I'm kind of with Olas. Barring any explanation, it does sound fetishistic. Or like the habit smokers get of putting something to their mouth. Or an obsessive compulsion.
1. The feeling of actual ownership. I will say right up front it's largely an illusion at this point, but when you download games from Steam, Origin, or uPlay, you're beholden to that service (and your login credentials) to reinstall / re-download, should you suffer a hardware or memory fault of some kind. Or if for some reason the service bans you and you lose access to those games. *Not typically an issue with "DRM-free" services like GOG or Humble, though in the event of hardware / software failure, you're still reliant on them existing in some form in order to reacquire your games. Which brings us to...
2. Not relying on internet connection. Not everyone has the bandwidth (or even the access) to obtain games digitally, and while things are improving, there's still a feeling of security in having a physical copy of something you can install and play completely offline. This doesn't necessarily apply to AAA-games, who are embedded with the above services, but the topic we're discussing here in the article are Indie games, which more often than not have DRM-free versions that would be perfectly at home on a stand-alone disk.
3. "Pokemon Syndrome," ie, gotta collect 'em all. Some people feel a measure of pride in being able to point to their vast library of disks. I guess you could term that "fetishistic" if you wished, but it's not all that different from people who pour hundreds of dollars into pimping out their car, or building an awesome PC case - there's a showing-off element to it that says "Look at all my fine stuff."
4. The extras. This is the part I was mainly trying to express in my first post - it's less about having a physical copy of the disk, and more about the presentation. A nice, descriptive novella-sized manual. Maps of in-game worlds or locations. That kitschy key-chain or desk ornament. Even the box itself, in some cases. They all give the sense that the developer isn't just selling you on an experience of ones and zeros, bits and pixels, but on something real and tangible - an experience you'll keep even after the software has moved on and left your poor, aged, unsupported and nonfunctional game behind[footnote]I'm looking at you, MechWarrior 2[/footnote].
Now it's perfectly fair if none of these apply to you, personally, and/or you don't find benefit in any of the points given that outweigh the convenience of a hassle-free digital copy. Contrary to what the internet at large seems to think, it's perfectly acceptable to have a different opinion or perspective on something. I just see no reason to be dismissive and snide about it. I don't see anything in the article to suggest the digital option will simply disappear - this is an alternative for people who do miss the bygone days when a PC game came in a VHS-sized box and felt like you were buying a product instead of a service.
Only one of those comes anywhere close to describing what Olas was talking about:
4. The extras. This is the part I was mainly trying to express in my first post - it's less about having a physical copy of the disk, and more about the presentation. A nice, descriptive novella-sized manual. Maps of in-game worlds or locations. That kitschy key-chain or desk ornament. Even the box itself, in some cases. They all give the sense that the developer isn't just selling you on an experience of ones and zeros, bits and pixels, but on something real and tangible - an experience you'll keep even after the software has moved on and left your poor, aged, unsupported and nonfunctional game behind
And it still doesn't explain the need for tactile feedback from a physical object. If you like swag, that's fine.
But then, I "own" several physical games no longer playable because of the devs, so I don't think that's the issue here either.
There are people who describe a need to feel or smell the manual or deal with the shrink wrap who, if they described this to anyone outside the gaming community, would sound needlessly obsessive. And even within the community. That's not "I like a game I can insert because I control the end content" or "because I don't want to rely on an internet connection to get MY game." That's compulsion. I'm an obsessive compulsive, and I have trouble not seeing this as the same thing (perhaps to a different severity).
Olas said:
I have no love of physical stuff. Physical stuff takes up space, creates clutter, is susceptible to wear and tear, and costs more (or at least should). I don't feel my love and appreciation or sense of ownership is lessened just because of the form my content takes, whether that be bits or atoms. It seems almost fetishistic the way I hear some people talk about the wonders of being able to feel something in their hand. It's just a piece of plastic. If you want to handle a piece of plastic I'm sure there's a bottle in your recycling you can fondle.
The bold bit should be enough to indicate he's not talking about your reasoning. Though, I mean, I can't say what he thinks of your other examples. Speaking for myself, I don't find them particularly bad. I get benefits to physical media. For example, you never have to recharge a book. I don't always share them, but I get them. However, noting the benefits and treating the game or manual as though it's some sort of magic talisman or whatnot does come off as the kind of behaviour one would seek help for (though I'm not sure how much of one's life this would occupy).
Bring back stone tablets! Don't you know that paper falls apart and ink fades, but stone! We can still read stuff from Ancient Egypt!
The only benefit of having a physical copy these days is the ease of re-installing it if something goes wrong or if you've removed the game some time ago and feel like playing it again. My friend went to re-intall Mass Effect 3 to try out a mod, and it took her nearly 5 hours to install the game and all it's DLC in. However, with the advancement of internet access, I'd imagine that problem would eventually go away.
Bring back stone tablets! Don't you know that paper falls apart and ink fades, but stone! We can still read stuff from Ancient Egypt!
The only benefit of having a physical copy these days is the ease of re-installing it if something goes wrong or if you've removed the game some time ago and feel like playing it again. My friend went to re-intall Mass Effect 3 to try out a mod, and it took her nearly 5 hours to install the game and all it's DLC in. However, with the advancement of internet access, I'd imagine that problem would eventually go away.
Not to mention, one of the benefits of PC is that you can get hard drives large enough to avoid this entirely. I haven't deleted any game I didn't thoroughly dislike since I bought the PC that preceded this current build.
I'm not sure the claim that people aren't willing to pay sticker price is really valid. I'm not willing to pay full MSRP for a game I've never heard of, but I've bought several games day 1 or (for games by companies I trust) for the preorder discount.
Yeah, I have a lot of games I paid $5 for, but quite a few of them I wouldn't have bought for full price (or wouldn't even have heard of) otherwise.
I'm mature enough to admit when I'm wrong - at least tangentially so, in this case. I'd overlooked that bit and did not realize he was speaking very specifically about someone's love of holding the disk. I'd misread it as a general put-down of anyone supporting this idea, and for that I apologize.
I don't fall into that camp myself, but even so, in the end does it really matter why someone's in favor of boxed physical content? I still maintain that as much as it might sound weird, there's no real harm in someone who just likes the smell of fresh plastic[footnote]Unless there's been some study linking manufacturing "fumes" with brain damage or nose cancer or something. That would be unfortunate for them.[/footnote]. There's no reason to deride them for it.
It's simple, the service that sold us the digital product still has to support it. If Capcom goes under, the Steams and Playstation marketplaces will still be under contract to offer the game for download to those who own it, even if they can't sell new licenses to people.
And that's just in theory, in practice, another company will buy Capcom out and keep selling it's product. Hell, System Shock was deemed impossible to resell on GOG because something like 3 or 4 companies had claim to the license, now, it's on GOG on Steam, even if it did take 10 years.
Also, my first digital distributor was Direct2Drive, after it went under my entire library transferred bought by Gamersgate, not entirely ideal but they're still available under the same username and password.
Finally, when Games For Windows UNDYING finally keeled over, all CD-Keys for the Batman Arkham games automatically reverted into Steam keys, so I copy pasted my Direct2Drive keys into Steam and got a second version on the service I prefer.
Why do I bring this up? Because I'm sick of hearing how you can do more with physical media. Discs decay in about 12 years, alot of my mid 90's CDs in collectors editions are yellowed and don't read properly anymore and it's not like I can mail the disks to the company to get replacements nowadays.
1. The feeling of actual ownership. I will say right up front it's largely an illusion at this point, but when you download games from Steam, Origin, or uPlay, you're beholden to that service (and your login credentials) to reinstall / re-download, should you suffer a hardware or memory fault of some kind. Or if for some reason the service bans you and you lose access to those games. *Not typically an issue with "DRM-free" services like GOG or Humble, though in the event of hardware / software failure, you're still reliant on them existing in some form in order to reacquire your games. Which brings us to...
I mentioned the problem of DRM and being tethered to distributors in my first post, and how it's not a problem with digital content but with the people who want to make money from it. In a way, it's a side effect of digital distribution being TOO convenient since data can theoretically be copied indefinitely without need to reference the original.
Although DRM is definitely a legitimate issue, most services that use it do have some sort offline mode that can let you use the content free of internet connection for at least a period of time. You also have to weigh this minor (for most people) downside with the upside of being able to reacquire the content in case it gets deleted or destroyed somehow, not to mention updates/patches, mods, and access across devices.
I get the sense that when people talk about the idea of owning something completely free of online connections, they're really imagining some apocalyptic future where their country's infrastructure has failed and they're living as a survivalist in some kind of bunker, playing their old single-player games on electricity that I assume is generated by turning a crank. I don't know, maybe I'm projecting too much, but that's the feeling I get.
I'm not particularly worried about Steam going under, and have to believe if they did they'd provide patches for their games beforehand, and if they didn't well... let's just say where there's a will there's a way.
*Not typically an issue with "DRM-free" services like GOG or Humble, though in the event of hardware / software failure, you're still reliant on them existing in some form in order to reacquire your games. Which brings us to...
Complaining that you need an internet connection to reacquire digital games is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. The fact that you can reacquire them at all puts should be a huge plus for digital content. Unless you buy a warranty, good luck getting a distributor of physical content to do the same thing at all.
2. Not relying on internet connection. Not everyone has the bandwidth (or even the access) to obtain games digitally, and while things are improving, there's still a feeling of security in having a physical copy of something you can install and play completely offline. This doesn't necessarily apply to AAA-games, who are embedded with the above services, but the topic we're discussing here in the article are Indie games, which more often than not have DRM-free versions that would be perfectly at home on a stand-alone disk.
It's funny how where some people see security, I see vulnerability. Disks can be scratched, toys can be chewed up by pets, even just regularly intended use can take it's toll on things over time. Add to that the risk of misplacement, theft, dropping it down a sewer, lending it to a friend who moves out of town. Physical media is also more reliant on specific hardware to work, which can make compatibility into an issue over time. It seems quite likely that my old consoles may someday stop functioning properly, but I'm pretty sure the internet is here to stay.
As for slow internet speeds, it's an embarrassing fact that so many people living in the first world still have this problem, but I see it as a problem that exists in the world around digital content. Digital distribution should by all rights be a much faster, easier, more energy efficient way of transmitting content to someone. While I'll admit it's a fact that for some people it's preferable to get into a car and drive to a store to buy a disk, I definitely don't see a reason why it SHOULD be.
3. "Pokemon Syndrome," ie, gotta collect 'em all. Some people feel a measure of pride in being able to point to their vast library of disks. I guess you could term that "fetishistic" if you wished, but it's not all that different from people who pour hundreds of dollars into pimping out their car, or building an awesome PC case - there's a showing-off element to it that says "Look at all my fine stuff."
Which you can't do with digital content why? Unless your friends have eye damage that makes it hard to see a screen I would think this is a non-issue. If anything doesn't the internet make it easier to share stuff with people who you otherwise couldn't invite to your house? If anything I think the digital age has made sharing stuff about one's life a little TOO easy for some people.
Digital content also has the benefit of being something you can choose NOT show to people. While you may be proud of your collection in front of your friends, you might not feel the same way when your parents are around.
4. The extras. This is the part I was mainly trying to express in my first post - it's less about having a physical copy of the disk, and more about the presentation. A nice, descriptive novella-sized manual. Maps of in-game worlds or locations. That kitschy key-chain or desk ornament. Even the box itself, in some cases. They all give the sense that the developer isn't just selling you on an experience of ones and zeros, bits and pixels, but on something real and tangible - an experience you'll keep even after the software has moved on and left your poor, aged, unsupported and nonfunctional game behind[footnote]I'm looking at you, MechWarrior 2[/footnote].
The only thing you mentioned that couldn't be digital would be the kitschy key-chain, and even then there are things that come close ie
But it's not the same!!
Okay fine, enjoy your keychain. Anything with some degree of physical functionality will necessitate a physical component. So your Halo lunchbox and Spongebob bottle opener are justified as well. This will also extend to clothing, though I don't know how many games come with that.
But by and large the game accessories can also be made digital, as has been the case with purchases I've made. I've had games come with wallpapers (as if I can't download them from the internet), soundtracks, and pdfs of comic-books and regular books, and things like trophies can be provided in game.
If there's one valid argument I think you could make for physical stuff, it's that we all live first and foremost in a physical world, in a physical area, house or room, and that physical space would be quite dull if we didn't own physical things to fill and cover it with (at least until we have walls like in Cloud Atlas). So I'll give you that point. After all, it's not like I don't own posters and models and stuff myself.
It's just that when it comes to videogames, we're talking about something that is, by definition, digital. Cartridges and disks were never intended as anything more than a tool to access the games. While I do have plenty of nostalgia, it's more for the content of the games than the physical storage devices they were on, which is why I'm a big fan of emulators.
Now it's perfectly fair if none of these apply to you, personally, and/or you don't find benefit in any of the points given that outweigh the convenience of a hassle-free digital copy. Contrary to what the internet at large seems to think, it's perfectly acceptable to have a different opinion or perspective on something. I just see no reason to be dismissive and snide about it. I don't see anything in the article to suggest the digital option will simply disappear - this is an alternative for people who do miss the bygone days when a PC game came in a VHS-sized box and felt like you were buying a product instead of a service.
I think the "it's my own opinion" defense is often used too lazily to defend a point without using rational. Ya, I suppose on some level there will always be an underlying qualia that can't be communicated through language, but most people who like something can describe the aspects that make it good to them in a manner that other human beings will understand. I mean, how else could MovieBob have a job if he wasn't able to say not only that he likes/dislikes about a movie but why?
I get the sense that when people talk about the idea of owning something completely free of online connections, they're really imagining some apocalyptic future where their country's infrastructure has failed and they're living as a survivalist in some kind of bunker, playing their old single-player games on electricity that I assume is generated by turning a crank. I don't know, maybe I'm projecting too much, but that's the feeling I get.
Speaking personally, I live in a rural area with abysmal connection speed and less-than-reliable service. Downloading the ESO beta took an entire week, going more or less full-throttle on what bandwidth I had. If Ookla's speed-test is to be believed, the same is true for around 15-20% of the US, which is a fairly substantial chunk of the population.
Complaining that you need an internet connection to reacquire digital games is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. The fact that you can reacquire them at all puts should be a huge plus for digital content. Unless you buy a warranty, good luck getting a distributor of physical content to do the same thing at all.
Consider the above - reinstall game library from disk in a couple hours, or spend an entire month, give or take, doing the same via download? It's not nearly as ridiculous as it sounds, and it's this kind of condescending tone that sparked my first reply. Not everyone has the option or privilege of high-speed access. I'm lucky I'm not still on dial-up, for fuck's sake.
It's funny how where some people see security, I see vulnerability. Disks can be scratched, toys can be chewed up by pets, even just regularly intended use can take it's toll on things over time. Add to that the risk of misplacement, theft, dropping it down a sewer, lending it to a friend who moves out of town. Physical media is also more reliant on specific hardware to work, which can make compatibility into an issue over time. It seems quite likely that my old consoles may someday stop functioning properly, but I'm pretty sure the internet is here to stay.
Oddly enough, I've almost never had any of the above issues with my physical media. I would point out how being responsible and taking care of your stuff is basic common sense, but I understand that "shit happens" and sometimes there are circumstances beyond your control. Hell, I loaned my Freespace 2 disks to a guy whose apartment burned down. If it weren't for the game being open-sourced over at Hard Light [http://www.hard-light.net/], I'd still be SOL.
... Bottom line, I'm not saying there isn't value in digital distribution. That was never my intent. My point is just that there's room enough and reason enough for a physical option to continue existing, and no sensible reason to be a dick to the people who do prefer the tangible one.
As for slow internet speeds, it's an embarrassing fact that so many people living in the first world still have this problem, but I see it as a problem that exists in the world around digital content. Digital distribution should by all rights be a much faster, easier, more energy efficient way of transmitting content to someone. While I'll admit it's a fact that for some people it's preferable to get into a car and drive to a store to buy a disk, I definitely don't see a reason why it SHOULD be.
Which you can't do with digital content why? Unless your friends have eye damage that makes it hard to see a screen I would think this is a non-issue. If anything doesn't the internet make it easier to share stuff with people who you otherwise couldn't invite to your house? If anything I think the digital age has made sharing stuff about one's life a little TOO easy for some people.
Digital content also has the benefit of being something you can choose NOT show to people. While you may be proud of your collection in front of your friends, you might not feel the same way when your parents are around.
This isn't me so I'm playing devil's advocate trying to back it up, in as much as I care to. The point is that to some people, a screenshot of a lengthy Steam library just isn't the same as a vast shelf of XBox or PS3 cases. That's obviously not you, either. I was simply listing one of the many reasons why a person might want a physical copy - as part of a collection.
The only thing you mentioned that couldn't be digital would be the kitschy key-chain, and even then there are things that come close ie
But it's not the same!!
Okay fine, enjoy your keychain. Anything with some degree of physical functionality will necessitate a physical component. So your Halo lunchbox and Spongebob bottle opener are justified as well. This will also extend to clothing, though I don't know how many games come with that.
But by and large the game accessories can also be made digital, as has been the case with purchases I've made. I've had games come with wallpapers (as if I can't download them from the internet), soundtracks, and pdfs of comic-books and regular books, and things like trophies can be provided in game.
I actually can't remember ever getting a keychain as part of a physical copy, but I remember some games having them as pre-order bonuses back when I was working at Best Buy. Also that USB "whale oil" lamp when Dishonored came out. Can't forget that one.
If there's one valid argument I think you could make for physical stuff, it's that we all live first and foremost in a physical world, in a physical area, house or room, and that physical space would be quite dull if we didn't own physical things to fill and cover it with (at least until we have walls like in Cloud Atlas). So I'll give you that point. After all, it's not like I don't own posters and models and stuff myself.
The maps from successive Elder Scrolls games are also some of my favorite wall-art. I'll concede that the laminated fold-out keymap-guide from MechCommander is purely nostalgic though and amounts to worthless clutter on my shelf.
It's just that when it comes to videogames, we're talking about something that is, by definition, digital. Cartridges and disks were never intended as anything more than a tool to access the games. While I do have plenty of nostalgia, it's more for the content of the games than the physical storage devices they were on, which is why I'm a big fan of emulators.
People are different, I guess? I have plenty of nostalgia for the games too, and a fair collection of ROMs. Some memories just happen to be attached to the peripherals too. And some don't have anything to do with the cartridges or their manuals. Memory is weird like that.
I think the "it's my own opinion" defense is often used too lazily to defend a point without using rational. Ya, I suppose on some level there will always be an underlying qualia that can't be communicated through language, but most people who like something can describe the aspects that make it good to them in a manner that other human beings will understand. I mean, how else could MovieBob have a job if he wasn't able to say not only that he likes/dislikes about a movie but why?
Did I not articulate my points clearly enough, or were you just tired of seeing that kind of statement used? If the latter, I'll understand that too, but it wasn't intended to be a cop-out. I've been lurking around the Escapist long before I had a username, I've seen plenty of arguments and flamewars over the absolute dumbest shit, simply because two (or more) people can't accept that someone else might have a different opinion or perspective. I'm not that guy and it wasn't really my intent to spark a feud - hell, I'd have left your quote off entirely if I'd just read a little bit more carefully. I was only expressing that, at the end of the day I'll still like getting Stuff in a Box and you'll likely still consider it an outdated idea and a waste, but that disagreeing with someone doesn't have to mean disrespecting them.
As I've said for years, I dislike the whole idea of digital media, I merely use it because I've been given no choice. Even when you buy a physical game for PC nowadays, it usually just includes a code and a disc that connects you to something like STEAM. With console games they increasingly require at least some degree of internet connectivity, and some kind of download or handshake to activate your game, it's not entirely on the disc.
I'll admit I miss the maps, books, and other things that came with boxed copies. Nowadays when those things DO exist in a collector's edition, they charge you extra for things that were included with the game for many years.
Most importantly though, I dislike the fact that I give people money for a product that I have no control over, and am entirely dependent on someone else to use. Sometimes when buying a game on say STEAM I even have to check in with multiple people to use a product that I paid for.
Now, I understand that the games industry argues that we technically never owned anything even from the beginning, so this isn't a "scam", but all semantics aside formalizing the fact that they have all the power and my money, and I have nothing unless they decide to grant it to me, is something I can't get behind. With a disc, with the game contained in it's entirety right there, I could install and play my game whenever I want, at any time I want, without needing to hope someone's server is up for me to download it or check in. What's more, even if it's unlikely that I would want to play a 20 year old game, as a consumer I feel that's my right, as things stand now if some of these platforms go down, they take everything I purchased with them.
As much as I hate big government, one thing I've argued for a long time is that there should be increased regulation of things like software, and the government should require everything to be made available on a self-contained hardcopy.
I also feel that in cases where digital distribution is for some reason necessary, the product should be required to be backed by a trust capable of ensuring the perpetual operation of the servers. In cases like MMOs where they sell digital content, I believe this is of particular necessity. As far as I'm concerned if some FTP game charges you money for a sword or a costume or whatever, they had better be able to guarantee that if you want to login from your death bed 50 years later and look at your shinies your able to, even if your the only one who has logged into that creaky old game for decades. Basically if you sell virtual property for money, you should be required to back that virtual property.
That said, I'll say that one of the things that made me an old school "Ultima" fan was the way how games like "Ultima IV" were just loaded with goodies along with the disk. You had a game guide, a play card, a history book, a separate book listing the spells (with runes on the cover you could translate with the rune guide in the history book), and it was all wrapped in a cloth map. It was cool that all that stuff came with the game, and actually figured into it, and it increased the feeling of value at the time. Today if you want something close to that they want like an extra $30 and at that point what was "neat" basically becomes "a bunch of garbage not worth anywhere near that".
Of course then again the odd thing is that I just mentioned Origin as being one of the groups I felt gave great value. Richard "I went into space" Garriott seems to have turned into a virtual real estate tycoon where he's apparently making a fortune selling virtual house lots and digital items for a game that hasn't even been released yet. The "beauty" of it is that your basically paying him for the right to put down a house (the house costs more money) which you then have to grind to pay in-game money on in order to maintain, and if you fail to pay your rent your lot which you paid real money for reverts to the bank.... so really, I think that kind of says it all about the world we live in now compared to what things used to be like. Even "Good Lord British" has basically become an MMO slum lord.
Eh, what can I say, I love the box. Having boxes on the shelf is something that makes my home complete, I can sit and stare at them, relive the memories I had with games, be inspired to replay something I haven't played in ages or forgotten I owned. And they make great displays.
Me and my girlfriends new flat suddenly felt all the more homely once we finally got our games shipped and upacked.
I love me some digital distribution. I don't have room for boxes and maps and other nonsense. They can keep it.
EDIT: I will say that I prefer the GOG.com model of digital distribution the most, where even if at some future date I don't have internet, and GOG.com goes out of business, I can still install and play my games, because I have a DRM free installer. I still use Steam of course, b/c what else can a PC gamer do, and Steam does provide a good service, but hopefully digital distribution heads more in that direction.
I still maintain that as much as it might sound weird, there's no real harm in someone who just likes the smell of fresh plastic. There's no reason to deride them for it.
You know, if someone has a plastic fetish, that's fine. But it then becomes an issue of them demanding a physical copy specifically to assuage their compulsion. Speaking of compulsion, you are talking to someone who suffers from OCD. Such fixations aren't necessarily harmful, but I start to wonder at the point people insist on or demand them.
I mean, like most things I get it to some extent. I still have positive associations with the first time I cracked open an NES game (all my previous game media had been secondhand), a starter of Magic, etc. But the way this is brought up comes off as really unhealthy.
Speaking personally, I live in a rural area with abysmal connection speed and less-than-reliable service. Downloading the ESO beta took an entire week, going more or less full-throttle on what bandwidth I had. If Ookla's speed-test is to be believed, the same is true for around 15-20% of the US, which is a fairly substantial chunk of the population.
This is actually a damn good reason to not go digital, and it really shouldn't be trivialised. Some people just don't have the bandwidth. Hell, I mock my crappy bandwidth, but the worst case scenario is I download a large game overnight. And even then, that's kind of rare.
US broadband speed is slow and expensive, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that a fifth of the US was in your boat. Personally, my biggest worry regarding digital games is that Comcast is going to start reinforcing the bandwidth cap again, because a single splurge could get my connection shut down.
ritchards said:
Also, when I got a box, it was mostly "here's a large cereal packet sized box, and all that's inside is a CD". That's just annoying, that is.
Yeah, this was always somewhat of an issue. I had SNES games that came with a four-page manual and a ton of cardboard. I think SimEarth was the size of one of the Bibles one might read off a lectern, and that was a couple floppies and a (admittedly thick, but nowhere near thick enough to justify the size of the box).
They used to do the same with CD longboxes, and they were largely for antitheft purposes. At least when the Playstation came out, those boxes looked purrrrrrty (most of the time), but there was a lot more of this than people seem to remember. Thanks Obama confirmation bias!
Gennadios said:
It's simple, the service that sold us the digital product still has to support it. If Capcom goes under, the Steams and Playstation marketplaces will still be under contract to offer the game for download to those who own it, even if they can't sell new licenses to people.
Are they actually required to, though? I mean, so far so good, but that doesn't mean it will continue to work that way.
And that's just in theory, in practice, another company will buy Capcom out and keep selling it's product. Hell, System Shock was deemed impossible to resell on GOG because something like 3 or 4 companies had claim to the license, now, it's on GOG on Steam, even if it did take 10 years.
In theory, someone will buy it and keep selling the games. In practice, they might not. Again, you can point to examples of it happening in the past, but you can't guarantee its continuation. If Capcom goes under because of financial issues, another company may not wish to take on the associated debt or may consider sales of the library not substantially worth it. That was nearly the case with THQ.
Also, my first digital distributor was Direct2Drive, after it went under my entire library transferred bought by Gamersgate, not entirely ideal but they're still available under the same username and password.
Also not a given. And I wonder who would undertake it if Steam were to actually keel.
Finally, when Games For Windows UNDYING finally keeled over, all CD-Keys for the Batman Arkham games automatically reverted into Steam keys, so I copy pasted my Direct2Drive keys into Steam and got a second version on the service I prefer.
Great for Batman players, not so great for the other games where the devs didn't transfer over. And a lot of them didn't. I'm told some games were outright rendered unplayable.
I really miss old packaging. And I don't even mean digital distribution here.
I mean when we switched from the large cardboard boxes that PC games in particular came in to these DVD case style things that we have these days...
That transition happened quite a while ago, but I'm still dissapointed by it.
Not to mention that I had all the packaging for some very old games, and somehow in all the moving I've done lost almost all of it. (I still have manuals and things, but not the boxes themselves.)
Those things were often works of art. And while you could say similar things about the DVD case style boxes, it just doesn't really have the same impact somehow.
Oh well. At least I still have an original copy of A link to the past somewhere... With it's box and all it's original inclusions... (Which is mainly just the manual and a map, but still...)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
