadia Pro games users claim every month as an addition to the upfront payout. It's Google giving more money out if your game was a successful game that drove Pro subs and user retention.

If your game sucks it won't be getting a lot of kickback because people will drop it.

 

[Budi]

Releasing a shitty game doesn't drive engagement. So I'm not too worried. Atleast personally I'm much more likely to come back on a good game on the next day too.

I'd assume this model is mostly preferred by devs making multiplayer games.

 

[ToddBonzalez]

Yeah this is shit. Really, really hope no platform that people actually care about adopts this model.

 

[Crayon]

There is no way the change in business model won't effect game design in the long term. It doesn't neccessarily have to be bad, but it could be.

Edit: I don't mean just pay-for-engagement. I mean sub services in general.

 

[Concrete1337]

So games being padded out is subscription services faults now?

They are padding games now and have been since people stopped buying 8 hour single player games back in the 360/ps3 era. AC games ballooned to 60 hours, Sony's cinematic games became 30+ hour open worlds, multiplayer got bolted on to all sorts of games. People stopped buying 8 hour games cause they weren't worth 90 bucks to them.

I miss shorter experiences but it's not a subscription services fault. Heck we know obsidian has small projects on the go, same with MS's other new studios. I'd say gamepass is making those more worth while.

 

[Zyae]

This isn't just a Google thing. Its the end game for any subscription service. They all want to pay by usage model, I don't know why folks think other gaming streaming services (or any streaming service) would be different.



I don't know why folks think this wouldn't come to Gamepass. You've had stuff like this interview with Phil last year where he says he hope they get there. Obviously push back from the folks making games means they can't... not yet anyway.

Click to shrink...

you're really misquoting him here. He said that developers have asked them about a pay per use model and he hopes that he can get there for those specific requests.

 

[Mechaplum]

Google needs to go the fuck away.

 

[Deleted member 17184]

Ye ah, I can't support this system at all. Short games are some of my favorites.

 

[4859]

Oh. We're arriving at what I immediately saw the moment horse armor hit the market.

Neat.

 

[PeakPointMatrix]

Thank god Stadia is a dead platform.

 

[Yoshimitsu126]

Ironically, souls games benefit from this.

 

[Onlywantsapples]

An ecosystem that offers different ways for companies to succeed is a healthy ecosystem. I don't think this industry will fall in this bleak future that many fear.
We have far healthier critics culture, business models, variety of content, and customer choice, than the music and movies industries ever did.

While physical media will go away, digital and purchasing of games will remain. As an industry it costs us nothing to offer these next to subscriptions, and customer choice is such an important thing for our industry, that I don't ever see going away.

Tastes and critical reception is also so varied and volatile, that taking insane risks to create games that are successful only based on engagement is not something that most companies will be comfortable with. You see this in mobile gaming, companies either hit it big or they crash and burn like there is no tomorrow. But mobile games have far lower risk and investment compared to big and massive AAA titles. Such an unhealthy business model is not what this core industry has been built on, one that is a bit slow to change anyways.

Just my personal thoughts on this.

Click to shrink...

this is a really good post, and kinda where I feel like things are going.

Since people seem to be using this, to take shots at Gamepass, what I'll say, is personally, despite being a gamepass subscriber, I've still bought quite a number of games, and there are at least 2-3 I want to buy later this year.

I think the retail purchasing model, being as flexible as it is and being able to stand right alongside the gaming subscriptions is a strength moving forward, which is also why I don't find the comparisons to Netflix as a really good comparison, because the comparison ends at "oh I just pay a small monthly fee and I get a bunch of games."

 

[Deleted member 79451]

The mobile space games market is already ruined, like completely worthless, due to timers and paying to skip timers. This will only make it that much worse, in literally the same way.

This stuff directly ruins gameplay. I say anything that is objectively bad, is objectively bad. And this cannot be rationally argued to be good in any way.

Not a healthy ecosystem, but a corrupted / ruined one.

 

[Deleted member 1698]

People stopped buying 8 hour games cause they weren't worth 90 bucks to them.

Click to shrink...

I'll suggest this is false. People never stopped buying quality short games. What actually happened was:

1) Developers stopped making quality games
2) More people purchased the shit games

Which is incidentally why this is a complete non-issue. The industry already runs on engagement figures for padded out games that have no respect for your time. And this is what the target audience seems to want to spend money on.

So business as usual for the majority, while the gamers who like shorter or more creative experiences feed off the few scraps you can still find like it is still 1992.

 

[thisismadness]

Its shitty, but I'm not sure its too different than incentives that already exist. The market already heavily encourages+rewards GAAS singleplayer and multiplayer games.

 

[Lord Azrael]

Companies need to reject Google vehemently and show them that this is unacceptable, the power is in their hands

 

[Kahhhhyle]

Ok so I get that this is bad news bears for smaller shorter games...

But like we're talking about a subscription model here. Does it totally make sense to prioritize the stuff that will keep people subbed? I don't think it's a coincidence that Ubisoft is hitting up all of these subscription services. Their games make perfect sense for it. It makes sense that one of the first Stadia Pro games was Destiny. A game that rewards check in's.

I'm not even saying I like it. More just like doesn't it make complete sense to do it this way? Why wouldn't they?

 

[Shogun]

First Objective: get a sword!
- find steel for sword
-find leather for sword
-find wood for handle
-convince blacksmith to make sword
-run errand for blacksmith
-pick up groceries for blacksmith wife
-tutor blacksmith son
-find blacksmith hammer needed to make sword
-take blacksmith daughter to school
-get blacksmith horse detailed

Main Mission: find map in cave
-find paper
-find stencils
-find ink
- find a map maker
-convince map maker to make you a map
-get map maker buggy detailed
-make map maker lunch
-massage map makers feet…

Yea, I see how this is going.

Click to shrink...

Yet people fucking love Genshin Impact.

 

[Syriel]

Get Google the fuck out of gaming. What is this absolutely horrendous dogshit idea?!

Click to shrink...

Wow, yeah, holy shit this is bad. If this catches on then goodbye any game that is not as artificially inflated as Assassin's Creed is

Click to shrink...

Classic Rare is excited.

 

[samred]

I would advise that people not sound the alarm bells on Stadia's move here, if only because these schemes have come and gone without blowing up the marketplace. Consider the last time someone tried this:

Amazon’s new games and apps store: Free for users, 12¢ an hour for devs

Amazon Underground games must be downloaded on new, bloated, Android-only app.

arstechnica.com

...and it didn't even last two years, all within a system that dumped cash onto participating devs.

You have a few months to claim Amazon Underground’s best free games

Amazon will not continue paying participating game and app developers in perpetuity.

arstechnica.com

 

[Rappy]

Currently it is bonus on top of standard deals but that still incentivize devs to make longer bloated games.

Click to shrink...

Why not include this in the OP?

But yeah, I'm in the camp of people just won't engage with it then. Just like they currently don't engage with Stadia.

 

[Deleted member 3190]

I'm not saying this won't change how some people make games I don't see how this is as terrible as everyone is making it out to be. Subscription MMOs, micro transaction riddled games, F2P, etc. have been around for years now and devs are still making single player games with none of that. This is going to be a new way for devs to monetize but it won't be the only way.

 

[jman1954goat]

Such a move would basically change game design in the same way like Spotify changed the way music is composed. No long intros or build-ups, just show the best parts of the game / song immediately to garner and hold the short-term attention and either repeat those good parts unnecessarily long for a bigger payout or immediately cut the content after showing it once and make the game as short as possible to get paid for the next one.

Click to shrink...

How has spotify changed songs?

I'm not a music expert I dont listen to songs very often so I'm not in the know.

 

[what am i even looking at]

If I do that trick with the rubber band like in the first Ratchet and Clank, does that count? Like, can I mess with the data enough for Google to fund Journey 2: Origins?

 

[mcruz79]

First Objective: get a sword!
- find steel for sword
-find leather for sword
-find wood for handle
-convince blacksmith to make sword
-run errand for blacksmith
-pick up groceries for blacksmith wife
-tutor blacksmith son
-find blacksmith hammer needed to make sword
-take blacksmith daughter to school
-get blacksmith horse detailed

Main Mission: find map in cave
-find paper
-find stencils
-find ink
- find a map maker
-convince map maker to make you a map
-get map maker buggy detailed
-make map maker lunch
-massage map makers feet…

Yea, I see how this is going.

Click to shrink...

Leaked documents for the next assassins creed game?

 

[BlastProcessing]

I would advise that people not sound the alarm bells on Stadia's move here, if only because these schemes have come and gone without blowing up the marketplace. Consider the last time someone tried this:

Amazon’s new games and apps store: Free for users, 12¢ an hour for devs

Amazon Underground games must be downloaded on new, bloated, Android-only app.

arstechnica.com

...and it didn't even last two years, all within a system that dumped cash onto participating devs.

You have a few months to claim Amazon Underground’s best free games

Amazon will not continue paying participating game and app developers in perpetuity.

arstechnica.com

Click to shrink...

This seems like even more of a reason for people to sound alarm bells, honestly.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

GAAS was the beginning of a slide to mediocrity for most of the big players. This will continue that trend and even sadly rope in smaller devs who were more willing to take creative risks.

 

[Sparkedglory2]

Pay by playtime? Ewwwww no thanks. That would screw over single player games

 

[NLCPRESIDENT]

Yet people fucking love Genshin Impact.

Click to shrink...

is that how that game is?

Leaked documents for the next assassins creed game?

Click to shrink...

Yea, I need to get verified tho

 

[jotun?]

Brb gonna go make a Stadia idle game

 

[Japanmanx3]

Slippery slope. Subsidizing the streams by seeing what most popular is another tier of griminess. Imagine Fortnite on Stadia being mad popular so it gets the most promo and love and server support while indie exhibit #256783 only has 5 players. Net Neutrality for games smh...

 

[mcruz79]

is that how that game is?

Yea, I need to get verified tho

Click to shrink...

😂😂

 

[newtonlod]

It's bizarre how all videogame novelties since, like, 2007 it's for the worse consumer-wise. If not at the start, eventually it will be. Game Pass? A great thing. But OF COURSE it will evolve to this with someone. If not MS, any other big tech company.


Being mostly a retro gamer I feel like I dodge a bullet at least every month. The videogame industry sucks. Capitalism sucks.
Long live emulators and retro gaming. You know, it was when videogames had a clear start and end and you didn't need to wait for years with updates and expansion packs and being hostage to shitty market practices.

 

[Messofanego]

Players controlling developers' finances, oh boy this has to be stopped. If this somehow went through, it would be the death of narrative games on subscription services.

 

[Son of Sparda]

This was always the end game goal for all subscription based services, and sooner or later, it'll become the norm.

 

[headspawn]

How has spotify changed songs?

I'm not a music expert I dont listen to songs very often so I'm not in the know.

Click to shrink...

Sounds like he's just describing pop music which has trended that way ever since radio edits and music videos... still tons of music out there being made that doesn't fall in line with that though.

 

[Stopdoor]

This is how arcades worked for decades and we got a ton of great games out of that so I dont buy that this is bad creatively for games.

Click to shrink...

I mean, it did kind of stifle things when you think of all the common tropes of arcade games, lives, continues, crazy difficulty curves. Certain types of games just couldn't exist in arcades. It had a strong influence on the games being made on home consoles for a long while as well. Similar to an Arcade game, it's not like you can't have a good GaaS game - but it is a dark cloud over the industry, you can't ignore it.

 

[Jonathan Lanza]

This is how arcades worked for decades and we got a ton of great games out of that so I dont buy that this is bad creatively for games.

Click to shrink...

Arcade games were designed to be short enough for you to play on a normal outing. If a game was too long people would know and wouldn't bother with it.

 

[nihilence]

I think this made the rounds a year ago with Apple.

Apple is reportedly canceling some Arcade contracts to focus on ‘engagement’

It’s trying to keep subscribers and lure new ones

www.theverge.com

 

[Hexa]

The transition to pay per page for Kindle Unlimited made it far worse with a lot of writers padding out their writing with nonsense that says nothing trying to make them as long as possible. Thankfully, Stadia isn't nearly as entrenched as Kindle Unlimited was with indie authors so it won't have nearly as much of an effect. Microsoft going this route with game pass is much more worrying, especially if it comes after major growth in game pass, because then developers, especially indie developers, definitely will change how they develop games in order to accommodate that.

 

[NLCPRESIDENT]

😂😂

Click to shrink...

Lol

 

[dex3108]

I'm not saying this won't change how some people make games I don't see how this is as terrible as everyone is making it out to be. Subscription MMOs, micro transaction riddled games, F2P, etc. have been around for years now and devs are still making single player games with none of that. This is going to be a new way for devs to monetize but it won't be the only way.

Click to shrink...

Just don't tell me that you didn't notice how some publishers changed games design to accommodate MTX and trap players for longer. Ubisoft is prime example. No more Rayman, Child of Light, or any smaller more linear products. Everything they make today is huge ass open world filled with bloat and MTX. And now they will even go for more F2P games.

 

[Sems4arsenal]

This is inevitable. People saying Microsoft/Sony would never will be eating some crow within a few years.

 

[oni-link]

If they make longer games, then I'd simply buy the games outright, as a one off fee will be cheaper over the long run than playing a 100 hour game over a year at £10.99 a month. In addition, buying it means I get to keep it rather than just renting it.

If the game can't be bought outright, then I simply won't play it at all,. There is too much choice around to have to deal with that

I have GPU but I don't play anything on there that would take more more than 20 hours to beat, because at that point I'd be better off just getting the game when it's £15 on sale.

It's funny though, people said GP will result in shorter or episodic games, whereas this strategy would imply longer games would be better, so really it could go either way. I am mildly concerned, but I don't think we're see anything that changes things too drastically

A final point would be, to those worried this will see game lengths expanded and content made repetitive and overblown, look at the average playtime of a AAA game from 2008-2012 and compare it with the average playtime of a AAA game from 2017 - 2021

I recently beat the Ezio collection, and all 3 games combined took me about 55 hours, whereas both Origins and Odyssey each took almost double that. Longer games has been a trend for a while

 

[Axel Stone]

If Gamepass gets big enough that devs depend on it, there is a valid concern that MS will adapt policies that are detrimental to certain game styles.

Click to shrink...

How are devs ever going to be in a situation where they're relying on revenue from a service that they have no guarantee they'll ever be on?