Apple Reportedly Considering Gaming Subscription Service

[cmaier]

The smart move by AAPL would be to move Games to their own, Dedicated App Store !

Been sending emails to Cook for a few years now to do just that !

Why?

 

[warp9]

Mobile games have been garbage for a long time because developers have been forced into advertising and gambling tricks. Nobody was willing to pay up front, so the games got worse and then there really wasn't anything worth paying for.

No one has come up with a solution until now and I think this could really work. The sweat factory game developers won't be happy about it, but they've been a black mark on gaming for too long and need to be shut down. In their place will rise developers who finally have a chance to make something fun and creative again-- and get paid for it.

 

[rockarollr]

Huh???

It’s okay. Go back to sleep. Not everybody will get it.

 

[smulji]

There's a lot of FUD in these comments so here's some clarity*.

- The subscription is for app store games and is designed to be like Spotify. Rather than publishing directly on the store, developers games are included in the subscription and they get paid per minute played. All ads and in-app purchases become obsolete and new business models emerge, like gameplay that doesn't depend on tricking players into buying more smurfberries.

This subscription service finally spells the end of dishonest garbage mobile games and we should be thrilled that this is happening.


*I'm not an Apple insider. This info is based on strategies currently been considered elsewhere.

well said

 

[ipponrg]

Mobile games have been garbage for a long time because developers have been forced into advertising and gambling tricks. Nobody was willing to pay up front, so the games got worse and then there really wasn't anything worth paying for.

No one has come up with a solution until now and I think this could really work. The sweat factory game developers won't be happy about it, but they've been a black mark on gaming for too long and need to be shut down. In their place will rise developers who finally have a chance to make something fun and creative again-- and get paid for it.

Pay to win or freemium games are where it's at. One of the reason Supercell does so well.

I don't think a gaming subscription service will work. The games that suck will still suck. The good games will still be free or relatively low cost to purchase.

 

[apolloa]

Oh dear this is sad, I can’t thinknof a worst company to offer a service oike this then Apple, the company who happily shoves freemium titles down your throat for it’s 30% cut, meanwhile those games are data mining the hell out of you and selling it on...

And as their are no big AAA games on iOS it’ll not have many good titles to offer either.

I’ll stick to the old model of actually paying one price for my games thanks. And I don’t care if they can’t make as much profit from that model... greedy gits.

This Apple service is nothing more then the freemium IAP model dresses up as something else... so the games could be utter rubbish but you still pay for them.

 

[warp9]

I don't think a gaming subscription service will work. The games that suck will still suck. The good games will still be free or relatively low cost to purchase.

The definition of a subscription is that all games are included in the price. You don't pay for individual games anymore.

Games that suck will still be there but nobody will play them and they won't last long. Good games will also be included and will make decent money. They won't have ads or in-app purchases anymore and can focus on pure gameplay, just like how it used to be.

Oh dear this is sad, I can’t thinknof a worst company to offer a service oike this then Apple, the company who happily shoves freemium titles down your throat for it’s 30% cut...

This is exactly why Apple is doing this. A subscription service flushes out freemium junk and levels out revenue cycles. They will still be taking their 30% (actually, 15% under sub rules).

And as their are no big AAA games on iOS it’ll not have many good titles to offer either.

There's no AAA games because no one will pay for them. Subscription changes that dynamic completely.

I’ll stick to the old model of actually paying one price for my games thanks.

What mobile games have you payed full price for, without iap, and were happy with what you got? More than one? You have to admit, your choices are slim and that needs to change.

This Apple service is nothing more then the freemium IAP model dresses up as something else... so the games could be utter rubbish but you still pay for them.

Rubbish games will last only as long as people play them. No players-- no profit-- no rubbish games.



I'm starting to sound like a broken record here, but the truth is-- a subscription service fixes everything that's wrong with mobile gaming. Ads are gone; in-app-purchases are gone; coins and timers are gone. Triple A can finally publish on mobile and not be worried about whether people will pay for it. Apple doesn't make any more or less than they did under the old model. The profit just shifts around.

As a game developer, I look forward to not worrying about how to monetize or how often ads should rotate, etc. Revenue would be a direct result of whether my game is any good or not.

 

[apolloa]

The definition of a subscription is that all games are included in the price. You don't pay for individual games anymore.

Games that suck will still be there but nobody will play them and they won't last long. Good games will also be included and will make decent money. They won't have ads or in-app purchases anymore and can focus on pure gameplay, just like how it used to be.


This is exactly why Apple is doing this. A subscription service flushes out freemium junk and levels out revenue cycles. They will still be taking their 30% (actually, 15% under sub rules).


There's no AAA games because no one will pay for them. Subscription changes that dynamic completely.


What mobile games have you payed full price for, without iap, and were happy with what you got? More than one? You have to admit, your choices are slim and that needs to change.


Rubbish games will last only as long as people play them. No players-- no profit-- no rubbish games.



I'm starting to sound like a broken record here, but the truth is-- a subscription service fixes everything that's wrong with mobile gaming. Ads are gone; in-app-purchases are gone; coins and timers are gone. Triple A can finally publish on mobile and not be worried about whether people will pay for it. Apple doesn't make any more or less than they did under the old model. The profit just shifts around.

As a game developer, I look forward to not worrying about how to monetize or how often ads should rotate, etc. Revenue would be a direct result of whether my game is any good or not.

Your living in a dream world if you think I believe for one second you don’t make a game, and stuff it full of IAP and adds to generate your revenue.
And yeas, the last game I bought was actually GRID, and their are others. A few years ago full priced games was the ONLY business model.

The ONLY reason Apple are doing this is to push freemium IAP rubbish in a different way where they make more money, end off.
We have EA and Activision charging FULL RRO for big games AND stuffing them full of overpriced loot boxes and IAP rubbish.

It’s all purely driven by sheer greed.

You really are flogging a dead horse to me to claim a subscription service is designed to stop IAP. It’s nothing more then repainting it.

When EA charges you the likes of 70 UK Pounds so you can purchase enough gold for ONE in game car in Real Racing 3, then they are not going to allow that revenue stream to be limited by a ‘cheap’ subscription mode, it’ll cost you a fortune every month, or be incredibly limited on games included due to Apple wanting the majority of the profits.

 

[bokdol]

Well the Newton wasn't exactly product of the year either, but they did pretty OK with the iPad.

Not sure you can judge Apple's current endeavours against their past failures in the '90s. They cause a radical change to every market they enter.

newton was so much more advanced than the palm that it was competing with. it was amazing. pippen was trash.

 

[keysofanxiety]

newton was so much more advanced than the palm that it was competing with. it was amazing. pippen was trash.

Jobs said the Newton was trash – he was very much a product guy with a rare consumer eye. If it wasn't intuitive or easy to use, it doesn't matter how much more technologically advanced it was if it couldn't be usable.

Mandatory Simpsons GIF

 

[warp9]

Your living in a dream world if you think I believe for one second you don’t make a game, and stuff it full of IAP and adds to generate your revenue.

I literally said in my post that is what I do. I would prefer to charge $5 or whatever but nobody spends money on games that aren't brand names. GTA for mobile was $10 and even that was a tough sell for a lot of people.

The ONLY reason Apple are doing this is to push freemium IAP rubbish in a different way where they make more money, end off.

I don't understand this. Apple makes money on everything on the store, no matter how it's packaged. I don't see a subscription fee changing that very much.

You really are flogging a dead horse to claim a subscription service is designed to stop IAP.

That's the literal definition of a subscription service. No ads (not allowed) and no IAP (not allowed). Whether it actually works or not, we just have to wait and see.

When EA charges you the likes of 70 UK Pounds so you can purchase enough gold for ONE in game car in Real Racing 3, then they are not going to allow that revenue stream to be limited by a ‘cheap’ subscription mode

$70 cars cater to "whales" and less than 1% of people actually buy them. They are only there to pad the bottom line. You would be surprised how many companies would trade large unpredictable revenue for smaller guaranteed revenue. In fact, that's the ideal situation for shareholders. That's why Adobe stock went up 400% after switching to Creative Cloud, even though their profit actually went down.



You can yell GREED all you want but the state of mobile games is awful and nobody is doing anything about it. At least Apple is trying to find a solution and if they make more money doing it, I don't care.

 

[bokdol]

Jobs said the Newton was trash – he was very much a product guy with a rare consumer eye. If it wasn't intuitive or easy to use, it doesn't matter how much more technologically advanced it was if it couldn't be usable.

Mandatory Simpsons GIF

He actually likes the emate300 which the Newton became. the device brought you the iPad and iPhone,.

how was it unusable? it was just not popular.

best stylus of its time.

 

[apolloa]

I literally said in my post that is what I do. I would prefer to charge $5 or whatever but nobody spends money on games that aren't brand names. GTA for mobile was $10 and even that was a tough sell for a lot of people.

It was a tough sell because of all the 'free' stuff being promoted, even though they all had IAP's in them. If you really do charge one price for your full game then kudos to you.

I don't understand this. Apple makes money on everything on the store, no matter how it's packaged. I don't see a subscription fee changing that very much.

It makes 30%, who's to say with a subscription model it doesn't push that to 80%?

That's the literal definition of a subscription service. No ads (not allowed) and no IAP (not allowed). Whether it actually works or not, we just have to wait and see.

It's an in app purchase system by another means. Take this scenario, Fortnite is the biggest game at the moment, you play it 100% for free, you can 'choose' to buy things but they by no means help you win in the game. now imagine that is under Apple's subscription model only, all of a sudden to play Fortnite you have to pay a monthly fee and you get things you never cared about, the only difference with this model is your now having to pay for something that was free.

$70 cars cater to "whales" and less than 1% of people actually buy them. They are only there to pad the bottom line. You would be surprised how many companies would trade large unpredictable revenue for smaller guaranteed revenue. In fact, that's the ideal situation for shareholders. That's why Adobe stock went up 400% after switching to Creative Cloud, even though their profit actually went down.

You can yell GREED all you want but the state of mobile games is awful and nobody is doing anything about it. At least Apple is trying to find a solution and if they make more money doing it, I don't care.

Plenty of people buy IAP's because that's the only way to play the game in a lot of cases, the games are rigged to make you spend real money, endlessly, thats pure greed no matter how you twist it because it makes the studios masses more money.
Why the hell else do you think COD or Battlefield have loot crates? They can offer weapons etc, they are in the game to make more money then selling the game at high RRP does..
That again is greed. Apple does nothing then to maximise it's own profits, this subscription model is nothing more.

Now, Nintendo do not support IAP's on the Switch, you can buy DLC but that's all. And it's making plenty of money...

 

[0388631]

Games, TV, Music, Magazines, Cloud storage...

Price for all of this?

That's not the spirit! You need COURAGE!

 

[tipoo]

I'd rather they put some of that original TV money towards funding exclusive games that really take full advantage of their chips. I'm ehh on the subscription bundle, but would love, say, Apple TV 4K exclusives that really push that actively cooled A10X A10X, or an update of that with A12X.

And if Apple did start making games in house, they'd be as vertically integrated as any console maker! OS, API, CPU, GPU, game...