You know why Blockbuster worked? I was a kid, and this was a long time ago, so the exact figures may be off, but you could enjoy and experience the entirety of a movie for like $8, or you could buy that new release for like $30.

And you got to keep a 90 minute experience for 24 hours, or pay a little more to keep it for a week.

Now, the great thing about movies is you only need to clear one evening to watch it, so let's say, realistically, most people have one solid 3 hours of free time a week to really sit down and enjoy a good media.

So, sure, Ubisoft, take your $70 game (don't try and tell me a video game is worth $120 because you're withholding half the content; Blockbuster also didn't try to charge you 50% more for a directors cut or extended edition), rent it to me for $18. Let me play the guaranteed maximum experience of say a 20 hour game over 8 weeks, and for just $2 more I can have it for 6 months. Oh, and last year's releases? Half price.

Somehow I don't think that's what they have in mind.

[–] BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

My initial guess would be around $70/month based on new game prices but that could be too high if we compare with streaming prices:

https://www.fool.com/the-ascent/personal-finance/articles/heres-how-much-it-would-cost-to-subscribe-to-all-streaming-services-in-2024/

If we take those averages it could be somewhere between $10/month (average for sports streams) or $50/month (average for live streams).

Could be something for Twitch streamers, but they sometimes get send free copies to review so even then its not a 100% match.

I really hope this flops fast.

[–] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 10 months ago

They also have to compete with services like Microsoft's GamePass, which offers tons of games for one monthly subscription fee. So unless they're gonna offer their entire library of games for a comparable price (or less, since they probably have fewer games total), they're gonna be in for a really rude awakening.

[–] programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 10 months ago

With games I would take into account the average playthrough as I don't buy a game a month. You can then compute the average price per hour played and prize the subscription service according to that amount.

Also digital games for $70 is a scam, they should be cheaper than physical games. Sucks having gamers getting comfortable with not owning their games.

[–] beetus@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Not so sure that the bankrupted blockbuster is a great example of how a business should be run.

Blockbuster failed for a few reasons chiefly that they didn't adapt to the internet fast enough. However their rental model did not bring in the revenues.

Whereas the competition, Netflix, did offer similar services (rented movies) for a flat subscription. Yes, Netflix also offered it via mail, however the Netflix model has (nearly) always been a flat subscription for its movies.

Arguably, using evidence we've seen in real life, the subscription model is preferred by consumers and businesses alike. (Note: I don't like them and have strived to cancel most of the subscriptions services I use)

[–] Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

If you want to try to compare it to Netflix, sure, Ubisoft, I'll pay $13/month for every game you ever made, every game you ever will make, and at least as many game (including new releases) from other publishers. Then, yeah, sure.