Video game ownership has been a surprisingly fluid concept over the course of the industry’s history. From the rise and fall of arcades to the proliferation of gaming consoles, developers have experimented with different ownership models. But if the course of the music and film industries over the past decade is any indication, there can be no doubt that the future of gaming is subscription-based access. Major industry players like , , and have embraced subscription-based models. On the other hand, giant tech newcomers to the scene, and , have come out with their own competing gaming subscription services. But when the dust settles, who will be left standing at the top of the pile? Sony Microsoft Nintendo Google Amazon To predict the future, we must look to the past. A brief look at the history of subscription-based access shows that Microsoft was an early adopter; first offering on the , and then taking the idea to the next level with . EA Access Xbox One Game Pass in 2017 Microsoft offered a service with unlimited access to over 100 Xbox One and Backward Compatible Xbox 360 games for $9.99 per month. The gaming giant credits with the success of many of its titles. Titles like “ ” and “ ” reportedly have around , while “ ” had 2 million people online in the first week and over 7 million in total. In April 2020, Microsoft reported over Xbox Game Pass subscribers. By January 2022, that number had jumped to . Game Pass Sea of Thieves State of Decay 2 5 million players Forza Horizon 4 10 million over 25 million followed suit with its own version, , which uses cloud-based streaming to deliver content. Instead of running on the player’s console, the game is run on remote servers and streamed directly to the player’s device. Sony PlayStation Now To compete with Game Pass’s substantive catalogue, Sony is working on a new service that merges its two subscription-based services set for release this spring. reportedly Even the hipster gaming company, Nintendo, fittingly cashed in on subscription-based access through an appeal to nostalgia. The acts as an emulator of older consoles, giving players access to classic titles on , , and the (the latter is accessed through an add-on expansion pack). But the limited scope of the subscription service reflects the company’s carefully curated brand identity, focused on the quality and draw of individual games. Furthermore, unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo is only a game company. As such, it does not provide a multimedia ecosystem that benefits from a subscription model like its tech giant competitors. Nintendo Switch Online NES SNES Nintendo 64 Having seen which way the winds are blowing, Amazon and Google joined in on the action with and . Announced in 2020, Luna is a subscription service that lets users sign up for one or several themed “channels,” allowing players to somewhat curate their subscriptions based on their interests and needs. Games are playable via web browser, Fire TV, tablets, and other supported mobile devices. Amazon Luna Google Play Pass Focusing more on mobile gaming, the Google Play Pass launched in 2020, giving Android users unlimited access to hundreds of titles on Google Play. At the forefront of the videogame industry, some blockchain-based games are also incorporating subscription-based access models. For example, the game Cradles eschews the prevailing model of Play-to-Earn gaming by introducing the first subscription service in a crypto game. Whereas in most games in this space, players have to buy their way in with an expensive NFT, Cradles players can access the game through a monthly game card. The adoption of this model shows supreme confidence by the developers in the draw, quality, and playability of their game. The focus on long-term viability is emblematic of the rise of Play-to-Enjoy games in the blockchain gaming space after the frenzy of last year’s Play-to-Earn craze. Where does this leave gamers standing? The synopsis above shows that companies that provide a multimedia ecosystem stand to gain the most from subscription gaming. Where Microsoft and Sony have room to grow, Nintendo is limited in this space due to its narrow scope. But that is not the whole picture – Google and Amazon, while tech/media giants in their own right, are somewhat limited in the quality of their catalogues since they are not primarily gaming companies. Those services can benefit by partnering up with more developers and expanding their catalogues. For games in the blockchain sphere, those that focus on quality and have a view toward the long term when it comes to playability have the best chance of success.

Amazon

Google

Microsoft

Nintendo

PlayStation

Sony

Why GameFi Will Be Bigger Than Just Play-to-earn Gaming

Nominated for 2022 - Gaming Guru of the Year

Nominated for 2022 - HackerNoon Contributor of the Year - Gaming

Too Long; Didn't Read

Boost your HackerNoon story @ $159.99! 🚀

The Future of Subscription-based Gaming

The Future of Subscription-based Gaming

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

Blockchain Gives Sports a Lucrative Way to Increase Their Fandom

10 Fascinating Facts About Crypto I Bet You Did Not Know So Far

113 Stories To Learn About Gamefi

3 Affordable Ways to Enter the Metaverse

195 Stories To Learn About Play To Earn

Blockchain Gives Sports a Lucrative Way to Increase Their Fandom

10 Fascinating Facts About Crypto I Bet You Did Not Know So Far

113 Stories To Learn About Gamefi

3 Affordable Ways to Enter the Metaverse

195 Stories To Learn About Play To Earn

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps