Support NeoGAF

[Gamer79]

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about games that are exclusively digital. I'm talking about games that offer a physical option but people still opt for digital. Also, I'm not including physical games that still require a server to even launch. PC gaming, which I love, definitely has its issues here, but at least it has a history of keeping games accessible for decades.


What a lot of younger gamers don't realize yet is that this all-digital future everyone seems to be hyped for is eventually going to screw them over. I've lived through it games I've paid for digitally are now completely unplayable. Take DriveClub for example: I can still manually search and redownload it (it doesn't even show up in the store anymore), but the multiplayer and other features are gone for good. Then there are games that required an online check-in or always-online connection once the servers were shut down, those games became worthless.


And this isn't going to stop. It'll only get worse. The digital library you're building right now? One day, you might not be able to access any of it. Every game you download, like Elden Ring (what is it, 80GB?), takes up space on a company's server and uses their bandwidth. As games age and become less popular, publishers aren't going to keep hosting those files forever. No downloads, no access. End of story.


One personal example I can show in the video I linked is The Crew on PS4. I bought that game, played it, loved it, now the servers are down and the game is completely bricked. That's the cold truth: when you buy a digital game, you don't really own it. You're just renting access via a key tied to a company's service. And when they pull the plug, that's it.


That's why I'm a big fan of the original Nintendo Switch. I own 36 physical games, I bought every single one I cared about. No server check-ins, no internet requirements. If Nintendo shut down tomorrow, I'd still be able to pop in a cart and play, as long as I have working hardware. Those games are mine.


Call me a relic yelling at clouds if you want, but I see this all-digital future as complete BS. Curious what the rest of you think. Are we headed toward a gaming dark age, or am I just stuck in the past?

 

[Pimpollo818]

I've learned to let go as I've gotten older.

As a young kid I'd hoard toys and games and such>DVDs>Vinyls. Not anymore.

 

[poppabk]

Why did you list a bunch of games that are dead even if you had a physical copy? Servers going down has nothing to do with digital.

 

[Lokaum D+]

thats why PC gaming is the future

i have preserved lots of Nintendo, Sony games on my HD

 

[HRK69]

Those games are mine.

You own the cartridge, not the game. Nintendo (or any publisher) still controls the license. It's a more durable illusion of ownership, but an illusion nonetheless

 

[JaxarGT]

Take DriveClub for example: I can still manually search and redownload it (it doesn't even show up in the store anymore), but the multiplayer and other features are gone for good. Then there are games that required an online check-in or always-online connection once the servers were shut down, those games became worthl

How would having the physical copies have made any difference there?

 

[Punished Miku]

Its over. This is just the 1st of many painful rants coming over the next several years. Nintendo is charging $10 more per game for physical. You're going to see 30% adoption rates for physical if you're bullish. PS is charging $100 extra for a disc drive. You're going to see 10% adoption rates on PS6.

Its done. How long do you think your oddly shaped PS5 is going to last? Because when those disc drives eventually die, it'll be done and none of your stuff is going to carry over to PS7. You'll be stuck hoping that your disc drive still works or all you'll have is a bedroom full of useless plastic repelling any appearance of adulthood.

I like options but its done. The Switch price hike and the disc drive add on already is the tombstone. You just don't know it yet.

 

[Pop]

How would having the physical copies have made any difference there?

Hey at least you'll own the disc

No but seriously, digital pricing is the real villain here

 

[wondermega]

As an indie developer, games I made for iOS years ago are simply gone. Not the same sentiment as this thread might intend (a lot of people don't consider mobile gaming in the same category) but it still stinks. I appreciate that it is their platform and they consider that a curated experience, and if something isn't regularly kept current/updated with modern features or other things to keep it relevant, then it isn't necessarily welcome on their marketplace (especially considering it's been long oversaturated with untold mountains of garbage) but still. Hell, there were lots of games I'd grabbed there years ago which likewise are just no longer available.

 

[JaxarGT]

Hey at least you'll own the disc

True but you own the disc to a still dead game. There is no advantage here that I can see.

 

[poppabk]

As games age and become less popular, publishers aren't going to keep hosting those files forever.

I downloaded my copy of Outrun 2006 just the other day - a game that hasn't been available for sale for 15 years. Also - it's still getting updates (although not from the publisher)

 

[Loomy]

Call me a relic yelling at clouds if you want, but I see this all-digital future as complete BS.

You're not a relic yelling at clouds, and the all-digital future - with all it's downsides - is a reality we have no control over. Music went first, film is almost done, and video games are next.

You think Sony and Microsoft are going to let you download free copies of the physical games you own when they stop putting disc drives in consoles?

No but seriously, digital pricing is the real villain here

 

[nkarafo]

Its not about digital or physical, its about DRM and control. Its just that with digital they can get away with it easier.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

I used to care but I don't anymore. I don't play things twice anyway.

 

[Last Hearth]

I've learned to let go as I've gotten older.

As a young kid I'd hoard toys and games and such>DVDs>Vinyls. Not anymore.

I have a bookshelf full of DVDs and Blu-ray's. It's been at least five year since I turned on my Blu-ray player.

 

[Loomy]

I have a bookshelf full of DVDs and Blu-ray's. It's been at least five year since I turned on my Blu-ray player.

Hold on to that.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

Why would it even matter if the DriveClub servers are up anymore? Nobody would be fucking playing it. The only people that play DriveClub are those that download it so that they can bitch that the servers are down.

Too many people cling on to the memories of past games and think if they could just boot up Halo 3 and there would be 2 million people playing like it is still launch night in 2007.

 

[hououinkyouma00]

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about games that are exclusively digital. I'm talking about games that offer a physical option but people still opt for digital. Also, I'm not including physical games that still require a server to even launch. PC gaming, which I love, definitely has its issues here, but at least it has a history of keeping games accessible for decades.


What a lot of younger gamers don't realize yet is that this all-digital future everyone seems to be hyped for is eventually going to screw them over. I've lived through it games I've paid for digitally are now completely unplayable. Take DriveClub for example: I can still manually search and redownload it (it doesn't even show up in the store anymore), but the multiplayer and other features are gone for good. Then there are games that required an online check-in or always-online connection once the servers were shut down, those games became worthless.


And this isn't going to stop. It'll only get worse. The digital library you're building right now? One day, you might not be able to access any of it. Every game you download, like Elden Ring (what is it, 80GB?), takes up space on a company's server and uses their bandwidth. As games age and become less popular, publishers aren't going to keep hosting those files forever. No downloads, no access. End of story.


One personal example I can show in the video I linked is The Crew on PS4. I bought that game, played it, loved it, now the servers are down and the game is completely bricked. That's the cold truth: when you buy a digital game, you don't really own it. You're just renting access via a key tied to a company's service. And when they pull the plug, that's it.


That's why I'm a big fan of the original Nintendo Switch. I own 36 physical games, I bought every single one I cared about. No server check-ins, no internet requirements. If Nintendo shut down tomorrow, I'd still be able to pop in a cart and play, as long as I have working hardware. Those games are mine.


Call me a relic yelling at clouds if you want, but I see this all-digital future as complete BS. Curious what the rest of you think. Are we headed toward a gaming dark age, or am I just stuck in the past?

Shouldn't you be shilling your new gaming PC?

Also your post doesn't make any fucking sense at all because physical has like nothing to do with have of it.

 

[nkarafo]

Why would it even matter if the DriveClub servers are up anymore? Nobody would be fucking playing it. The only people that play DriveClub are those that download it so that they can bitch that the servers are down.

Too many people cling on to the memories of past games and think if they could just boot up Halo 3 and there would be 2 million people playing like it is still launch night in 2007.

True.

But then there stuff like The Crew where not even the single player game works if the servers are off.

 

[RoboFu]

Multiplayer online has nothing to do with physical vs digital.

 

[a multicultural team of v]

True.

But then there stuff like The Crew where not even the single player game works if the servers are off.

Yeah and that's very fair, usually games would release a final patch to enable single player without the multi.

That said, even if they did that you aren't playing the same game people played when it was released. (I assume in this case, I never played the Crew specifically) Sometimes experiences are just a moment of time, and if you aren't in the moment of time you missed it, and there is no recreating it.

Death Stranding is a good example - playing the game solo is simply not the same game as connected. You are missing a significant portion of not only content but the intended narrative itself. The game's world and structure is built around being connected.

This is strength and weakness of multiplayer/connected games, and a strength and weakness of truly single player games. It is what is is.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Sure, this is why paying full price is kind of retarded.

 

[TGO]

You own the cartridge, not the game. Nintendo (or any publisher) still controls the license. It's a more durable illusion of ownership, but an illusion nonetheless

The cartridge or disc gave him unlimited access to the contents own by the publisher that he paid to have ownership of.
No one is making the mistake of thinking they own the IP, people are making the mistake of thinking the publisher can withdraw that that access when you're in physical possession of it.
They can't, being a physical possession is the key here.
They agreed to sale it to you for a sum on money, the deal is done.
Even if they came into your house and took it, who do you think would win the lawsuit here?
This is why they want you to have digital, it's their loophole.
No physical object to sale, no physical rights.
The illusion is making people think like you do.
As soon people realised this the better.
Even Christopher Nolan said the same, once you own a physical copy it belongs to you for as long as you want it.

 

[Gamer79]

Multiplayer online has nothing to do with physical vs digital.

Some games you cannot play at all anymore

 

[Zacfoldor]

The truth is I fux wit it.

I think gaming is cheap af, even switch 2. Ever try boating, racing, bicycling? Shit costs a fortune. Go price a real bike. Go price SCUBA gear. Go price truck and parts kits. Go price a movie theatre.

 

[Gamer79]

The cartridge or disc gave him unlimited access to the contents own by the publisher that he paid to have ownership of.
No one is making the mistake of thinking they own the IP, people are making the mistake of thinking the publisher can withdraw that that access when you're in physical possession of it.
They can't, being a physical possession is the key here.
They agreed to sale it to you for a sum on money, the deal is done.
Even if they came into your house and took it, who do you think would win the lawsuit here?
This is why they want you to have digital, it's their loophole.
No physical object to sale, no physical rights.
The illusion is making people think like you do.
As soon people realised this the better.
Even Christopher Nolan said the same, once you own a physical copy it belongs to you for as long as you want it.

 

[Celcius]

I've learned to let go as I've gotten older.

As a young kid I'd hoard toys and games and such>DVDs>Vinyls. Not anymore.

Same
These days I'm into physical minimalism and digital maximalism.
Having a clean and tidy place IRL with a few things but in the digital world having basically infinite space and everything you could ever want at your fingertips.

 

[AJUMP23]

You are renting your game from the publisher.

 

[Sebastian1295]

I've learned to let go as I've gotten older.

As a young kid I'd hoard toys and games and such>DVDs>Vinyls. Not anymore.

Collecting videogames isn't hoarding because they have value and some of them have there value raised as the years go by and it's harder to get a physical copy of them. Hoarding would mean you're collecting junk and have a house full of junk. Getting rid of valuable games/toys/vinyls etc just means you're throwing money down the drain for no reason

 

[nkarafo]

You own the cartridge, not the game. Nintendo (or any publisher) still controls the license. It's a more durable illusion of ownership, but an illusion nonetheless

When you buy a game you should own that particular copy you bought. You should be able to play it whenever you want and also sell it to whoever you want.

With online DRM the publishers are slowly taking these things away from you.

I don't get why so many defend this. Are you people shareholders or something?

 

[danklord]

Not everyone is interested in having a museum in their homes.

 

[HRK69]

The cartridge or disc gave him unlimited access to the contents own by the publisher that he paid to have ownership of.
No one is making the mistake of thinking they own the IP, people are making the mistake of thinking the publisher can withdraw that that access when you're in physical possession of it.
They can't, being a physical possession is the key here.
They agreed to sale it to you for a sum on money, the deal is done.
Even if they came into your house and took it, who do you think would win the lawsuit here?
This is why they want you to have digital, it's their loophole.
No physical object to sale, no physical rights.
The illusion is making people think like you do.
As soon people realised this the better.
Even Christopher Nolan said the same, once you own a physical copy it belongs to you for as long as you want it.

While it's true that owning a physical item gives you possession of it, the core issue isn't about the physical ownership of the cartridge or disc, it's about the underlying software rights. Even with physical media, the game's publisher retains the rights to the software. When you buy a game, you're not buying the game outright, you're buying a license to use it under the publishers terms. That license can be revoked, altered, or restricted at their discretion.

Take a look at software agreements and DRM practices, they explicitly state that the publisher controls access to the content. That doesn't just apply to digital. Phsical copies can also be bound by these rules. If the servers shut down or if a patch bricks the game, your physical copy becomes obsolete, regardless of ownership of the physical media

The idea that "no one thinks they own the IP" misses the bigger point, the publisher's control over the software itself is what's important. Sure, you own the physical media, but that doesn't mean they can't pull the rug from under you if they want to. A lawsuit over this would likely hinge on the license agreements, which usually favor the publisher

If you want true, untouchable ownership, you'd have to control the hardware and software entirely, which isn't possible in today's market

 

[DeVeAn]

While I totally get the concern, it's really a non issue. Internet has shown you can play anything you want now if you search hard enough.

There will always be a way.

 

[Gamer79]

When you buy a game you should own that particular copy you bought. You should be able to play it whenever you want and also sell it to whoever you want.

With online DRM the publishers are slowly taking these things away from you.

I don't get why so many defend this. Are you people shareholders or something?

no they are short sighted

 

[Crew511A]

It's amazing watching people huff copium to try to deny the obvious. You don't have to like it, but it's pretty obvious where the market is going.

And if you're counting on Nintendo to save us from this dystopia, you're huffing the most copium of all.

 

[HRK69]

When you buy a game you should own that particular copy you bought. You should be able to play it whenever you want and also sell it to whoever you want.

With online DRM the publishers are slowly taking these things away from you.

I don't get why so many defend this. Are you people shareholders or something?

Who says I'm defending the publisher lol

 

[MrRibeye]

didn't even need to read the user name, the opening sentence immediately let me know this is a Gamer79 thread lol

Gamer79 has posted his daily thread about gaming life decisions.

Is this the most Gamer79 thread by Gamer79 yet?

You gotta love my man Gamer79 , his threads always bring genuine discussion, amusement, and this time wholesomeness to this spicy forum.

Gamer79 is a national treasure

 

[Gamer79]

While it's true that owning a physical item gives you possession of it, the core issue isn't about the physical ownership of the cartridge or disc, it's about the underlying software rights. Even with physical media, the game's publisher retains the rights to the software. When you buy a game, you're not buying the game outright, you're buying a license to use it under the publishers terms. That license can be revoked, altered, or restricted at their discretion.

Take a look at software agreements and DRM practices, they explicitly state that the publisher controls access to the content. That doesn't just apply to digital. Phsical copies can also be bound by these rules. If the servers shut down or if a patch bricks the game, your physical copy becomes obsolete, regardless of ownership of the physical media

The idea that "no one thinks they own the IP" misses the bigger point, the publisher's control over the software itself is what's important. Sure, you own the physical media, but that doesn't mean they can't pull the rug from under you if they want to. A lawsuit over this would likely hinge on the license agreements, which usually favor the publisher

If you want true, untouchable ownership, you'd have to control the hardware and software entirely, which isn't possible in today's market

I dont give a shit about all that. I can play it whenever I want and they cant shut the servers down on me.

 

[HRK69]

I dont give a shit about all that. I can play it whenever I want and they cant shut the servers down on me.

And you are calling ME shortsighted?

Lol

 

[nkarafo]

Who says I'm defending the publisher lol

Pardon me, the tone of your post made it look like the way publishers are handling it is reasonable for you.

 

[Durin]

Digital definitely has downsides, and I think physical lost its sense of true ownership as soon as day-one patches were a thing.

I think the only future of physical is later single player/local multiplayer releases that include all the files needed to run, no servers required. Kind of like collector vinyl.

What I would like to see happen more often is if a game is out for 5+ years with no new content, the dev just remove the DRM with some themed sale on Steam, or release on GoG. After that long the game has sold the vast majority of copies to invalidate the piracy worry, and you get a PR win for people that want to actually own a thing. DRM-free digital + NAS is the way.

 

[MrRibeye]

Whatever happened to Sony's 8-terrabyte large PlayStation Portal cloud gaming exclusive?

 

[HRK69]

Pardon me, the tone of your post made it look like the way publishers are handling it is reasonable for you.

Fuck no. I absolutely hate it.

 

[Sgt. Pinback]

So, is NeoGAF just a blogging site now? People can just create threads about whatever navel gazing horseshit they like?

 

[Gamerfan81]

Physical media is almost dead, just like shopping malls.

The times are changing. And you know whose fault that is? The consumer. It was the consumer that wanted the convenience of digital media right away and this is the future.

The consumer is always, right? Isn't that the motto? The consumer chose this future. Fact.

 

[AeonGaidenRaiden]

Nobody is hyping up the digital future, its just happening wether you like it or not. Even since the PS4....so many games require day 1 patch to even function properly. I think COD Blops 3 had only MP on disc, the campaign, zombies and extra maps all had to be downloaded. All you have is a plastic box on the shelf, not a full game.

 

[TGO]

That license can be revoked, altered, or restricted at their discretion.

How can they revoke or alter something you can easy revert back with the copy you paid for?
Very few games don't work out the box regardless of how many times people say they require day one patchs, it's faster to name the ones that don't then name the ones that do require them.
In fact some games like Assassin's Creed Unity actually runs better without patches on newer hardware.

Take a look at software agreements and DRM practices, they explicitly state that the publisher controls access to the content. That doesn't just apply to digital. Phsical copies can also be bound by these rules. If the servers shut down or if a patch bricks the game, your physical copy becomes obsolete, regardless of ownership of the physical media

Yet again, how?
A patch? Always online? (something that Ubi removed from the new Crew games because they had no legs to stand on)
Yes a publisher can enforce shitty practices but they never end well for them and there's usually a way around it.
Out of the hundreds, and I mean hundreds of games I own there is probably 2 max that doesn't work without some backend fiddling.

 

[NomenNescio]

While it's true that owning a physical item gives you possession of it, the core issue isn't about the physical ownership of the cartridge or disc, it's about the underlying software rights. Even with physical media, the game's publisher retains the rights to the software. When you buy a game, you're not buying the game outright, you're buying a license to use it under the publishers terms. That license can be revoked, altered, or restricted at their discretion.

Take a look at software agreements and DRM practices, they explicitly state that the publisher controls access to the content. That doesn't just apply to digital. Phsical copies can also be bound by these rules. If the servers shut down or if a patch bricks the game, your physical copy becomes obsolete, regardless of ownership of the physical media

The idea that "no one thinks they own the IP" misses the bigger point, the publisher's control over the software itself is what's important. Sure, you own the physical media, but that doesn't mean they can't pull the rug from under you if they want to. A lawsuit over this would likely hinge on the license agreements, which usually favor the publisher

If you want true, untouchable ownership, you'd have to control the hardware and software entirely, which isn't possible in today's market

Check out the First Sale Doctrine. Owning a physical copy of a software that doesn't rely on server authentication is true ownership of such copy, and this has been established by courts. There's nothing the publisher can do -factually or legally-, you can just use your copy offline.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

That's why when the industry goes full digital with inevitably higher prices, I'm done with modern gaming. I don't trust these greedy corporations especially with game ownership and pricing where they will have FULL control. I don't know why so many modern gamers do not realize that or even care. They have absolutely no idea what they are embracing with an all digital future.

 

[Metnut]

Counterpoint… backwards compatibility is more prevalent than ever before and it's never been easier to play games that are 10-15 years old on modern hardware. You can decide at 9pm on a Friday that you want to play a game and watch a tv show and have a drink and the DL is over and you're ready to go. Before this you'd have to hook up an old system to play older games.

It's not all bad.