Square Enix opens ad-supported streaming game service

[Lennis]

So what does everyone think of this latest innovation in gaming?  Is this a superior model to the old convention of game-rentals to try out new titles?  Or is this the beginning of another type of fleecing on the order of DLC, destined to dominate the gaming landscape if we let it take root?  Judging from historical patterns, I am inclined to be pessimistic.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/square-enix-opens-ad-supported-streaming-game-service-6393885

[chi_z]

"damn it all" - pirate from Chrono Cross

[idioticidioms]

So what does everyone think of this latest innovation in gaming?  Is this a superior model to the old convention of game-rentals to try out new titles?  Or is this the beginning of another type of fleecing on the order of DLC, destined to dominate the gaming landscape if we let it take root?  Judging from historical patterns, I am inclined to be pessimistic.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/square-enix-opens-ad-supported-streaming-game-service-6393885

I'm inclined to agree with you given my history of playing ftp mmo's.

[FaustWolf]

All I know is, games were somehow more fulfilling back in the day when we went to a video store to rent them. That's just my gut sense; seldom have I seriously considered quality in the context of revenue model before, and that makes this thread interesting to me.

I'd have to argue quality is more in the hands of the composite artists that create a project, and hence the business-minded publisher, and independent of revenue model. But some of the comments on that article have me worried about this particular model. Take the very first one, for instance:

"I have no problem watching 1 minute of ads every 20-25 minutes of gameplay (and by watch I mean rest my eyes for a bit and go grab a drink from the fridge)"

I completely agree with the speaker there; that's exactly what I'd do myself, and have done in the ad supported model when I've come across it. But the advertiser's expense has been completely wasted in both our cases. Can such a model go on? Or does an industry-wide bust lie just over the horizon?

The model must rely on the IP holder's brand recognition to carry it through; if one in ten people pay attention to a targeted ad, then Square Enix gets to use the model over Joe-or-Jane Six Pack. Which, I suppose, isn't that much different from ye olde rental model in the grand scheme of things. If quality art is to persevere, then advertisers must keep taking a chance on lesser-known indies just as rental stores did on these random titles we treasured back in the day.

[tushantin]

"I have no problem watching 1 minute of ads every 20-25 minutes of gameplay (and by watch I mean rest my eyes for a bit and go grab a drink from the fridge)"

I completely agree with the speaker there; that's exactly what I'd do myself, and have done in the ad supported model when I've come across it. But the advertiser's expense has been completely wasted in both our cases. Can such a model go on? Or does an industry-wide bust lie just over the horizon?

The advertiser expenses usually are wasted in this case, but just as much as in television companies and Youtube channels. Some work, some don't. But in either case, the companies are willing to invest in mass-advertisements simply to allow the product to remain at the tip of the consumer's tongues when they eventually do plan to buy something (this is usually how Samsung triumphs over HTC in sales, and Intel over AMD). Even in game play and breaks, similar concepts work.

I still think that ad-supported gaming services are good, provided they can be reached to wider audiences. Not sure how they might work though (will it be WebGL based or Gaikai?), but I still think that consoles and powerful computing would offer more quality to high-end games than the current HTML5 streaming technologies (which hasn't evolved enough... yet). But at the same time, I think this step would also help drive the next-generation stream-gaming technology advancements.