Buying games digitally.

[Xprimentyl]

However, with music, I do miss the age of CDs, tapes and records (even though I know some dedicated collectors do have records). I think we are missing a lot of great music because of the digital age because no-one takes the time to listen to things for extended periods of time anymore. That's not the case with games though so the same logic doesn't apply to gaming culture.

And this comparative logic defies all reason. Music is far more digestible than games; I can listen to a song or two from an artist in about 8 minutes and decide whether or not I might like them all while jogging or doing my taxes, and services like Spotify allow me easy access to literally hundreds of thousand of artists and songs to explore. And guess what? I?m not paying the same $15-20 as I would have for the physical album!! Music is perfect for digital services. Games, on the other hand, command your full undivided attention, and a good one commands that attention for hours if not days or weeks at a time, so giving access to thousands upon thousands of them at a literal click at the full retail price of a physical copy and the added possibility that one day my access to that purchase could end does little more than waste time, money and add to an inevitable backlog.

I prefer to be more selective when I buy my games, one or two at a time, and in my day to day life, given that I pass dozens of retailers that offer me physical copies of games, I can be bothered to stop for 5 minutes and buy one that comes with a 100% guarantee of permanent ownership. But to each their own. If digital copies shine your shaft, you?ll be plenty happy for the foreseeable future.

I am a musician myself so that probably plays a part in it. People used to take to time to listen and digest a whole album multiple times through when they had a bought hard copy with a booklet / artwork - but now they tend to jump around and listen to whatever so things don't tend to stick as often, in my opinion. I say this as someone who knows lots of amazing musicians and/or songwriters who I believe could have been signed and made it back in the day but now are lost in all the white noise of the internet. Not saying it's impossible to make it but it's a symptom of shorter concentration spans from people in music.

I understand where you?re coming from. I wouldn?t call myself a musician, but I do play the piano and have a great appreciation for music. However, many people see music as entertainment whereas people like you and me see it as art. The former have always been comfortable jumping around to whatever music suits their hummingbird-like attention span; digital services have just made it easier to do so; they?ve not changed the minds or attitudes of the latter.

The reason I don't think this applies to gaming as much is after you buy a digital game you tend to play through the whole thing and get massively invested in it irrespective of the form you get it inm whereas it's not the case with music as you can jump around and not let a lot music grow on you in the same way people once did, or it happens less often at least.

You said it; it doesn?t matter what form of media a game is bought in, the players will (well, should) become massively invested in what they buy; that?s what games are supposed to do. The difference is, a digital copy brings a real-if-tacit impermanence for the same price as a physical one, and little more is mitigated than niggling inconveniences.

I guess I?m only thinking in terms of new titles; digital is fine for deeply discounted titles. I?m not bitching if I lose $10-20 on a year-old game I had a passing interest in, but if I?m dropping $60 for the new GTA or Halo title, best damn believe I?m walking away with something tangible in my hand.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

I prefer digital because I can't be bothered with the clutter. But I appreciate you can't sell them on so I get why you wouldn't want digital versions. If the PS5 has PS4 compatibility and i can play my digital games on there that would be amazing.

Digital is the future because it doesn't have physical waste and you don't need to wait for things to be shipped to you to access them. They just need to iron out the laws about how people own the games and prevent the ability from people to remove things from the market altogether like Konami did with the silent hills demo. That shouldn't be possible in an art medium.

?Clutter?? Was life pre-digital availability really that inconvenienced by the clutter of physical games? That sounds like the portion of an infomercial where a minor problem is exacerbated by some frustratingly inept Average Joe just before they reveal the solution for ?ONLY $19.99!!!? Is the tradeoff for dubious ownership of your purchases really the ideal fix? I?m no luddite, but I?ll take my chances with something tangible; reliability is a far more valuable quality than convenience, particularly when uncertainty is the ?comes-with? of the latter.

Not talking about the clutter factor, talking about wasting the material and energy and time to construct a disk and case and print a label when you don't need any of those things with digital.

 

[McElroy]

Not talking about the clutter factor, talking about wasting the material and energy and time to construct a disk and case and print a label when you don't need any of those things with digital.

Funny enough, while it's probably different with games, music consumption causes more CO^2 equivalent emissions now than it did on CDs' heyday in 2000.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Not talking about the clutter factor, talking about wasting the material and energy and time to construct a disk and case and print a label when you don't need any of those things with digital.

Funny enough, while it's probably different with games, music consumption causes more CO^2 equivalent emissions now than it did on CDs' heyday in 2000.

That's prolly to do with the technology involved in actually playing the music. Games don't have analogue method of running that are only possible with a physical game, you'll need your console or pc to be on to play em either way.

 

[McElroy]

Not talking about the clutter factor, talking about wasting the material and energy and time to construct a disk and case and print a label when you don't need any of those things with digital.

Funny enough, while it's probably different with games, music consumption causes more CO^2 equivalent emissions now than it did on CDs' heyday in 2000.

That's prolly to do with the technology involved in actually playing the music. Games don't have analogue method of running that are only possible with a physical game, you'll need your console or pc to be on to play em either way.

IIRC it's because YouTube is an inefficient music player (songs are videos). To be honest, the CO^2 impact of gaming whether it's new consoles, the discs, or servers and live services involved is something that should be looked into.

OT: On PC it's a no-brainer, digital all the way. You *do* actually own your copy even on Steam (but you obviously have to download it first).

 

[Xprimentyl]

OT: On PC it's a no-brainer, digital all the way. You *do* actually own your copy even on Steam (but you obviously have to download it first).

And there?s the rub. Having to download it means it takes up physical space on your hard drive, and often, one must often delete games to free up space for others. What happens to the deleted games you own when a service ends? What happens to those you?ve downloaded if the services ends and your computer crashes?

This is why Stadia existing makes absolutely no sense: you buy hardware and pay a subscription fee for the opportunity to pay full retail price to stream video games whose quality is completely dependent upon the fidelity of your internet connection. When Google inevitably stops supporting Stadia (in like a couple of months,) all any of those early adopters will ?own? is a literally useless piece of hardware.

 

[McElroy]

OT: On PC it's a no-brainer, digital all the way. You *do* actually own your copy even on Steam (but you obviously have to download it first).

And there?s the rub. Having to download it means it takes up physical space on your hard drive, and often, one must often delete games to free up space for others. What happens to the deleted games you own when a service ends? What happens to those you?ve downloaded if the services ends and your computer crashes?

I dunno about Stadia so I can't comment on that.

However... I empirically tested if downloading games takes up physical space. It doesn't. My hard drive still has exactly the same dimensions. If we really get down to it, even the so-called physical copy is a disc backup of your wholly digital game, but nowadays games almost always get updates, which makes the usefulness of that disc very questionable. And y'know what DOES take physical space? The disc drive.

 

[Xprimentyl]

However... I empirically tested if downloading games takes up physical space. It doesn't. My hard drive still has exactly the same dimensions. If we really get down to it, even the so-called physical copy is a disc backup of your wholly digital game, but nowadays games almost always get updates, which makes the usefulness of that disc very questionable. And y'know what DOES take physical space? The disc drive.

You know that?s what I meant, talking about the hard drive essentially becomes the ?physical? copy of your games and hard drives have a finite amount of ?space.? If a digital games service ends abruptly and you lose or damage that hard drive, or if you have some purchased games NOT downloaded, you simply lose those digital games.

 

[McElroy]

However... I empirically tested if downloading games takes up physical space. It doesn't. My hard drive still has exactly the same dimensions. If we really get down to it, even the so-called physical copy is a disc backup of your wholly digital game, but nowadays games almost always get updates, which makes the usefulness of that disc very questionable. And y'know what DOES take physical space? The disc drive.

You know that?s what I meant, talking about the hard drive essentially becomes the ?physical? copy of your games and hard drives have a finite amount of ?space.? If a digital games service ends abruptly and you lose or damage that hard drive, or if you have some purchased games NOT downloaded, you simply lose those digital games.

What I do agree with is that we must be critical of blind trust towards digital distribution services having your game "in store" on your profile. However, a service denying your access to your games without a good reason is extremely unlikely to happen, and were one service to shut down there would emerge alternative ways to get a working copy of your game (people are creative like that).

Now optical disk backup vs a hard drive backup. Some people like to put stuff in shelves, I guess? I have a few dozen movies and games (PS3) on disks and if I could get them sold I would sell them right now bar a few collection items.

 

[Xprimentyl]

However... I empirically tested if downloading games takes up physical space. It doesn't. My hard drive still has exactly the same dimensions. If we really get down to it, even the so-called physical copy is a disc backup of your wholly digital game, but nowadays games almost always get updates, which makes the usefulness of that disc very questionable. And y'know what DOES take physical space? The disc drive.

You know that?s what I meant, talking about the hard drive essentially becomes the ?physical? copy of your games and hard drives have a finite amount of ?space.? If a digital games service ends abruptly and you lose or damage that hard drive, or if you have some purchased games NOT downloaded, you simply lose those digital games.

What I do agree with is that we must be critical of blind trust towards digital distribution services having your game "in store" on your profile. However, a service denying your access to your games without a good reason is extremely unlikely to happen, and were one service to shut down there would emerge alternative ways to get a working copy of your game (people are creative like that).

I?m not suggesting that a service would every actively deny your access, but given the myriad things that could go wrong (service shut down, technical difficulties, get hacked, etc. if you?ve not taken precautions to download everything you ?own,? it can just be gone.

Point in case: my girlfriend had Verizon?s cable package, and over the course of several years, she?d purchased dozens of On Demand movies, some for as much as $20. When Frontier bought Verizon a couple years ago, though they promised the changeover would be seamless, they somehow managed to lose all of her purchases, literally all gone. She had to call and complain multiple times over the course a couple weeks before they found ?some? of her purchases, less than half of them. They gave her a nominal $50 credit off her next bill for the inconvenience saying that was the best they could do since they (Frontier) had no way of quantifying what (Verizon purchases) she?d actually lost. What?s worse, Frontier was the only option for cable in our area for a while, but recently another option became available. She was ready to switch immediately until I reminded her that if she does drop Frontier, they?re taking her movies with them. Lesson learned; we now rent any movies we want to see On Demand for like $6, and if we like it enough to want to own it, we buy the Blu-ray.

 

[McElroy]

Point in case: my girlfriend had Verizon?s cable package, and over the course of several years, she?d purchased dozens of On Demand movies, some for as much as $20. When Frontier bought Verizon a couple years ago, though they promised the changeover would be seamless, they somehow managed to lose all of her purchases, literally all gone. She had to call and complain multiple times over the course a couple weeks before they found ?some? of her purchases, less than half of them. They gave her a nominal $50 credit off her next bill for the inconvenience saying that was the best they could do since they (Frontier) had no way of quantifying what (Verizon purchases) she?d actually lost. What?s worse, Frontier was the only option for cable in our area for a while, but recently another option became available. She was ready to switch immediately until I reminded her that if she does drop Frontier, they?re taking her movies with them. Lesson learned; we now rent any movies we want to see On Demand for like $6, and if we like it enough to want to own it, we buy the Blu-ray.

I'd put my right to access the material I paid for over the service provider's mistakes.

 

[Squilookle]

Point in case: my girlfriend had Verizon?s cable package, and over the course of several years, she?d purchased dozens of On Demand movies, some for as much as $20. When Frontier bought Verizon a couple years ago, though they promised the changeover would be seamless, they somehow managed to lose all of her purchases, literally all gone. She had to call and complain multiple times over the course a couple weeks before they found ?some? of her purchases, less than half of them. They gave her a nominal $50 credit off her next bill for the inconvenience saying that was the best they could do since they (Frontier) had no way of quantifying what (Verizon purchases) she?d actually lost. What?s worse, Frontier was the only option for cable in our area for a while, but recently another option became available. She was ready to switch immediately until I reminded her that if she does drop Frontier, they?re taking her movies with them. Lesson learned; we now rent any movies we want to see On Demand for like $6, and if we like it enough to want to own it, we buy the Blu-ray.

I'd put my right to access the material I paid for over the service provider's mistakes.

Isn't that what both of you are saying?

 

[McElroy]

Point in case: my girlfriend had Verizon?s cable package, and over the course of several years, she?d purchased dozens of On Demand movies, some for as much as $20. When Frontier bought Verizon a couple years ago, though they promised the changeover would be seamless, they somehow managed to lose all of her purchases, literally all gone. She had to call and complain multiple times over the course a couple weeks before they found ?some? of her purchases, less than half of them. They gave her a nominal $50 credit off her next bill for the inconvenience saying that was the best they could do since they (Frontier) had no way of quantifying what (Verizon purchases) she?d actually lost. What?s worse, Frontier was the only option for cable in our area for a while, but recently another option became available. She was ready to switch immediately until I reminded her that if she does drop Frontier, they?re taking her movies with them. Lesson learned; we now rent any movies we want to see On Demand for like $6, and if we like it enough to want to own it, we buy the Blu-ray.

I'd put my right to access the material I paid for over the service provider's mistakes.

Isn't that what both of you are saying?

When it comes to licensed promises, they sometimes expire or otherwise get canned. For example in the case of an On Demand license which doesn't include the option of downloading it for offline viewing, I would use a workaround (screen capture or whatever) to do it. Against the terms of your purchase, obviously, but not against copyright law.

 

[Xprimentyl]

Point in case: my girlfriend had Verizon?s cable package, and over the course of several years, she?d purchased dozens of On Demand movies, some for as much as $20. When Frontier bought Verizon a couple years ago, though they promised the changeover would be seamless, they somehow managed to lose all of her purchases, literally all gone. She had to call and complain multiple times over the course a couple weeks before they found ?some? of her purchases, less than half of them. They gave her a nominal $50 credit off her next bill for the inconvenience saying that was the best they could do since they (Frontier) had no way of quantifying what (Verizon purchases) she?d actually lost. What?s worse, Frontier was the only option for cable in our area for a while, but recently another option became available. She was ready to switch immediately until I reminded her that if she does drop Frontier, they?re taking her movies with them. Lesson learned; we now rent any movies we want to see On Demand for like $6, and if we like it enough to want to own it, we buy the Blu-ray.

I'd put my right to access the material I paid for over the service provider's mistakes.

Isn't that what both of you are saying?

Yep.

When it comes to licensed promises, they sometimes expire or otherwise get canned. For example in the case of an On Demand license which doesn't include the option of downloading it for offline viewing, I would use a workaround (screen capture or whatever) to do it. Against the terms of your purchase, obviously, but not against copyright law.

Understood, so why should ?licensed promises? come at the same cost as a physical one? What is the distinction between their ?Rent? and ?Buy? options if both are essentially rentals? Why is an ?against the terms of service? workaround necessary if her movies were ?purchased??

What it boils down to is digital purchases have their place, but anyone who uses them (particularly those who depend entirely on them) should hold their providers to a higher standard of dignity and expect that the price they pay should be mitigated by the added risk they assume, i.e.: a $60 physical disk should be, I dunno, a $40 digital download with the understanding that for that lesser price and convenience comes potentially transient ownership.

 

[McElroy]

Understood, so why should "licensed promises" come at the same cost as a physical one? What is the distinction between their "Rent" and "Buy" options if both are essentially rentals? Why is an "against the terms of service" workaround necessary if her movies were "purchased?"

On PC there is no physical purchase anymore anyway. You get a DVD-shaped coaster for your soda can, I guess. By licensed promise I mean on demand services that can be 1) bought for a period of time, "renting" 2) subscribed to (you can watch a curated selection of stuff) or 3) bought for an indefinite time. The third option, as far as I know, includes a digital copy at least on paper, but it's possible (and I reckon common) that the service doesn't include a built-in way to download a copy. Ripping the video then could be breaking copyright protection which is not allowed.

What it boils down to is digital purchases have their place, but anyone who uses them (particularly those who depend entirely on them) should hold their providers to a higher standard of dignity and expect that the price they pay should be mitigated by the added risk they assume, i.e.: a $60 physical disk should be, I dunno, a $40 digital download with the understanding that for that lesser price and convenience comes potentially transient ownership.

Why in the heck would they do that? For a new game the point is to get to play it: 60 bucks ty no matter the platform. In the case of new multiplatform games, ownership being tied to whoever holds the disc is indeed better and more convenient. Because of all the other perks of PC gaming I'm fine with this (which has become evident in the course of this thread, I bet).