A Ubisoft Exec has shared their thoughts on some topics regarding the current state of the gaming industry including where it may be going. Philippe Tremblay, Ubisoft’s Director of subscription sales, spoke with GamesIndustry.Biz about the game publisher’s rebranding/restructuring of its Ubisoft+ subscription services. The Ubisoft Exec had some interesting things to say about changes that are happening within the industry. He conveys in the interview how Ubisoft has been extensively analyzing the market of subscription services, for both games but also including movies and television, and the shopping behavior of its customers.
Research data showed trends with gamers staying actively engaged with older back catalogue titles hence why they were offered at a lower rate (Ubisoft+ Classics). Other patterns showed that over a half billion hours of gameplay occurred from millions of subscribers within four years. The data also showed how some subscribers might play multiple games while others would simply try out the service and drop it after a month.
Per GamesIndustry.Biz:
“There are multiple behaviours,” he explains. “There are definitely a lot of people who come in for one game and then decide to buy it after [the subscription ends]. That’s part of the reality and that’s ok with us.”
Now while Ubisoft’s premium tier subscription service may be higher than those offered by competitors Sony and Microsoft Tremblay does emphasize that it not only grants early access to new AAA games but also that subscribers can play the “complete” version of the game with all its DLC and extra content. Subscribers play their games on different platforms as well including PC and consoles, or via game streaming devices such as Amazon Luna. He explains that Ubisoft is seeing growth with its subscription services and that its data shows that one in ten subscribers has never played a Ubisoft game beforehand.
Industry Shift:
Tremblay finishes the interview with thoughts on the future of the industry. It is here where some gamers may have their feathers ruffled but the Ubisoft Exec does have a point. He does point out similarities to how consumers have shifted away from buying physical media such as CDs and DVDs to various streaming media services instead. This shift has led to a decline in physical media sales, something that in turn has caused some big box store retailers such as Best Buy to begin removing physical media from their inventory.
In regards to gaming, he predicts a similar shift within the gaming industry, and while this may end up being somewhat true of physical copies, it could be a long time coming given the presence of digital retailers like Steam, Epic, and GOG. However, between Ubisoft+, NVIDIA’s GeForce Now, Microsoft’s Game Pass, and Sony’s and Amazon’s offerings, it is clear that a shift is indeed happening. He does add that there are some benefits to this change with player’s games being kept on servers but as many veteran gamers know already, that can be a risk should those servers, or support for said games, get retired or shut down.
“One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to, a little bit like DVD, having and owning their games. That’s the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That’s a transformation that’s been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect… you don’t lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That’s not been deleted. You don’t lose what you’ve built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it’s about feeling comfortable with not owning your game.”
Subscription Fatigue:
Tremblay also acknowledges that subscription fatigue across all platforms, whether gaming or television/movie-based, is already happening. The industry is continuing to experience growing pains with numerous providers combining services under one roof to attract subscribers while keeping costs lower. Meanwhile, consumers are also dealing with what seems to be a never-ending swath of services from every direction be it music, video, gaming, or just about anything anyone can imagine to be offered online. The Ubisoft Exec jokes about this by saying “And I’m a dad with teenagers… it’s difficult to keep up with what you’re subscribing to and where. That’s part of the challenge we have as a subscription service, and we’re embracing that.”
Discussion (16 replies)
Join Discussion →HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Naw dawg, I don't think so. If I can't own it, then I won't use it. Streaming didn't replace DVDs or BDs for me (but grabbing DVD rips and BD rips did), and I will NEVER ever subscribe to a service to play video games. I buy games that are fully playable locally and offline, and which I actually own. Ubisoft is basically telling gamers to go "pirate" their games. Then again they've been doing that ever since they came out with uPlay (which is now Connect I guess).
The ONLY digital storefront I truly respect is GOG.
Ubisoft will need to get used to not getting money.
If you acquired a video game local install through any means you don't own the game. If you paid money you have a license to use the software. You don't OWN the software. And these days that License isn't even portable.
Too true. Gotta love that EULA fine print.
Yeah, with most storefronts like Steam, but not GOG (last I checked).
It's not GOG that owns the game, it's the maker/publisher that gives you a lioocense to play.
As others have said, you do not own games. You never have. Such software always remains the property of the publishers and developers that created it and even the purchase of physical media does not change that. It only constitutes a license to use the software. Just to further this point, it's actually always been the same with movies released on physical media. There is a reason why they have all that licensing crap up front on the old VHS and Betamax movies. It's even illegal to play your DVD or Blu-Ray in a public space as it violates the license.
You do not, and never have owned any video game, film or operating system.
You still don't own the software. Again, even physical media does not constitute ownership of the software. You even still have to agree to the license to install it or use it. The difference is that GOG doesn't add any additional DRM and allows you to retain a local installer for reinstallation should you need to use it.
When you have a local, offline copy of the game that you legally paid for, isn't that just as much ownership as having a physical disc?
I meant I own a copy of the game, not the IP rights.
Yeah I get what you're driving at.
Nobody in their right mind thinks they own the intellectual property rights when they buy a copy of a software or a movie.
What they own is the unrevokable licence to play it at home.
But with a subscription you don't even own a licence, whatever you buy can be taken away and you have no recourse against it.
100% this. It's why I resist subscribing to a gaming service be that xbox, PS5, or any of the PC ones.
Well I think we can all agree that to some extent none of us own anything anymore, if we ever did, and the only thing really changing is the extent to which we can use it. I will say that is why I too, like @DrezKill mentioned, try to get everything I can on GOG and like @Grimlakin also mentioned, I will not pay for a gaming subscription service.
I get what Ubisoft is refering to with the obvious rise of Netflix, Disney, Max, etc. but the gaming community isn't quite ready, and may never be, to do a full on switch. However for physical movie/t.v. discs, the writing sure seems to be on the wall but I too am one of those who will fight it.
I'm well aware of this as its happened to me on Amazon Prime. Video I've "purchased" is suddenly no longer available in North America.
The same can be said about some physical media, if it needs a server to run you are done playing if the servers go down. or if they ban your product key.
I would consider a sub if they could cranck out enough games I would like to play but Ubisoft only makes a couple games a year and most are of no interest to me buying the ones I want is cheaper.
The same would be true for most companies making video games, even Netfliw atm is barely keeping up with stuff I want to watch and I have access to shows that people in the US for example don't have access to due to rights.
Im going to ask about a different aspect of this.
If subscriptions were to become the norm for games, I could see this impacting game design for the worst as games would then need to "take a long time" to maximize the money from it.
Or conversely the subscription could be very costly monthly because you have to pay for a sub to 100's of game just to get access to the one you want.
So do you all think there is danger of either of these scenario's?
I would think the greater danger would be churn - getting as many “flavor of the month” shovelware titles out as fast as possible
Basically what the mobile app stores have become