Apple Arcade: You can’t own it, and you also can’t rent it
In the latest edition of “you own nothing,” and we revisit Apple Arcade much sooner than I had expected.
Apple Arcade, as you may remember, is a $5 monthly subscription service from Apple in which you can play a collection of unmonetized (and demonetized) mobile games, all of which are exclusive to Apple Arcade (or at least have an Apple Arcade-exclusive new version) on iOS/macOS. Some of these are ports of existing smartphone, console or PC games, but others are entirely new.
Like any digital service you have ever used, the content not owned by the store owner is licensed. This means the content is subject to contracts, and contracts often have an end. In this case, deliberately.
Apple announced that 15 games would be leaving Apple Arcade “soon.” The insider scuttlebut was that the initial contracts for these games to be on Apple Arcade had 3-year terms, and one side or the other had decided not to extend or restructure the contract.
Unlike regular app store apps, already downloaded copies of these 15 games will refuse to open once their deadline hits. And unless the developers add a method to transfer save game data to a new iteration of the app, players’ progress will die with it.
While the developers are free to put the games in regular circulation as soon as they leave the app store, we won’t know their choices until they come. While losing progress sucks, several of these games reviewed well and I’m sure some players are looking forward to the potential to pay once for them and keep them. But that can also be bad news for Apple for the multiplatform games: if I’m starting Cardpocalypse over anyway, why not just buy the PC version right now instead of waiting to see if it even migrates to the regular iOS app store?
So if the idea of having to pay $5 a month for the rest of your life for access to certain unique games was turning you off, good news! You’ll probably only get to pay for a few years, followed by losing all your progress and then the game potentially vanishing forever if it’s a true exclusive.
About The Author
Drew
Features Editor | Drew started behind the 8(bit)-ball in the video game world. He first became interested in anime by chance exposure on the Sci-Fi channel. Drew's the creative force behind blog-wide features, works the movie and food beats, and pioneered Damage Control’s entry into video, podcasts and streaming.
Add a Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Yes! losing access (as the platforms evolve and Host-vendor relationships devolve) is one of the bad parts about a subscription model for games!
Also, don’t forget many “online” games that require web access to play have also become obsolete this way.
It might be cynical, but I start treating games like a “ticket to the movies”. Recently, I could spend $16 to go see Thor, or I could download a game (Gibbon beyond the trees) — I think $10 bucks on sale. I played Gibbon for ~2-3 hours and enjoyed it. Don’t ever intend to play it again.
I own a “digital license” but have more or less mentally resigned myself to having it be the same thing as a movie ticket : i.e. not available to me forever, just the memory of it.
It helps with my obsessiveness anyway, but these license issues persist..
What’s more disturbing is as the subscription models play out— the incentive system. That means cheaper games that people play more that don’t require creativity updates become cheaper for both parties to service to consumer..
ie.. long story short creative and new games destroyed for the status quo
(think of how cable was great and the cable became crappy because it was .. well.. cable TV) and you can imagine how it will play out.
This is why I still think purchasing content will hopefully still be important for foreseeable future.