GIBIZ - New study Shows Stadia Pricing Model at Odds with what Cloud Gaming Players Want

Oct 25, 2017
11,358
Earlier this month, Broadband Genie published the first half of the results of a survey it conducted in tandem with GamesIndustry.biz sister-site Eurogamer, revealing that 83% of a group of over 3,000 surveyed were interested in streaming services.
Nearly three-fourths of gamers would prefer a Netflix-style payment model for a cloud gaming service, while only 20% name Google Stadia's proposed plan as the model they're most interested in.
However, in the second half of that survey published today, the specifics of Google Stadia's proposed platform didn't appear tremendously popular. In addition to the 74% that said they were most interested in a plan that allowed for paying a subscription fee to access a full library of games, 86% said they expected games purchased on the cloud to be cheaper than physical copies or digital downloads.




Source
 

Primethius

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,243
Makes sense to me. Streaming services at the moment are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist and offer a convenience untenable by the mass market.
 

Alienous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,412
They surveyed Eurogamer readers? That isn't the audience.

The audience are people who wait 3 or 4 years for a games console to drop in price - the people who buy console games but find $399 too steep an entry cost. I'm not convinced that audience would know what Eurogamer is.
 

Rodelero

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,860
I feel like people would think differently if they were told the subscription was, say, $30/mo. You're not going to get a Netflix priced subscription, or Game Pass priced subscription, which isn't going to leave with with massive gaps in your game library.
 

Surface of Me

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,308
Not gonna happen.

If these big companies have deals in place with Google or even have their own platforms, they aren't going to allow MS to disrupt that by giving a different model that shits all over their own platforms and deals.
Just like Game Pass? Why would companies put games on a service when that could disrupt people buying those games traditionally?
 

gofreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,321
I don't think it was an accident that Sony ended up with an all-you-can-eat sub model for PSNow after tinkering with rentals etc.

However, I think paying for games individually might work out better on streaming platforms where you can also get download rights. And individual purchases will probably be the only way to get comprehensive access to catalogs on streaming services.
 

pswii60

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,364
UK
PS Now already does this and only has 700,000 subscribers so... That said, it's shit. It remains to be seen if Stadia and xCloud actually deliver a tolerable experience.

Also, Xbox Game Pass has truly spoiled people. It's already set the benchmark in terms of content people expect on a gaming subscription service, and they don't even have their first party studios in gear yet. And the catalogue is only going to get stronger when you consider some of the stuff that is coming to the service day one in the next year. Also unlike Stadia, Microsoft won't only be reliant on one platform of subscribers to fund content. They have console and PC in addition to xCloud.
 

Rodelero

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,860
Also, Xbox Game Pass has truly spoiled people. It's already set the benchmark in terms of content people expect on a gaming subscription service, and they don't even have their first party studios in gear yet. And the catalogue is only going to get stronger when you consider some of the stuff that is coming to the service day one in the next year.
Eh, I think people are overhyping Game Pass when it comes to this. It's a good side-offering, but it's a million miles from being able to be the primary way people consume games and that is what Stadia wants to be. Game Pass has improved a good bit, but if you only had Game Pass you'd miss out on every big release every year. No Call of Duty. No FIFA/Madden/NBA2K. No AC. No Destiny. Even if Microsoft do improve their first party immeasurably, it's nowhere near replacing the need to actually buy games.

Ultimately, while I do think Stadia has its work cut out, those wanting a subscription service need to consider that it's either going to have the same flaw as above, or it's going to cost a lot, lot more.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,562
Not gonna happen.

If these big companies have deals in place with Google or even have their own platforms, they aren't going to allow MS to disrupt that by giving a different model that shits all over their own platforms and deals.
Nice avatar. Anyways the issue with Stadia seems to be the $10 a month just for access. What Microsoft will likely do is have Game Pass and xCloud mixed together so that people don't see a just a fixed cost for entry but rather a bundled subscription. The way Uplay Plus works is you pay $15 a month then an addition Stadia cost for the 4k/60fps access.

Eh, I think people are overhyping Game Pass when it comes to this. It's a good side-offering, but it's a million miles from being able to be the primary way people consume games and that is what Stadia wants to be. Game Pass has improved a good bit, but if you only had Game Pass you'd miss out on every big release every year. No Call of Duty. No FIFA/Madden/NBA2K. No AC. No Destiny. Even if Microsoft do improve their first party immeasurably, it's nowhere near replacing the need to actually buy games.

Ultimately, while I do think Stadia has its work cut out, those wanting a subscription service need to consider that it's either going to have the same flaw as above, or it's going to cost a lot, lot more.
You seem to be contradicting yourself trying to promote Stadia as the better option when in reality Microsoft is actually giving you options. Also why would it cost more on xCloud? Makes no sense. Microsoft could easily host new games on xCloud and sell them just like Google is.
 

Dirtyshubb

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,473
Just like Game Pass? Why would companies put games on a service when that could disrupt people buying those games traditionally?
Third parties only do older games or games that have stopped their initial release sales window, otherwise its only MS who has day 1 games.

Streaming services like stadia and comparable ones are just gonna be older games with subscription and new games being available for full price purchasing.

This idea some people seem to have that everything will be streamed and they will have access to everything without actually buying games just isn't going to happen.
Nice avatar. Anyways the issue with Stadia seems to be the $10 a month just for access. What Microsoft will likely do is have Game Pass and xCloud mixed together so that people don't see a just a fixed cost for entry but rather a bundled subscription. The way Uplay Plus works is you pay $15 a month then an addition Stadia cost for the 4k/60fps access.
What exactly is that meant to be, some kind of dig like I'm a MS hating fan boy?

I'm not discrediting gamepass, just this idea that Stadia or any other streaming platform is gonna be the defacto way people purchase and play their games.
 

Maintenance

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,931
People want Netflix, a.k.a Game Pass but with streaming.

If that's realistic or not, it is a matter for another day, but that's what they want.
 

pswii60

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,364
UK
Eh, I think people are overhyping Game Pass when it comes to this. It's a good side-offering, but it's a million miles from being able to be the primary way people consume games and that is what Stadia wants to be. Game Pass has improved a good bit, but if you only had Game Pass you'd miss out on every big release every year. No Call of Duty. No FIFA/Madden/NBA2K. No AC. No Destiny. Even if Microsoft do improve their first party immeasurably, it's nowhere near replacing the need to actually buy games.

Ultimately, while I do think Stadia has its work cut out, those wanting a subscription service need to consider that it's either going to have the same flaw as above, or it's going to cost a lot, lot more.
I never said Xbox Game Pass could be the primary way people consume games.

xCloud is a combination of everything you'd find on an Xbox console, so via cloud streaming it allows you to both buy games and enjoy Xbox Game Pass. And enjoy those purchases natively on console too (and PC in some cases). The best of both worlds, meaning that xCloud can be the primary way people (who can tolerate streaming) consume games.

Even Netflix is only a side-offering. Indeed, Netflix was always designed to be a side-offering, a complimentary subscription. It was never designed or intended to replace your premium TV subscription.
 

Tickling

Member
Oct 29, 2017
897
Give the same survey to Xbox and PlayStation owners and I bet the results are very similar.
 

IamFlying

Member
Apr 6, 2019
262
Stadia aims at an audience that just barely exists:

Rich gamers with perfect uncapped internet connection that mostly want to play at home (because on the go internet connection is just not good enough, even with a 50$ 5g mobile flat) but don't want to buy a console for strange reasons.
 

Dr. Mario

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,903
Netherlands
They surveyed Eurogamer readers? That isn't the audience.

The audience are people who wait 3 or 4 years for a games console to drop in price - the people who buy console games but find $399 too steep an entry cost. I'm not convinced that audience would know what Eurogamer is.
Agreed. Obviously conventional gamers are only interested in new business models if it means cheaper games, because they're already being served by the current business model. It's more about the people that aren't.
 

Chirotera

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
1,107
I'm still having trouble figuring out who Stadia is for. The tech is cool and promising, but right now, save for a very small market of premium internet users, it offers few if any advantages over already existing gaming packages.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,562
People want Netflix, a.k.a Game Pass but with streaming.

If that's realistic or not, it is a matter for another day, but that's what they want.
Pretty much. I think a lot of people realize streaming isn't going to be as good as local gaming so there should be a reduction in costs. Charging people $10 a month and then the same price as a hard copy or a digital copy that can be downloaded doesn't really seem like that is what people wanted with streaming.

I never said Xbox Game Pass could be the primary way people consume games.

xCloud is a combination of everything you'd find on an Xbox console, so via cloud streaming it allows you to both buy games and enjoy Xbox Game Pass. And enjoy those purchases natively on console too (and PC in some cases). The best of both worlds, meaning that xCloud can be the primary way people (who can tolerate streaming) consume games.

Even Netflix is only a side-offering. Indeed, Netflix was always designed to be a side-offering, a complimentary subscription. It was never designed or intended to replace your premium TV subscription.
Netflix is hugely popular and they do not host new movies. I think this is what many wanted with streaming, some bundles. If Stadia can also offer back catalog games for a low bundled price then I think they will get greater success.

I'm still having trouble figuring out who Stadia is for. The tech is cool and promising, but right now, save for a very small market of premium internet users, it offers few if any advantages over already existing gaming packages.
It seems a bit at odds yes. They want people with nice TV"s and good internet but don't want to invest in a decent computer. They also want to aim at those who want a convenient way to play, even more convenient than game consoles. No patches to download, just turn it on and ready to go.

Third parties only do older games or games that have stopped their initial release sales window, otherwise its only MS who has day 1 games.

Streaming services like stadia and comparable ones are just gonna be older games with subscription and new games being available for full price purchasing.

This idea some people seem to have that everything will be streamed and they will have access to everything without actually buying games just isn't going to happen.

What exactly is that meant to be, some kind of dig like I'm a MS hating fan boy?

I'm not discrediting gamepass, just this idea that Stadia or any other streaming platform is gonna be the defacto way people purchase and play their games.
Not a dig, just a chuckle. Anyways this is why I think Microsoft's approach iss the better one because they still offer those otions.
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
10,329
Stadia will need better ways to deliver content to players. Buying a 60 dollar game on a new service just isn't very tempting. Especially with Google's trackrecord.

So yes, they do need a subscription service. Maybe with tiers.
 

StraySheep

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,631
Well yea, obviously. But that model isn't sustainable for developers continuously.
And it devalues their art.

I wish people would be able to take a step back from the streaming model and recognize the dangers involved. Or even just the part that everyone hates already about how it isn't fun to have to subscribe to 10 different monthly services. Edit: In the world where this model is the dominant model. Having the option is fine, just not my preference.
 
Last edited:

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,562
Stadia will need better ways to deliver content to players. Buying a 60 dollar game on a new service just isn't very tempting. Especially with Google's trackrecord.

So yes, they do need a subscription service. Maybe with tiers.
First they need to prove it works well and then adjust the price accordingly. So yes, tiers are likely coming.

And it devalues their art.

I wish people would be able to take a step back from the streaming model and recognize the dangers involved. Or even just the part that everyone hates already about how it isn't fun to have to subscribe to 10 different monthly services.
Who is everybody that hates subscription models? I think it is you who needs to take a step back. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. It's called opening up the marketplace for those who may want it. What, you want to remove Netflix too because it ruins the art?
 

Jawmuncher

Crisis Dino
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
11,500
Ibis Island
While not an exact comparison. Digital movies compared to Blu-ray’s is a good example. You pay less there considering you’re getting less after-all.

Right now project Stadia titles are offering you less, so it doesn’t makes sense for them to be the same MSRP in my eyes.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,562
While not an exact comparison. Digital movies compared to Blu-ray’s is a good example. You pay less there considering you’re getting less after-all.

Right now project Stadia titles are offering you less, so it doesn’t makes sense for them to be the same MSRP in my eyes.
To be fair Google thinks they are offering you more. They are advertising it as better than and game console and on par with computers that costs hundreds if not thousands to invest in to get a 4k/60fps experience with instant access to play your games. Now the proof is in the pudding but that is what their marketing looks to be going after.

So they want PlayStation Now? Isn't that Netflix-esque streaming with no other fees?

That service just needs to get better at putting more recent games on it.
PS Now does not offer streaming for 4k 60fps games and they do not offer new titles. Does it even offer instant access with no patches? You're also talking about a company who refussed EA Access until rececently, so what are the chances they are as open as Google?
 

StraySheep

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,631
First they need to prove it works well and then adjust the price accordingly. So yes, tiers are likely coming.



Who is everybody that hates subscription models? I think it is you who needs to take a step back. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. It's called opening up the marketplace for those who may want it. What, you want to remove Netflix too because it ruins the art?
This is by no means a new complaint, read any of the stadia threads in the last year.


No, nobody is forcing me to do anything. Until the model takes over and becomes the dominant revenue source of game publishers. At that point I can only hope that dedicated hardware is a niche product and not totally gone from the market.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,964
I buy games digitally, but I'm not paying full price for a game I can't play offline. This is why I think a sub model would be best for Stadia, and also why I think Xcloud could take off of distributed priority. Giving me the ability to play the games I own locally AND via the cloud would be a big selling point.
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
10,329
And it devalues their art.

I wish people would be able to take a step back from the streaming model and recognize the dangers involved. Or even just the part that everyone hates already about how it isn't fun to have to subscribe to 10 different monthly services.
I've got a HBO and Netflix subscription, I've subscribed to Amazon Prime for a couple of months too. Currently my only gaming subscription is Game Pass Ultimate. I'm spending more money on gaming than I did before. I'm playing more games and I'm playing a more diverse set of games.

I just spend less money on Steam. I wouldn't mind if Google would add a subscription. I'll probably jump on and off those and keep my Game Pass sub as my primary one like I have Netflix now. I've subscribed to EA Access too for a while.
 

Alienous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,412
While not an exact comparison. Digital movies compared to Blu-ray’s is a good example. You pay less there considering you’re getting less after-all.

Right now project Stadia titles are offering you less, so it doesn’t makes sense for them to be the same MSRP in my eyes.
Console games offer you less in terms of ability to customize the experience when compared to PC games, or accessing online features without a subscription, and cost more.

It makes sense to view Stadia on that trajectory. A lower entry cost and a streamlining of the experience for a less 'hardcore' audience.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,258
First they need to prove it works well and then adjust the price accordingly. So yes, tiers are likely coming.



Who is everybody that hates subscription models? I think it is you who needs to take a step back. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. It's called opening up the marketplace for those who may want it. What, you want to remove Netflix too because it ruins the art?

What he said is a rising issue that lots of people have be discussing around the internet, including this site. Don't really get whats lost to you, over the last year or two people have been complaining about the amount of streaming services there are.
 

Mathieran

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,455
I don’t like the Stadia model. Game pass and PSNow are better. I don’t want to buy games to stream them. If I buy the game I want the option to download.
 

StraySheep

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,631
I've got a HBO and Netflix subscription, I've subscribed to Amazon Prime for a couple of months too. Currently my only gaming subscription is Game Pass Ultimate. I'm spending more money on gaming than I did before. I'm playing more games and I'm playing a more diverse set of games.

I just spend less money on Steam. I wouldn't mind if Google would add a subscription. I'll probably jump on and off those and keep my Game Pass sub as my primary one like I have Netflix now. I've subscribed to EA Access too for a while.
Crazy. At some point there should be a service that lets you with one button activate and deactivate services.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,562
This is by no means a new complaint, read any of the stadia threads in the last year.


No, nobody is forcing me to do anything. Until the model takes over and becomes the dominant revenue source of game publishers. At that point I can only hope that dedicated hardware is a niche product and not totally gone from the market.
You can hope for whatever you want but I have a huge issue with anyone telling me that nobody wants subscription models. Game Pass offers great value to me. Netflix offers great value to many. These things exists because people subscribe. OnLive came and gone, now PS Now has 700,000 subscribers. If there is a market they will go after it.

What he said is a rising issue that lots of people have be discussing around the internet, including this site. Don't really get whats lost to you, over the last year or two people have been complaining about the amount of streaming services there are.
Here's a suggestion, don't use them then. I am not telling you to subscribe and I would appreciate you or anyone else not telling me what the impacts are if I choose to subscribe.

Crazy. At some point there should be a service that lets you with one button activate and deactivate services.
Well your old model sucks to be frank. We used to pay a monthly fee for all of our cable. Why am i paying for channels I don't watch? This way I can choose what I want and low and behold TV shows are so much better now than they used to be.
 

McScroggz

The Fallen
Jan 11, 2018
2,460
Unless I’m out of the loop I feel like the pricing model is going to stop Stadia from ever really getting off the ground. You have to pay a subscription to then buy games for the service...

Like, I get services evolve over time, but it seems like there is such a vast gap that needs to be overcome even before you get into literally any of the other potential issues or reservations people have for Stadia.
 

Maintenance

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,931
So they want PlayStation Now? Isn't that Netflix-esque streaming with no other fees?

That service just needs to get better at putting more recent games on it.
As you yourself said, PSNow isn't really the same because they don't put same day/date games.

Until they do that, it won't be able to really compete.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,121
Brooklyn, NY
Right now, my sense is that MS is going to use xCloud primarily as a value add for Game Pass Ultimate instead of as a service in and of itself, and that’s a much better fit for the market and the inherent limitations of streaming tech than what Google is doing.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,258
You can hope for whatever you want but I have a huge issue with anyone telling me that nobody wants subscription models. Game Pass offers great value to me. Netflix offers great value to many. These things exists because people subscribe. OnLive came and gone, now PS Now has 700,000 subscribers. If there is a market they will go after it.



Here's a suggestion, don't use them then. I am not telling you to subscribe and I would appreciate you or anyone else not telling me what the impacts are if I choose to subscribe.
I'm extremely lost at your response all the other poster and I was saying was that there are people who don't want every company having their own sub/ theres lots of services to sub to, that doesn't mean stadia or gamepass are bad. Don't know why you took it personal.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,562
I'm extremely lost at your response all the other post and I was saying was that their are people who don't want every company having their own sub. Don't know why you too it personal.
I get it, some don't like subscription models. Some do. My opinion is no more valid than yours but I'm not going to support any argument that tries to discourage anyone from subscribing. I think most of us are mature enough to spend our own money as we wish.
 

Alienous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,412
Unless I’m out of the loop I feel like the pricing model is going to stop Stadia from ever really getting off the ground. You have to pay a subscription to then buy games for the service...

Like, I get services evolve over time, but it seems like there is such a vast gap that needs to be overcome even before you get into literally any of the other potential issues or reservations people have for Stadia.
You don't need to pay a subscription for 1080p visuals, and people are already willing to pay half of a Stadia subscription to get access to the online features in games they've already paid for.