Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Comcast Tries Online Game Subscription Route

Posted by simoniker on from the rent-a-ghost dept.

WebGangsta writes "Comcast announced a new gaming service available to anyone: for a monthly fee of $14.95, subscribers will have unlimited access to more than 60 PC-based games, from mainstream titles to educational software. New titles will be added each month. Games referenced in the press release included Atari's Dead Man's Hand [plus other largely Atari titles from the recently launched, similar Atari On Demand, including Neverwinter Nights and Civilization III: Conquests]. Is this one of the revenue streams Comcast was thinking about developing when they combined G4 with TechTV? Is there really a market for pay-service video games, and was there a lesson to be learned from Sega's attempt at this market (which was priced $2 less just nine years ago)?" Update: 06/02 17:06 GMT by S : Commenters point out Yahoo! is offering a similar service, currently with a greater variety of games.

25 comments

  1. Phantom? by oiarbovnb · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Let's hope this is better than the phantom console.

    1. Re:Phantom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      My first thought, too. But a cable company doing it (as opposed to, say, an investment scammer) strikes me as a "good-fit" idea.

    2. Re:Phantom? by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1
      I'm not going to knock the Phantom till it's out and the service is up and running. I think the idea behind the Phantom is a great one... but the most recent noises make it sound like cable TV for your games: you get a basic package for the monthly fee, then you add on "premium" packages...

      As a console, not PC, gamer I'm skeptical, but still interested, when it comes to the Phantom. This Comcast service, however, doesn't interest me in the least since I still have to have a PC to play the games...

  2. It's worked already for Steam by skermit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Steam works and although I had my reservations about it originally, I kinda love it. I like not having to d/l the latest HL and CS patches to play, and it's great now that they've worked out most of the bugs in the integrated IM/matching client. If this service becomes anything like it, AND they have a software base which is worth buying... they can consider me as another customer.

    --
    -Christopher Wu
    http://www.christopherwu.net/
  3. The Evil Empire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one won't be subscribing to this. Not after they fired every TechTV employee, and turned what once was a great TV network into complete garbage. One gaming show on TechTV daily was fine, but adding all the stupid G4 shows is too much.

    I hope this is a miserable failure for comcast.

  4. This is not new by greywar · · Score: 0, Redundant

    @home, later attbi.com, now comcast.net...about 3 years ago tried this. It was OK, but...well..I just couldn't get involved, too low of a selection at the time. And no 'new' releases. If someone does it with new releases....THEN we'll be talking about something that works. So it depends on the management team of it.

  5. Sega Channel by The-Bus · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Sega Channel was simply amazing. It's too bad it came in at the tail-end of the console's life-time. By then I know Sega had branched out into the Sega-CD, the Sega 32x, making it a bit confusing in the minds of parents. At the time, my non-SNES having friend had it, and being not of legal age to work and not with unlimited spending money, we couldn't just rent a game every couple of days. But with SC, we could get any game, anytime. It was usually a long wait to get each game (up to 10 minutes sometimes), but the smorgasbord was fantastic. Had Sega Channel come out in 1991, they would have cleaned up.

    I think $14.95 to download PC games isn't a bad idea... A better idea is to have the new set-top boxes (which have integrated HD and Tivo-like PVR options) also include, say, a cheap PC. Then you can have a wireless game controller and/or keyboard and mouse and play on your TV. The benefits are of course that the hardware requirements aren't insane. Graphics are gonna run, max, at 1024 x 768 (they could run at 640x480 or less in a non-HD TV)*, so you don't need a super-powerful nVidia SupraGammadeon 85000 (an MX runs, what? $55?). The processor is also ultra-cheap, because you don't "need" the new P7. Hard drive doesn't need to be more than 20GB. With some work, this could be a Phantom-style device. Except it has an installed user-base and it's, oh yeah, a real product. Cost of the device is probably an extra $200-300. You can slash that by making it a PC from one or two years ago and getting older PC games to work with it. You know, UT, Quake 2, Half-Life, etc. Or offer two choices, one that's $14.95/m with free rental and plays games with sys requirements that were average in 2001, and one super-fancy one that can play all the newest games, with a higher cost.

    Would I pay an extra $9.95-14.95 to be able to play a library of games from 1995-2002 (or newer, less process-intense ones?). Hell yeah. Just have it be on my TV, not my PC. I spend enough time in front of it as it is.

    Bring it on.

    * Pure guesses here.
    ** I'd say the second option shouldn't be considered because its target market frankly does not want to play games on their TV, or if they did, they already can, and get games through illegal means or just plain buy a whole lot of them.
    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    1. Re:Sega Channel by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 1

      You mean like a DISCover or a PC with a DVI or TV-OUT? Or even a HTPC? Hey, the technology is already here ready for you to take advantage of it. There's no need to wait for someone to build you a box when you can go out and build it yourself for possibily less. Or just drag your existing computer and hook it up to your television. Or grab a used laptop and use the TV output. Need older games? Just visit the many abandonware sites on the net. Can't beat free games. The whole point is everything you describe can be had more or less right now and inexpensively.

    2. Re:Sega Channel by sammaffei · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Dude (Torgo's Pizza), I love your handle...

      "The master won't be pleased..."

      --

      Political correctness is the newest form of slavery.

    3. Re:Sega Channel by The-Bus · · Score: 1
      That's sort of what I refer to when I speak of "Power User" -- anyone that wants what I described can do it, easily, and cheaply. Hey, you can even do it with ROMs and cabinets and all that jazz. However, due to the interest there is in this, and the amount of time/research people are willing to put into developing these things, I also think it's likely that someone would just as rather pay $15/m to do this because the most intensive technical thing they have done is reformat Windows with Dell tech support on the phone*.

      Or, the other possibility, anyone that really wants what I described (old games) has already done the work and there's no market for this.

      * The Dell rep said: "The hard part was getting the user to re-install all the spyware."
      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    4. Re:Sega Channel by UltimaL337Star · · Score: 1

      I had a sega channel, I cherished it for as long as I could. If I could I'd still be paying for it. You got what seemed like hundreds of new games each month complete with different themed browsers. Games were nicely catagorized into genres and there were even help forums, stratdgy and tips and news. A perfect example of what a p2p could be like. I would have TRULY never of had the chance to try (and many times) buy games I'd otherwise dismiss, Gainground/Gain Ground is one great example for those who have probably never heard of it. Plenty of rare and low profile games were always in there.

  6. Yahoo! has something similar. by MeenMunky · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://gamesondemand.yahoo.com/play

    They've had that for quite some time now. Same price and a lot more games. Never tried it; though.

  7. Been there, done (still doing) that by CDLewis · · Score: 4, Funny
    ...for a monthly fee of $14.95, subscribers will have unlimited access to more than 60 PC-based games...

    Blah... http://www.usenetserver.com/ has been doing that for years. And they don't limit you to games. You've got apps... music... donkey porn...
    1. Re:Been there, done (still doing) that by calebtucker · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but service mentioned in the article is for people who want to have legit, non-warez software. Anyone can find warez, especially now with all of the bittorrent sites around.

      I'm only replying because someone modded this as interesting. I'm pretty sure the parent was trying to be funny, but some dumbass mod thought it was interesting.

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
    2. Re:Been there, done (still doing) that by CDLewis · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ...some dumbass mod thought it was interesting.
      I suppose if that dumbass mod hadn't heard of Usenet, he actually may have found it interesting...

      To the topic, though - as a Comcast user, I'd rather see them investing in and offering a higher-bandwidth, more trouble-free pipe. To use the peanut butter cup analogy: just focus on the peanut butter... I'll get my chocolate from someone else. (Actually, I'd most like see them whither up and blow away and let Optimum Online's 8mbs+ pipes service my area.)
    3. Re:Been there, done (still doing) that by calebtucker · · Score: 1

      My point was that the article is about a service for getting legit games. Anyone can find pirated software. I don't see how that could be modded up as interesting for such a story.

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
  8. I'm horribly mistaken by greywar · · Score: 1

    ACK.... Yahoo does this. sigh. I suppose now I get modded down. Please tell me there isnt a 'mod stupid' option. I can see it now.... Karma rating: stupid

  9. This topic has been covered before on Slashdot by matthewcraig · · Score: 1

    Nice to see another player in the online games market, but this topic has been covered by Slashdot only last year.

  10. How about low ping servers? by British · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I might be compelled to pay comcast if they hosted super-fast(ie super-low ping, but also fast server proecessorwise) gaming servers for UT2004, etc. Have other comcast players hop on board and have some really nice streamlined gaming.

    Idea has been brought to comcast before, but shot down.

  11. pay for play? no way! by eudas · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "Is there really a market for pay-service video games[...]?"

    Not for me, there isn't.
    Subscription-based models for games is just not something I'm willing to go for, and I think anybody who is willing to go for it is playing right into their hands. It's just not a good economic choice.

    And think about it -- if a majority of games try to go subscription-model, they will simply cannibalize their business even more. Subscribers have a finite amount of cash they will spend on games per month. If games turn to US$15-20/mo each, then subscribers will only play 1, maybe 2-3 games.

    So it'll turn into an environment where people will say "this game is so cool, come play with me" and you have to either say "no, i can't afford another game subscription" or cancel one of your other games to pay for the new one...

    so you will only play a few games, thereby fragmenting the player communities. but who cares about that? divide and conquer! turn gamers into an even more splintered, more easily manipulated, and most importantly billable consumer group.

    blah. why is the future so depressing?

    eudas

    --
    Blessed is he who expects the worst, for he shall not be disappointed.
  12. The Phantom business model by liminality · · Score: 1

    sounds like the entire Phantom "console" business model has been pre-empted by a web-based interface running on PCs (and for a lower fee too). what were they thinking?

  13. Mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    Subscribers have a finite amount of cash they will spend on games per month. If games turn to US$15-20/mo each, then subscribers will only play 1, maybe 2-3 games.

    Isn't that the whole point of the service? I took a look at the yahoo link and, unless I'm mistaken, you can play as many titles as you want for $15. At $50 a title in the store, I only buy 2-3 titles a year.

    so you will only play a few games, thereby fragmenting the player communities. but who cares about that? divide and conquer! turn gamers into an even more splintered, more easily manipulated, and most importantly billable consumer group.

    Xbox live is owned/managed by the most draconian company in the world (at least we at /. like to think so). But there seems to be a pretty healthy community of online clans.

  14. But have you seen the games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They're all at least 3 years old...
    Who'd pay to pay "Budget shelf" titles?

  15. Heat.net did this awhile ago. by JavaLord · · Score: 1

    Heat.net which I believe was owned by Sega used to host high speed servers which catered to @home users. They had custom games that you had to pay to play, but they also had Quake 2 and Sin servers. They also ran deathmatch games with cash prizes, and had their own software to connect to the servers and hang out in lobbies. It was a nice little community. The best part was the deathmatch for cash, like twice a week for each game they would get players together to play a normal DM game, and whoever won would get $50. Not a huge prize, but it's a fun way for a casual gamer to compete.

    I think that comcast can succeed if they can build a community. Some exclusive content would be nice too.