Gamehackery: What Does the Subscription Boom Mean to Gamers?

It's not a coincidence that the new microsoft office (Office 365) and the recently announced Adobe Creative Suite (including Photoshop) are being offered as subscriptions (rather than products). Everything is coming up subscriptions. You can subscribe to coffee, to tea, to cloud data services and to toilet paper. No, seriously. You can subscribe to toilet paper. So, it's no fluke that...

It's not a coincidence that the new microsoft office (Office 365) and the recently announced Adobe Creative Suite (including Photoshop) are being offered as subscriptions (rather than products).

Everything is coming up subscriptions. You can subscribe to coffee, to tea, to cloud data services and to toilet paper.

No, seriously. You can subscribe to toilet paper.

So, it's no fluke that DDI was a subscription service. Don't expect that to change. From a pure business point of view, the subscription model is the most important development in the gaming industry in the past ten years.

View attachment 57483

Smoothing Out the Boom and Bust

The big advantage of a subscription program is that it creates dependable revenue streams for the company. It may not be more than they would get selling products, but it's a lot easier to plan for and manage.

They may lose some subscribers, or gain some, each month, but even those changes will follow on fairly predictable trajectories.

It also means you have an ongoing relationship with that customer -- making it easier to continue to offer them additional products.

A Subscription is a Relationship

A purchase can be fairly anonymous. A fistful of lawnmower money may buy a players handbook, but it doesn't forge a connection between the purchaser and the company that produce the book.

A subscription, though.... that's a relationship. It builds a connection between company and customer that the company can use to offer additional products and services.

It's also a data mine that just won't quit. The company has your name, your address; they can build a history of your purchases and study what you're interested in. In the case of DDI, they're able to track what classes are being created, what rules are accessed in the DDI most often, and can get a pretty good idea of how many active games are going by studying the number of characters that are incrementally leveled up in a given month.

What Will We Subscribe For?

Assuming that we don't expect Charmin and Mountain Dew deliveries from our favorite game companies, what sort of things are gamers willing to pay an ongoing subscription for?

To date, the DDI has proven that we're willing to pay for digital tools. Character Builders, Online databases of game rules and data, etc.

Over at Paizo, though, is a towering demonstration of the power of good content to drive subscriptions. Paizo, by the way, will let you subscribe to just about anything they're producing -- including their monthly card decks (mostly item cards, with play support cards like chase decks and critical hit decks mixed in).

And that's not all. We've seen dungeon-a-day and adventure-a-week. New magazines are appearing. Subscribe to Obsidian Portal or one of the other campaign managers to track your game.


Fiddling with Knobs and Dials

So, the real alchemy that the brains behind the businesses we support is trying to strike the right balance of price and service for their subscription models.

For example, there's a limit to what we might be willing to pay to Wizards for DDI. From their point of view, any single individual's price point is not particularly interesting. They need to take a guess at what the numbers of their subscribers will be at each price point.

So, at the moment the price is $9.99. They've hit upon that price because they believe that more than half of the people who would pay $4.99 would also play $9.99, but less than half of those that would pay $9.99 are willing to pay 14.99.

Of course, they set that price during the 4e heyday, and now they're in the last trimester (we hope) of birthing their new version. But outside of the tabletop world, ideas about subscription services have changed. The Freemium/Free-to-Play model is becoming more and more expected across industries where a product's market position isn't so strong that there's no need for it.

"I want to Buy it, not Rent it"

Sure you do. And I don't blame you. But you're fighting a losing battle.

In typical subscription programs -- along the magazine model -- you get your content in the mail each month and it's yours to keep. But when we start looking at RPG Tools as a Service -- like DDI or Fantasy Grounds -- when your subscription ends you no longer have access to that data.

A subscription for a service offers so many benefits to the company (steady revenue, durable connections to customers, and awesome data) that it's critical for a company to propel you over those concerns. Maybe it's better price, or better services, or both. You can expect that companies with the necessary support structure to handle a subscription program of some sort to move in that direction.

What's more, as more and more products and services are available by subscription, fewer customers will balk at this sort of scheme. We will become used to subscribing to Microsoft Office, to Photoshop. It won't be unusual to have a subscription to underpants.

Other Models

Here are a couple of other example subscription services that make interesting models for potential RPG/Gaming services:

  • Bespoke Post - Once a month subscribers are offered a "Box of Awesome". Past boxes have included wine decanter kits, a himalayan salt block, and high-end shaving kits. Subscribers can opt out of a monthly box if you're not interested.
  • Freemium Services - like Dropbox or Evernote. Or Free-to-play games. (next week's column will look at micro transactions, so stay tuned)
  • Quarterly - A wide variety of quarterly subscritions to themed boxes of odds and ends curated by interesting folks like Veronika Belmont (Tekzilla, The Sword and Laser)

You've Got Mail

So, you tell me -- what's important for you in a service you'll subscribe to? Are you more interested in tools or content? What subscriptions do you maintain at the moment (besides your EN World subscription, right?)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hussar

Legend
Wings said:
Among the many reasons I had nothing to do with 4e was that WotC made it clear that to play it, you were expected to have a subscription to DDI to play.

I'd just like to point out that this is completely untrue. There is absolutely no requirement to have a DDI sub. Sure, they want you to, of course. But, this meme that has persistently circulated that you need a DDI sub to play 4e is completely baseless.

If you can play 3e without online tools, you certainly can play 4e which is a considerably simpler system.

But, I wonder if this is an issue with subs. Detractors point to any sub program of a company they don't like and then use that as a stump point in ongoing edition wars. "Oh, you don't want to play THAT game, you need a sub to play". It's one of those things that sounds like it could be true and people often don't bother to actually do any fact checking before buying into it, particularly if it happens to confirm their own biases.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Radiating Gnome

Adventurer
I wonder if this is an issue with subs. Detractors point to any sub program of a company they don't like and then use that as a stump point in ongoing edition wars. "Oh, you don't want to play THAT game, you need a sub to play". It's one of those things that sounds like it could be true and people often don't bother to actually do any fact checking before buying into it, particularly if it happens to confirm their own biases.

I think that's right on the nose. People see a subscription for a game that they don't like and they see it as a sign that the company is just out to screw people. People who enjoy the game (by and large) can see the value offered by the subscription and are happy to pay it.

Obviously a lot of the conversation about topics like theses focuses on D&D and it's permutations, but my hope has been to try to make the conversation mostly philosophical and generic -- assume an imaginary game that you enjoy, and a subscription service of some sort that you value. What might it look like?

-rg
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
There is absolutely no requirement to have a DDI sub.
FWIW I would never make that case. Of course, playing off the books alone is entirely possible. Somewhat disincentivized due to the spreading out of "core" material over more books and rampant early errata, but hardly impossible.

I would, however, make the case that putting the rules compendium under that subscription makes it much harder to learn about that system and increases the propensity of misconceptions about it. It also makes people who aren't part of that subscription feel like "outsiders", so to speak. It has had a polarizing effect.

And again, the reason this is such a big issue is because the main competitor(s) have the same stuff online for free, and fans are happy to make tools for free.

If you can play 3e without online tools, you certainly can play 4e which is a considerably simpler system.
You can, and, wait, what? ... Oh never mind.
 

tomBitonti

Adventurer
This sort of blanket assertion really gets me frustrated. I'm not saying that subscriptions are never bad for the buyer; I just don't think that they must be.

... text omitted ...

A content subscription -- like the adventure paths that Paizo and En World offer -- I also see value in those for the consumer.

... text omitted ...

-rg

I'm thinking the intent of "subscriptions are good for the seller and bad for the buyer" was intended as a "bad, in an overall average sense, to buyers". Certainly individuals can find value in subscriptions.

Subscriptions seem to definitely remove choice, while offering convenience, and while changing a price point, possibly lower, and possibly higher.

Also, there seem to be different sorts of subscriptions: A subscription to an online database (e.g., DDI) seems to be to be a rather different product than a periodical subscription. The main difference seems to be that a buyer can usually decline a periodical subscription, buying issues one off as desired, and moving to a subscription purchase only when they find themselves buying issues often enough that a subscription is a better (cheaper and more convenient) deal. Online subscription practices seem to take away these options.

Thx!

TomB
 

tomBitonti

Adventurer
I'd just like to point out that this is completely untrue. There is absolutely no requirement to have a DDI sub. Sure, they want you to, of course. But, this meme that has persistently circulated that you need a DDI sub to play 4e is completely baseless.

If you can play 3e without online tools, you certainly can play 4e which is a considerably simpler system.

But, I wonder if this is an issue with subs. Detractors point to any sub program of a company they don't like and then use that as a stump point in ongoing edition wars. "Oh, you don't want to play THAT game, you need a sub to play". It's one of those things that sounds like it could be true and people often don't bother to actually do any fact checking before buying into it, particularly if it happens to confirm their own biases.

Wait ... the initial statement was "you were expected to have a subscription to DDI to play". (Bold added by me.) There is a big difference between an expectation and a requirement. The expectation seems to provide information about the sellers intent, and does seem to have an impact on what the seller makes convenient (or not).

Thx!

TomB
 

tomBitonti

Adventurer
There does seem to be an opinion that the OGL was a marketing ploy that didn't pan out the way WotC and later Hasbro intended, as far as their profit margin is concerned, and ultimately that is what Hasbro cares about. If they can charge for products and services then they will and its up to us to decide whether or not to pay for them.

Additional text omitted.

I'd say that a particular opinion, not a factual one. I could equally assert that OGL frightened some folks at WotC, and those folks eventually had the upper hand in managing the game. Or, that certain folks were so dis-enamored with the business model that they spent the whole of 4E chewing off their arm to get themselves out of the trap they felt the model to be. YMMV. It's opinion, since we've never had a chance to review internal emails or do detailed psychological profiles of the decision makers.

Thx!

TomB
 

Mike Eagling

Explorer
I'd say that a particular opinion, not a factual one.

I completely agree, indeed I essentially said it was an opinion!

The view of the OGL I put forward there was based on a bunch of websites I'd read and certainly wasn't intended to be authoritative. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

delericho

Legend
Wait ... the initial statement was "you were expected to have a subscription to DDI to play". (Bold added by me.) There is a big difference between an expectation and a requirement.

IIRC, at the presentation where 4e was first announced, someone (possibly Chris Perkins) likened the digital offering (what was to become DDI) to "the fourth core rulebook". Of course, it's possible I'm imagining that, or it was the Rouse on this site, or something. Certainly, though, WotC would have very much liked to have all 4e players be DDI subscribers (and, of course, would very much have liked to have a fully-featured DDI available on launch day).

Fortunately, though, they had the good sense to make it a nice-to-have - that while those tools were very nice and extremely useful (to the extent that I won't play 4e without access to the Character Builder), they were never actually necessary. (And, indeed, based on WotC's estimates of player numbers (~1 million), and our best guess of DDI subscribers (~80k), it seems that the subscribers are actually a fairly small minority amongst 4e players. Though there could be a mass of 'unknown' subscribers on there, or a massive amount of sharing of accounts.)
 

delericho

Legend
And again, the reason this is such a big issue is because the main competitor(s) have the same stuff online for free...

It's probably worth noting that the core of Paizo's business is not the rules but rather the Adventure Path product... and specifically subscriptions to the Adventure Path product. It makes absolute sense for them to put the rules online for free, because that reduces the entry requirements for using the thing that they actually want to sell you.

But if every Paizo subscriber cancelled their subscription and instead bought each monthly volume via the online store, that would probably kill Paizo stone dead, even if they bought exactly the same products. Because a subscription means an (almost) guaranteed sale, and with enough of those they can be sure they'll sell enough copies to pay for the print run. But an ad-hoc buying pattern, even with the same overall sales, is a much riskier proposition.

WotC's business model appears to be built around two things: sales of Core Rulebooks (specifically PHB1) and subscriptions to DDI, with the former becoming less important with time and the latter moreso. Under that model, it doesn't make sense to make the rules freely available online - doing so would directly reduce book sales, and would also make it possible for people to create tools every bit as good as those in DDI, reducing subscriptions. Now, if WotC could find a way to reverse the appeal of DDI, so people are primarily interested in the e-mags and get the Compendium and tools as an added extra, then that reverses the calculation. But assuming they can't, and that most people subscribe for the tools and get the magazines as an added bonus, the rules have to stay paywalled.
 

Ahnehnois

First Post
It's probably worth noting that the core of Paizo's business is not the rules but rather the Adventure Path product... and specifically subscriptions to the Adventure Path product. It makes absolute sense for them to put the rules online for free, because that reduces the entry requirements for using the thing that they actually want to sell you.
That may be. This would go back to my earlier point about how the group of people who financially support the company is a small and distinct subset of the people who actually play the game.

In a larger sense, this business model could be stated as "For every 100 people that use our free rules, 10 of of them will buy the rulebooks, and 1 will voluntarily become an adventure path subscriber. If we sell those people a high enough volume at a high enough margin, their business can support us in making new general interest products that we can release for free and sell in hardback to attract the next 100." Not to mention that the existing ruleset continues to attract players regardless of whether the company does anything at all. Establishing the SRD is essentially a one-time cost, but it keeps attracting people over time, some of whom will eventually become high-volume customers. That's the free-to play model. It works for Paizo because they are indeed able to get a ton of money from that group of subscribers by keeping them happy.

So I wouldn't say that the rules are tangential at all. They're the thing that attracts people in the first place, even if they're not the direct source of income for the company.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top