MARCH
Dialogue
Send your views, using ‘Dialogue’ as the subject line, to edge@futurenet.com. Our letter of the month wins an exclusive Edge T-shirt
Issue 406
Subscription remodel
The suggestions to remedy gaming’s woes in E406 were varied, creative and, at times, provocative. To address one of the main issues, profitability, we had proposals to improve costs (Shawn Layden, Alex Hutchinson) and revenue through demand (Caroline Marchal, Dan Adelman, Jörg Tittel) and, as alluded to by Sam Barlow, pricing. But is there more to this latter point? It’s hard to believe that optimal pricing is based around a few ‘standard’ price points, some of them legacy, and some basic, broad subscription services, given that there will be differing demand and a varying willingness to pay across a multitude of customer segments.
To combine a few suggested solutions, is there opportunity for more focused subscription services, curated around specific genres, themes or experiences (or even aspects such as game length), priced to match to the target customers’ willingness to pay? Would these steady revenue streams then allow the subscription provider to invest in more games of the same ilk, spreading risks across a portfolio? Do we perhaps need more EA Plays but from the likes of a Devolver, or a Kowloon Nights, or one of Teddy Dief’s suggested ‘indie labels’? Or, dare I say it, Edge?
Matt Turner
Given that we’ve been picking through videogames for the purposes of this here magazine for 30-ish years now, we feel entirely qualified and accept your proposal immediately. Our fledgling publishing empire just needs a boatload of cigars and a big fat mahogany boardroom table, if you happen to know any going begging.