← Back to context

Comment by norman784

12 hours ago

AFAIK the issue is with one time purchase games, where is not clear if you will be able to play forever or whenever they want to pull the plug, if they change to subscription based model or free to play, then it will be clear for the players what they are paying for.

The distinction makes sense, but I wonder if the bill will inadvertently incentivize games to move to subscription based models, which would be ultimately be a worse experience for consumers.

  • It won't. Most games bought on steam will never be played, not even once. Customers won't splurge on subscriptions they won't use.

    • > Most games bought on steam will never be played, not even once.

      How did you gain access to my Steam library statistics?

  • Ultimately consumers can then make a better choice, to simply drop those subscription based games.

    • They could, but there is very little evidence to show that a dislike for subscription models outweighs people's desire to consume quality content.

      Evidence is strong that people follow the content they want, and then secondarily choose the least friction delivery model.

      1 reply →

  • It would basically mandate subscription model for online games. Also wonder if it'd introduce legal risk for online mode in a game that also has local play, say Call of Duty or the newer Super Smash Bros, or if "ordinary use" is clearly not that.