Comcast Tries Online Game Subscription Route

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.

Comments

It's worked already for Steam

[skermit]

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.

Sega Channel

[The-Bus]

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.

Yahoo! has something similar.

[MeenMunky]

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.

Been there, done (still doing) that

[CDLewis]

...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...

Re:Been there, done (still doing) that

[CDLewis]

...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.)

How about low ping servers?

[British]

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.