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 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?)

 

[Radiating Gnome]

And that's why I view the end of the article as a bait-and-switch: it takes the advantages of the subscription model (steady income and strong customer connections) and shoehorns them into arguments in favor of subscription services, which are in actuality only a very specific type of subscription. And then ends asking the audience what it would take to get them to swallow the bitter pill of purchasing a fairly tangible product on a service basis.

That may be a fair assessment of my arguments -- I'm not sure i got to quite such a clear point.

I think, though, that because in our industry at this point, I'm having a hard time thinking of a subscription product that is entirely service, not either a content subscription (Like an Adventure Path) or a content+service subscription (like DDI), that when we're talking about service+content subscriptions it's not unfair to blend in the advantages of content subscriptions. A big component of the DDI subscription is content -- and while it's not always as high quality as a monthly Paizo AP product, it's also not as expensive (and comes bundled with the online tools).

I'm trying to think... if there are any subscription services for gamer stuff that are all service without content, and the only examples I can come up with are the VTT options like Fantasy Grounds and Roll20.

Personally, my answer to this question is going to be pretty simple: I won't ever be interested in purchasing a tabletop rpg on a service basis, thank you very much, but I can think of plenty of honest-to-goodness services that would add value to my game table. Things like adventure and setting content, organized play, and improved networking tools to help meet more gamers interested in my style of game will always be worth paying for--at least in my book. Additionally, I currently pay 10 bucks a month to roll20, since I live out in the boonies and I'm happy to support the product that pretty much single-handledly enables my pursuit of this hobby. I strongly prefer to buy this service in a system-agnostic format, though.

There's some interesting attitudes to unpack there. You want content, organized play, and networking tools -- and VTT tools. That's actually a pretty robust set of wants that could (and are) be offered as services. But you prefer having relationships with multiple smaller companies rather than getting all of those from a single source.

Now think about a video game service like Steam. It's an online store/community hug/multi play organizing hub for video games. Would you be interested in a Tabletop RPG version of that? What would have to be different?

I mean -- the point I wanted to get with the article was not to ask you what it would take to get you to swallow a bitter pill -- but what you would LIKE in a service like this. Imagine the service (or services) that could make this good for you. And maybe the company that produces it isn't the game company -- maybe what we're talking about is an evolution of the RPGNow PDF store -- one that adds community, organized play, and good VTT options for every game system they sell. Is that something worth subscribing to?

-rg

 

[Nytmare]

There is a natural price control mechanism -- others can build competing products.

If it were a thriving industry, like the car industry let's pretend, then yes. If the car companies got together and announced that they were no longer going to be selling cars, just manufacturing and renting, there would be about 15 minutes of rioting and murders, and then a new car company who wanted to sell cars would pop into existence.

But do you think that an industry, or more to the point a market, that's as weak and strangled as the RPG market currently is, has the strength to support enough competition for things to get healthy?

 

[Nagol]

If it were a thriving industry, like the car industry let's pretend, then yes. If the car companies got together and announced that they were no longer going to be selling cars, just manufacturing and renting, there would be about 15 minutes of rioting and murders, and then a new car company who wanted to sell cars would pop into existence.

But do you think that an industry, or more to the point a market, that's as weak and strangled as the RPG market currently is, has the strength to support enough competition for things to get healthy?

By having the competition not be profit-minded. If you look a the industry, a lot of the product in the tertiary tier is made as a hobby. Any revenue generated is a sweet bonus. Hobby development has started to climb into the secondary tier as well. It's following much the same path as writing -- a base of people willing to provide it for free limits prices for those who try to make a living at it.

 

[dd.stevenson]

That may be a fair assessment of my arguments -- I'm not sure i got to quite such a clear point.

You might not personally be at such a clear point, but the article is clearly worded. "Want to buy rather than rent? You're fighting a losing battle," it proclaims. Why is it a losing battle? "Because of steady revenue, durable connections to customers, and awesome data." In light of this, what's a constructive market participant to do? "Tell me what you want in a subscription service."

I think, though, that because in our industry at this point, I'm having a hard time thinking of a subscription product that is entirely service, not either a content subscription (Like an Adventure Path) or a content+service subscription (like DDI), that when we're talking about service+content subscriptions it's not unfair to blend in the advantages of content subscriptions. A big component of the DDI subscription is content -- and while it's not always as high quality as a monthly Paizo AP product, it's also not as expensive (and comes bundled with the online tools).

I'm trying to think... if there are any subscription services for gamer stuff that are all service without content, and the only examples I can come up with are the VTT options like Fantasy Grounds and Roll20.

I've seen a few fly by night 3.x npc builders that are service subscription based: but, yeah, I would agree that the TTRPG industry hasn't yet proven fertile ground for servicizing (MMOs excepted; and even these thrive on content delivery).

There's some interesting attitudes to unpack there. You want content, organized play, and networking tools -- and VTT tools. That's actually a pretty robust set of wants that could (and are) be offered as services. But you prefer having relationships with multiple smaller companies rather than getting all of those from a single source.

Not so. I would much rather buy these services from a single source. However, at the moment I'm not keen on 3E or 4E D&D. So I'm sort of stuck fending for myself, for the time being.

Now think about a video game service like Steam. It's an online store/community hug/multi play organizing hub for video games. Would you be interested in a Tabletop RPG version of that? What would have to be different?

No problem here: this is something I think about every time I log onto Steam. And every time I think about it, I'm left feeling that the Steam format would be hard-pressed to add great value to my TTRPG experience. The problem is that Steam is a storefront first, and an everything else third. Whereas I would want my TTRPGSTEAM product to be a community/gamefinder first, a free content aggregator second, a VTT third, and a storefront--well, a storefront not at all.

Why? I can't quite put my finger on it, to be honest, but there's something about sitting down to prep for a TTRPG that makes me not want to be marketed to. It's as if the creative or the escapist mindset is not compatible with the consumer mindset, if that makes any sense.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

voNo problem here: this is something I think about every time I log onto Steam. And every time I think about it, I'm left feeling that the Steam format would be hard-pressed to add great value to my TTRPG experience. The problem is that Steam is a storefront first, and an everything else third. Whereas I would want my TTRPGSTEAM product to be a community/gamefinder first, a free content aggregator second, a VTT third, and a storefront--well, a storefront not at all.

Why? I can't quite put my finger on it, to be honest, but there's something about sitting down to prep for a TTRPG that makes me not want to be marketed to. It's as if the creative or the escapist mindset is not compatible with the consumer mindset, if that makes any sense.

I like to think that these sorts of conversations -- imaginative conversations about what might be -- can be very constructive in a couple of ways. There's obviously no need to change the way we do anything, from our point of view as individual gamers. But the way products and services are offered to us will change -- maybe quickly, maybe slowly, but inevitably.

By having conversations out ahead of the change, we may be able to frame and inform the conversations about those changes. Not that I have any special access to anyone, but I have to believe that if we have a constructive enough conversation -- or conversations -- people will notice and listen.

Also, I think it doesn't hurt us as consumers to prepare for the changes in the market by thinking about what we might see. In this case, if we understand that these game companies, which tend to be anemic business propositions, and are facing dwindling audiences, etc -- if we understand that those organizations need to find better ways to do business for their own survival -- and we see a value in their ongoing survival -- we might find a way within ourselves to support those changes, rather than gnash our collective teeth every time someone changes something.

Too often, I think, members of the gamer audience see themselves in a sort of adversarial relationship with the game companies. We imagine that they're out to screw us over, just desperate to take our money. It's easy to forget that each one of those game designers is someone who loves the game and their primary goal is to make the best game they can. We're all on the same team.

So, anyway, that's what I'm trying to explore -- what I think might be coming, what might be interesting within that trajectory, etc.

-rg

 

[Nytmare]

Also, I think it doesn't hurt us as consumers to prepare for the changes in the market by thinking about what we might see. In this case, if we understand that these game companies, which tend to be anemic business propositions, and are facing dwindling audiences, etc -- if we understand that those organizations need to find better ways to do business for their own survival -- and we see a value in their ongoing survival -- we might find a way within ourselves to support those changes, rather than gnash our collective teeth every time someone changes something.

The designers aren't the ones making the decisions as to how the games are sold though, are they?

I know that a lot of this is very much a product of me being a child of the 80s, but in business, I'm big on the onus being on the company to concede to what is best for as many customers as possible so that they can show enough profit so that everyone gets paid and that they can start/fund the next project. Not for the customers to grin and bear it when the company makes decisions that appear to be based solely off of keeping just enough of their customer base happy so that they can make as much money as possible.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

...I'm big on the onus being on the company to concede to what is best for as many customers as possible so that they can show enough profit so that everyone gets paid and that they can start/fund the next project. Not for the customers to grin and bear it when the company makes decisions that appear to be based solely off of keeping just enough of their customer base happy so that they can make as much money as possible.

I hear you, but there are decent odds that you might be one of the minority of customers whose tastes and preferences are not satisfied by new methods. That doesn't mean they're making bad business decisions.

That's especially true if you're someone for whom one of the best features of the hobby is that it can be inexpensive. If you're not planning to spend money on the game, the companies producing the game would be making very bad business decisions if they were trying to make you happy. They need to pick a strategy that will give them a good, sustainable business, and (perhaps unfortunately) that means getting people to spend money. Especially for the bigger companies who have people's livelihoods dependent upon that revenue.


-rg

 

[Mike Eagling]

That's especially true if you're someone for whom one of the best features of the hobby is that it can be inexpensive. If you're not planning to spend money on the game, the companies producing the game would be making very bad business decisions if they were trying to make you happy. They need to pick a strategy that will give them a good, sustainable business, and (perhaps unfortunately) that means getting people to spend money. Especially for the bigger companies who have people's livelihoods dependent upon that revenue.

I think this is one of the reasons why the RPG industry is forever described as being in a state of decline. Buying a rulebook is really all that is necessary to play the game. The idea of homebrewing everything else is almost an inherent part of the hobby. It therefore doesn't surprise me that Hasbro, for example, has put their supporting content behind a pay wall.

 

[Nytmare]

I hear you, but there are decent odds that you might be one of the minority of customers whose tastes and preferences are not satisfied by new methods. That doesn't mean they're making bad business decisions.

That's what I mean though. "Prefer to buy and refuse to rent" is definitely a minority, but do you think that there's any chance of them losing even one customer who prefers to rent and refuses to buy, especially when the price is practically the same?

My personal (albeit unprofessional) business philosophies assume that good business decisions are what make the industry and communities as a whole stronger, and that a "sustainable business" is not one where you build in a bunch of strategies and safety precautions so that you can strangle off your own, old products so that they stop being your own worst competition.

 

[dd.stevenson]

I like to think that these sorts of conversations -- imaginative conversations about what might be -- can be very constructive in a couple of ways. There's obviously no need to change the way we do anything, from our point of view as individual gamers. But the way products and services are offered to us will change -- maybe quickly, maybe slowly, but inevitably.

By having conversations out ahead of the change, we may be able to frame and inform the conversations about those changes. Not that I have any special access to anyone, but I have to believe that if we have a constructive enough conversation -- or conversations -- people will notice and listen.

Also, I think it doesn't hurt us as consumers to prepare for the changes in the market by thinking about what we might see. In this case, if we understand that these game companies, which tend to be anemic business propositions, and are facing dwindling audiences, etc -- if we understand that those organizations need to find better ways to do business for their own survival -- and we see a value in their ongoing survival -- we might find a way within ourselves to support those changes, rather than gnash our collective teeth every time someone changes something.

Too often, I think, members of the gamer audience see themselves in a sort of adversarial relationship with the game companies. We imagine that they're out to screw us over, just desperate to take our money. It's easy to forget that each one of those game designers is someone who loves the game and their primary goal is to make the best game they can. We're all on the same team.

So, anyway, that's what I'm trying to explore -- what I think might be coming, what might be interesting within that trajectory, etc.

You've been completely gracious in handling my criticisms--thanks for that.

To answer your question about what I think the future should/will look like, I have to assert something that some people probably disagree with. Specifically, I believe that the spoken/printed word are the foundation of our hobby, and that map-orientated tabletop tools (and other visual tools as well) will always be somewhat peripheral to this market as a whole. Thus, I believe that the future of the ttrpg industry will resemble the future of the publishing industry (rather than, say, the CRPG industry).

I know you've explored this in other articles, but the publishing industry is in flux right now--its old business model is dead, and nothing new has risen yet to functionally replace it. E-publishing has hope, but it's just not there yet and it's not perfectly obvious that it will ever be more than a mere shadow of the publishing industry of the 20th century. I'm both a kindle app user (on my ipad) and an avid technophile, and even I still yearn for the physical book when I'm flipping through my virtual pages. It's possible that young people will be exposed to only virtual pages and thus not be conditioned to read physical books, but I don't think that's the most likely outcome, as long as the dead tree publishing industry can soldier on with the blockbuster model.

At a guess, I would say that the future of publishing lies within some yet-to-be-produced electronic device, that closely resembles a dead tree book, but which can be configured to display different content on its pages with the press of a button. Also, and perhaps alternatively, I would speculate that we're going to see a serious print-on-demand boom, perhaps reaching the point where every middle class family has a book printer next to their computers in their homes.

But all this has been explored by people better informed than I, and we're still no closer to the solution. So who really knows?

Now all that being said, I don't think that the TTRPG brands will ever become shy about merchandising their lines into the CRPG space. Right now, I suspect that we're looking at the beginning of a low-end CRPG boom consisting of products like Torment: Numenera. It's more than possible that these products will evolve into a set of end-user tools that could be used by would-be dungeon masters easily create great content for online sessions. However, while such a suite of products might come to overshadow the TTRPG industry, I don't believe it could ever legitimately replace it.