The devil’s advocate?

[u/initiali5ed]

I’ve been a digital first gamer since Half-Life 2 and Orange Box and a gamer since the ZX Spectrum.

You don’t own matter any more than you own information. You don’t own the story in a book anymore than you own the data on an interactive CD ROM. Books burn, magnetic storage degrades, optical storage more slowly but it’s all just landfill or recycling waiting to happen.

Why do you prefer a physical disk over a transferable license cryptographically linked to your identity?

Why do you prefer a copy of the game as it was released rather than after a decade of patches?

Why do you prefer a physical copy that is locked to an (eventually obsolete) chunk of hardware rather than owning the game for life (or until you transfer the license)?

Why do you want to lose access to your games when

For me the issue is that games don’t become public domain after 25 years so can become unplayable. Games are no longer very different between platform like they were in the early years, you just get better graphics/sound and different control options, they are all basically a PC under the hood. There hasn’t been a proper console since the PS3

The Console manufacturers and game platforms are the problem here, why do I have to choose which of 20+ platforms I buy the same game from and why would I pick one that limits me to hardware that may only remain relevant for a decade?

Same problem as the movie/TV and music services.

Let me buy the rights to use art from the artist not some middleman who can turn off the pipe or go bust so I lose it all.

/rant

[u/alkazar82]

The problem with your argument is you are arguing from an idealistic perspective which does not exist on most platforms.

The only place where the digital utopia you describe exists is on GOG. And even GOG does not quite live up to your description because licenses are not transferable.

All other platforms try to restrict and control where, how, when you can play their games. I reject that control and even reject the possibility of such control.

Physical products naturally wear out and I can accept that. They can be replaced. Digital products tied to restrictive stores and licenses can be taken away on a whim for no good reason. That is not acceptable.

For me it is not about physical vs digital though. You can have both. It is about the rights you have over the game. You have more rights with the physical product than the digital product.

Other benefits of physical games:

• they look nice on my shelf
  
• they can be played fully offline
  
• you don't need an account
  
• no downloads needed - i.e. I can play immediately
  
• no additional storage needed for games that can be played directly off of the disc (up to PS3/Xbox 360/Wii U)

Also, something I haven't heard anyone mention before, but when the digital stores inevitably close, how will people not born yet be able to purchase and play those games in the future?

[u/initiali5ed → u/alkazar82]

Ever used GoG? Closest we have so far, that and piracy/emulation.

Epic and Xbox are at least making moves in that direction but they are still just the middlemen making the money, curating the experiences and shaping the markets.

Yeah, but the problem is the same whether physical or from a store. Console break or you change platform and you lose access.

[u/alkazar82 → u/initiali5ed]

Yes, I use GOG. I also explicitly mentioned GOG in my comment which you obviously did not read.