Is the subscription worth it, or would buying be cheaper
Your data
The fourth field is the one people fill in wrongly, and it decides the whole answer. It is not the shop price of a new release: it is what you would really have paid, which for most people means waiting for a sale.
Count only the games you would actually have bought. A catalogue of four hundred titles saves you nothing if six of them were ever going to leave your wallet, and counting the rest is how a subscription is made to look free.
Nothing on this page says whether to subscribe. The real limit is the time you have to play, and this calculation cannot see anybody's week.
Results
| Games a month it has to give you before it pays for itself | — |
| The same thing as one game every so many months | — |
| What you are paying per game you actually play | — |
| Total paid to the subscription over the period | — |
| Purchases you did not have to make | — |
| Still bought, because you want to keep them | — |
| What is left at the end | — |
Divide the monthly price by the price of one game and you have the whole question in a single number: how many games a month the service must hand you before it stops being an expense. Everything else on this page is that number examined from a different side.
The same subscription against different game prices
| Price of one game | Games a month to break even | One game every so many months |
|---|
This table is the reason almost every answer to the question is yes. With the figures this page starts with, a game priced at 250 makes the subscription pay for itself on one game every five and a half months, which anyone clears without trying. The same subscription measured against a game bought on sale at 30 needs one and a half games a month, which is a great deal of finished games.
Same service, same person, opposite conclusions, and nothing changed except which price was substituted. Comparisons written with the price of a new release are not wrong by arithmetic; they are answering for a buyer who never waits, and most of us wait.
There is one more asymmetry, and it is the one a monthly price hides: buying accumulates and subscribing does not. The games you want to keep have to be bought anyway, and that purchase comes out of the saving. In the example above the gross saving is 420 over the year and 200 of it goes straight back out for the two keepers, leaving 220.
So the honest way to read a subscription is as rent, not as a discount. It is cheap while you are consuming quickly and it turns expensive the month you stop, because it takes the whole fee whether or not you opened it, and leaves nothing behind when you cancel.
How many games a month does a subscription have to give me?
The monthly price divided by the price of one game. At 45 a month against a game you would really have paid 100 for, that is 0.45 games a month, or one game every two and a bit months.
Everything else is that one number seen from another side. If the service hands you more than that, it is cheaper than buying; if less, you are renting a catalogue you are not getting through.
Why do most articles say a subscription is obviously worth it?
Because they use the price of a new release. At 250 a game the break-even is one game every five and a half months, which anybody clears without trying, so the answer comes out yes before the question is really asked.
Put in the price you would actually have paid, which for most people means a sale, and the same subscription needs far more. At 30 a game it takes one and a half finished games a month.
| Price of one game | Games a month to break even | One game every so many months |
|---|---|---|
| 30 | 1.50 | 0.7 |
| 50 | 0.90 | 1.1 |
| 100 | 0.45 | 2.2 |
| 150 | 0.30 | 3.3 |
| 250 | 0.18 | 5.6 |
Does a big catalogue make the subscription better value?
Only the part of it you would have bought. A game you were never going to pay for saves you nothing when it is included, so counting the whole catalogue is how a subscription is made to look free.
This is why two people with the same service get honestly different answers. The catalogue is the same for both; the list of games they would have bought is not.
Why does the calculation take money off for the games I want to keep?
Because buying accumulates and subscribing does not. A game you want to keep has to be bought whether or not it is on the service, and that purchase comes out of what the subscription saved you.
In the example on this page the gross saving over a year is 420, and 200 of it goes straight back out for two keepers, leaving 220. A subscription is rent: it takes the fee whether you opened it or not, and leaves nothing behind when you cancel.
Reactions
0
0 Comments
Be the first to comment