KylieDog said:
thetonestarr said:
How would it not work out for publishers? Obviously, Nintendo would keep track of which games are being rented the most and a portion of the proceeds would be calculated out for each respective publisher. If it's too big a problem, they could put an age limit that any game offered would have to be six months old or something first (or perhaps each individual publisher would decide on the age).
A multitude of publishers have jumped on the Humble Bundle bandwagon, many of which have offered games less than a year old. The publishers are making practically nothing off of these bundles. Rather, it's a PR thing.
From a business standpoint, there is enormous potential here if pieced together properly. Obviously some kinks would need to be worked out, but you're being incredibly shortsighted if you just straight-out dismiss the concepts altogether. The biggest factor that needs to be considered is simply the price point. The rest is cake. |
Not all publishers will want their games being played for free and games still selling well enough publishers will never want going free. What Sony does for PS+ is approach every single publisher individually to make them agree to a PS+ promotion.
Allowing people to pick any game will never happen, even with a time limit on age of game.
|
This I definitely have to agree with. For them to do a truly digital rental service, every publisher would have to be individually approached for each of their games and they would have to agree to whatever share the platform manufacturer is willing to pay them for putting their game up on that service. This is way too much hassle and probably won't ever happen. PS+ is the best we can or will get in that regard.
And guys, I know Nintendo fans are very defensive about anything Nintendo, but comparing Club Nintendo to PS+ is just sad.
