Poll: If Video Games Were ONLY Digital

[peg | 372]

I would say "who the hell cares, all these modern games suck anyway".

[zeppelin03 | 314]

15 hours ago, DoctorEncore said:

I believe this has already happened numerous times, although I can't think of any examples off the top of my head. It's definitely problematic.

It has. The community makes patches or mods to restore it.  Sometimes you can select your patch version on steam too.

Edited June 15, 2020 by zeppelin03

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

9 hours ago, Code Monkey said:

The Wii is still getting new games so that end hasn't happened yet.

You know what I meant

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

10 hours ago, elprincipe said:

Does anyone think all-digital platform providers would do something to games a la what Netflix did in censoring Back to the Future 2? Or what about Disney Plus removing an episode of The Simpsons? What if the game you "bought" on Steam got a required patch that removed part of the game that had an expired license, or something deemed "offensive"?

If you're worried about that, buy through a DRM-free platform like GOG and just maintain your own backup.

[Makar | 1,946]

Four reasons why I don't like digital games:

1) storage is always a problem. Only so much memory on a system.

2) I can't sell them or trade them if I want to do that. 

3) I can't collect them. Nothing to display. No cool physical artwork, etc.

4) They're the same price as physical games. I have no incentive to buy a digital game if I can buy the same game physically. I distinctly recently remember buying Wargroove digitally thinking it was an eShop exclusive, then learned there was a physical copy, bought that, called up the Nintendo help line and got my money back for the digital Wargroove.

If games go full digital they better figure out the internal storage issue. You fill up your switch's memory with like 5-10 games. It's a joke. Yes I know you can buy a micro SD card but that has its limits too and games will only take up more memory over time as they get more complex with graphics. 

CDs are still a thing, as are physical books so I don't see why video games would ever be only digital.

I prefer physical and always will but if digital is the only option, I'll get with the times if they fix some issues like the storage one, I'll probably buy a ton less, and if they start doing games with ads, I'm out.

[Sumez | 2,994]

I'm sort of missing an answer that applies to me (and, I image, a lot of other people).

It's not like I wouldn't buy digital-only games if I were forced to do so as the only means to acquire them. But my threshold for investing in something I don't actually get, is gonna a lot more strict. I try to never spend more than $10 on a digital download. Maybe $15 if I really, really want it. That's not gonna change.

Of course this probably means I should pick the first option of the poll, but I don't feel like it correctly applies to my mindset, as it wouldn't just mean switching from my current approach to physical copies.

[themisfit138 | 523]

15 hours ago, DoctorEncore said:

I believe this has already happened numerous times, although I can't think of any examples off the top of my head. It's definitely problematic.

They removed about half the roster on Marvel Ultimate Alliance. In one of the updates on 360. Including some of the DLC ones. 

[phart010 | 1,708]

3 hours ago, Makar said:

Four reasons why I don't like digital games:

1) storage is always a problem. Only so much memory on a system.

2) I can't sell them or trade them if I want to do that. 

3) I can't collect them. Nothing to display. No cool physical artwork, etc.

4) They're the same price as physical games. I have no incentive to buy a digital game if I can buy the same game physically. I distinctly recently remember buying Wargroove digitally thinking it was an eShop exclusive, then learned there was a physical copy, bought that, called up the Nintendo help line and got my money back for the digital Wargroove.

If games go full digital they better figure out the internal storage issue. You fill up your switch's memory with like 5-10 games. It's a joke. Yes I know you can buy a micro SD card but that has its limits too and games will only take up more memory over time as they get more complex with graphics. 

CDs are still a thing, as are physical books so I don't see why video games would ever be only digital.

I prefer physical and always will but if digital is the only option, I'll get with the times if they fix some issues like the storage one, I'll probably buy a ton less, and if they start doing games with ads, I'm out.

They are gonna go digital only eventually. Doesn’t make sense for us as consumers. But it makes too much sense for the publishers. They want to guarantee that everyone that wants to play a game has to pay for it.
 

When you buy a used game, the publisher makes zero money. There are no used game sales or trades when it’s all digital. Everyone pays the publisher to play the game. 
 

I believe that if internet speeds were where they needed to be in North America, then we would have seen digital only PS5 and New XBox.. We were only fortunate enough to get disc drives on these systems because 5g infrastructure is still not ready to go. When 5g is up and running across America, we will start phasing out discs/cartridges for mainstream gaming consoles.

Edit: and then we will finally say goodbye to Gamestop

Edited June 15, 2020 by phart010

[RH | 4,968]

The sad truth is that consumers are quick to forget and under-appreciate current benefits when something new and shiny comes along that has a single-benefit to it.  I mean, modern displays are definitely better than CRTs, even late in the CRT lifespan, but I remember when every one was making the huge push to transition to LCD monitors and LCD/Plasma TVs at home.  Sure, having a flatscreen meant you could have a lighter, bigger display so everyone sacrificed what was basically horrible picture quality when compared to the CRT for the added benefit.

The death of the CRT was inevitable since it was a piece of analog tech that was continuing along in an increasingly digital world, but the point is for the sake of lighter/narrower monitors, they were willing to throw away the quality for something that gave them a bit more screen real estate (even though resolution often couldn't compare.)

I never see a day when digital games can offer enough features and freedom to be worth the loss of physical media but as a younger generation ages into adulthood, I see the majority of them wanting to just have a way to have instant-access to the latest media.  Of course, it's not instant because a 100GB game will still take a while to download, but you can instantly buy it and then start the process of downloading it to play "shortly".

Also, I recall reading a long time ago that one of the "saviors" for physical media might actually be people living in very rural regions.  Earlier in the thread I started about "Did you have a free premium cable channel", I mentioned that where my parents live, they had dial-up just 10 years or so ago, and now they still suffer with a slow DSL/satellite connection because they don't have a broadband option.  I have no clue what percent of gamers are in rural communities with out fast (enough) download speeds, but even if they alienate 5% of their base, that's enough to see a huge hit in revenue.

Until the US had broadband for all, keeping a physical option available makes sense, even if there's a premium for it.  Frankly, I'd be willing to pay a 10% up charge just to have a physical item. I have no clue why they do this because this would provide additional incentive for those that don't care one way or the other to actually buy digital only.

[avatar! | 1,827]

17 hours ago, elprincipe said:

Does anyone think all-digital platform providers would do something to games a la what Netflix did in censoring Back to the Future 2? Or what about Disney Plus removing an episode of The Simpsons? What if the game you "bought" on Steam got a required patch that removed part of the game that had an expired license, or something deemed "offensive"?

Of course they would! No doubt about it. Now, we could argue whether HBO's decision to remove Gone With the Wind was a correct response or not, but it shows you how powerful controlling digital content is. Imagine Nintendo decides to remove a game for whatever reason. Sure, they'll give you a refund, but that game is GONE forever. Maybe you put 100+ hours into the game to unlock everything, and now, it's just a memory.

[avatar! | 1,827]

4 hours ago, Sumez said:

I'm sort of missing an answer that applies to me (and, I image, a lot of other people).

It's not like I wouldn't buy digital-only games if I were forced to do so as the only means to acquire them. But my threshold for investing in something I don't actually get, is gonna a lot more strict. I try to never spend more than $10 on a digital download. Maybe $15 if I really, really want it. That's not gonna change.

Of course this probably means I should pick the first option of the poll, but I don't feel like it correctly applies to my mindset, as it wouldn't just mean switching from my current approach to physical copies.

I'm not sure what sort of option you're looking for? The scenario is that ALL new games are available only digitally. What do you do? I think it's a pretty clear-cut scenario. You can be as picky as you want and only buy 1-2 games a year, but if you still purchase them then you're in the first option. 

[Makar | 1,946]

1 minute ago, avatar! said:

I'm not sure what sort of option you're looking for? The scenario is that ALL new games are available only digitally. What do you do? I think it's a pretty clear-cut scenario. You can be as picky as you want and only buy 1-2 games a year, but if you still purchase them then you're in the first option. 

I'm kinda with @Sumez on this one. There isn't a great answer for "I'd buy them with this one stipulation". $10 for digital games is also my cutoff. If it isn't a game I know I'll love, I won't shell out more than $10 because I can't return it if I don't like it. I also don't buy a lot of digital titles because they don't have demos. How will I know I'll like a game if I can't play a small part of it beforehand? This isn't a problem with physical games because like I said, you can return those if you don't like the game. No way am I shelling out $60 for a digital title if I can't get my money back

[avatar! | 1,827]

Just now, Makar said:

I'm kinda with @Sumez on this one. There isn't a great answer for "I'd buy them with this one stipulation". $10 for digital games is also my cutoff. If it isn't a game I know I'll love, I won't shell out more than $10 because I can't return it if I don't like it. I also don't buy a lot of digital titles because they don't have demos. How will I know I'll like a game if I can't play a small part of it beforehand? This isn't a problem with physical games because like I said, you can return those if you don't like the game. No way am I shelling out $60 for a digital title if I can't get my money back

People can always have stipulations and it doesn't make sense to try to put those all into a poll  

Also, since when can you return physical games you open? Most places you can return physical games if you order them and they're damaged. Playing a game, not liking it, and returning it is I'm quite certain not legal. Also, sounds like you should choose option 1. 

[Matchbook | 194]

On 6/13/2020 at 1:04 PM, TDIRunner said:

I've been saying it for years, but an all digital world is where I draw the line.  That's where I stop buying video games and I just enjoy what I have.  It's coming and there is no way to stop it.  Honestly, I don't even care.  I almost see it as an excuse to stop buying games.  Besides, as I get older, I enjoy modern games less and less.  All the more reason to enjoy what I have.  My backlog is big enough to keep me busy for most of the rest of my life.  

Backlogs so long ugh, the struggle is real......

[Bearcat-Doug | 5,105]

I doubt I'm going to buy any new consoles, but I'd at least like the option of physical games.

[Makar | 1,946]

38 minutes ago, avatar! said:

People can always have stipulations and it doesn't make sense to try to put those all into a poll  

Also, since when can you return physical games you open? Most places you can return physical games if you order them and they're damaged. Playing a game, not liking it, and returning it is I'm quite certain not legal. Also, sounds like you should choose option 1. 

Uh every game ever for pre-owned at GameStop? I should've stipulated pre-owned since yea I don't think you can do that for brand new games. Although you could still open a brand new game and return it to GameStop for store credit for the value of a pre-owned copy. Pretty sure you can do that at Walmart and target too so that I think is a legal way to do that for brand new games

Edited June 15, 2020 by Makar

[SNESNESCUBE64 | 553]

Companies are making it easy to move to digital as things get faster and more reliable. Heck, you can even return games on steam if you don't like it.

For me personally, I think I am going to move more to digital for a couple of reasons, the biggest of which is I don't care to have a shelf full of ps4 or ps5 games. Reason being is that you just have to install those games anyway, so theres no real benefit for me to have the actual disc. Another reason is mechanical failures, I have had so many modern drives just straight up die on me, between my laptop, xbox 360, and a ps3 that I had for a week before returning it, it just isn't worth the hassle. And with games constantly going on sale, financially it has the potential to be cheaper.

[zeppelin03 | 314]

31 minutes ago, SNESNESCUBE64 said:

Companies are making it easy to move to digital as things get faster and more reliable. Heck, you can even return games on steam if you don't like it.

For me personally, I think I am going to move more to digital for a couple of reasons, the biggest of which is I don't care to have a shelf full of ps4 or ps5 games. Reason being is that you just have to install those games anyway, so theres no real benefit for me to have the actual disc. Another reason is mechanical failures, I have had so many modern drives just straight up die on me, between my laptop, xbox 360, and a ps3 that I had for a week before returning it, it just isn't worth the hassle. And with games constantly going on sale, financially it has the potential to be cheaper.

I was going to bring up Steam refunds but you beat me to it.  2 weeks since purchase and under 2 hours of play has been enough for me to decide if I keep a game plenty of times.  It was a great move on Steam's part.  Also, Steam Family Sharing allows you to share your entire library with others.  I have used it to expand the library on someones system and it works great.  Updating a setting in Steam is much easier than dropping off 300 PS5 games at their house.

The only loss is trade/resale but I don't mind.  Instead of buying a game at $60 knowing I could trade for $30 if I don't like it I wait for a sale if I have doubts.  Games are $40 or less in no time.  I will gladly buy Hotline Miami 1&2 on sale for $4 digitally instead of $30 for a cart/disc.  If the physical version truly had the full game I would get it but it is missing day 1 patches, updates, dlc, etc.

Edited June 15, 2020 by zeppelin03

[avatar! | 1,827]

52 minutes ago, SNESNESCUBE64 said:

For me personally, I think I am going to move more to digital for a couple of reasons, the biggest of which is I don't care to have a shelf full of ps4 or ps5 games. Reason being is that you just have to install those games anyway, so theres no real benefit for me to have the actual disc. Another reason is mechanical failures, I have had so many modern drives just straight up die on me, between my laptop, xbox 360, and a ps3 that I had for a week before returning it, it just isn't worth the hassle. And with games constantly going on sale, financially it has the potential to be cheaper.

I agree that digital games definitely have the potential to be cheaper, but I disagree with "mechanical failures". I haven't had a single drive just "die" on me, and I've had numerous consoles. I do know that many people treat their "stuff" as if they're living in a frat house, so it doesn't surprise me that many systems have been damaged. Seriously, people don't know how to treat things with respect, I've seen it numerous times. That said, here are reasons why I will purchase physical copies and not digital

1)Digital = lose your account lose your games -NOT so with physical

2)Digital = game is removed by company game is lost -NOT so with physical

3)Physical copies can easily be lent to a friend, and there's no limit on this

4)Physical copies can be resold without any issues, they can also be an investment

5)Physical collector's items include numerous bonuses that are impossible to replicate digitally (such as statue/figure etc)

My main determent to physical copies is that they take up space. That's of course the nature of physical copies and collecting, but it's easy to let things go overboard if one is not prepared. 

[themisfit138 | 523]

5 hours ago, RH said:

Also, I recall reading a long time ago that one of the "saviors" for physical media might actually be people living in very rural regions.  Earlier in the thread I started about "Did you have a free premium cable channel", I mentioned that where my parents live, they had dial-up just 10 years or so ago, and now they still suffer with a slow DSL/satellite connection because they don't have a broadband option.  I have no clue what percent of gamers are in rural communities with out fast (enough) download speeds, but even if they alienate 5% of their base, that's enough to see a huge hit in revenue.

Until the US had broadband for all, keeping a physical option available makes sense, even if there's a premium for it.  Frankly, I'd be willing to pay a 10% up charge just to have a physical item. I have no clue why they do this because this would provide additional incentive for those that don't care one way or the other to actually buy digital only.

I live out in the sticks. The only internet option is satellite. I barely even get cellphone coverage out here. It takes days to download a small patch. There is no way I would be able to download a 100GB game. Based on speed alone, that is well over my data cap. I also can’t play any games, such as Gears of War, that require you to be online to even start the game. All of this factors into my not buying the new gen of consoles.  

[a3quit4s | 4,125]

Had to delete my original Nintendo online account because of the hack and got tired of the emails telling me to reset my password. Resigned up today for NES and SNES vc and my wife wanted to get some download only games. Had to call Nintendo to get my old purchases reinstated to my new account. Had receipts and transaction numbers, still had to be escalated to a supervisor to get the games I paid for onto my new account as a one time courtesy.

i hate the future. 

[zeppelin03 | 314]

It's interesting that 50% of the people on here would still keep gaming in an all digital future.  That seems plenty high for a collector heavy forum.  I can only imagine what the numbers are like for the general public.  Most people I know don't want to mess with discs anymore.

[Dr. Morbis | 2,091]

30 minutes ago, zeppelin03 said:

It's interesting that 50% of the people on here would still keep gaming in an all digital future.  That seems plenty high for a collector heavy forum.  I can only imagine what the numbers are like for the general public.  Most people I know don't want to mess with discs anymore.

I was just going to point this out, but the very last post in the thread beat me to it; if a bunch of crotchety old retro collectors and gamers are mostly okay with going 100% digital, think about how the rest of the general population is going to feel about it: less hassle up front means everyone's in.  And furthermore, 99% of the videogame consumers in this world take whatever the industry feeds them anyway; right now it's just a matter of infrastructure, as has been pointed out...

[avatar! | 1,827]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Morbis said:

I was just going to point this out, but the very last post in the thread beat me to it; if a bunch of crotchety old retro collectors and gamers are mostly okay with going 100% digital, think about how the rest of the general population is going to feel about it: less hassle up front means everyone's in.  And furthermore, 99% of the videogame consumers in this world take whatever the industry feeds them anyway; right now it's just a matter of infrastructure, as has been pointed out...

Tell me, when Microsoft decided to go all digital, how well did work out for them?

[Dr. Morbis | 2,091]

How well did digital distribution work out for Sega and Nintendo decades ago?  Put things in perspective, man... it's 2020 now and our infrastructure is improving all the time.  You'll see...