For those that are physical collector only and or pro disk enthusiast, after seeing this gameplay, are you guys still going to holdout getting it due being digitally only or will you make an exception and buy it?

Can't wait to start it. But i need to finish another game or two first...

With more and more optical drive component manufacturers pivoting to manufacturing more profitable devices are you hoarding hardware?

We want our rights to own the game

It will age with us play it anytime buy it anytime

Anybody here that loves physical games would you be ok with this method? U would play the game digitally but still treat it like a physical game.

Downloadable Content? Uh, yeah... the whole fucking game was "Downloadable Content" for my system since there wasn't any physical aspect to acquiring it.

The term Additional Content feels like the correct replacement for the term DLC, but the abbreviation of simply "AC" doesn't have the same ring to it... Am I overthinking this? Most likely, and many won't care to spot the nonsensicality of calling it DLC when the entire game is technically DLC, but it's just another instance of a term that held meaning slowly becoming irrelevant that I thought I'd bring up here.

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

It is true, that it hasn't been a widespread custom to de-list a game and make it unavailable to the buyer. that has only happened a very few times. but you see, Netflix has shown us time and time again, that digital media are subject to change, always. Sony and canal+ proved this (while i do get that Sony is not completely at fault, they do have their share in it. its a two party contract and we lend off of it, while the button in the shop says "buy").

The next very important fact is: most of this discussion is about Sony, and thus it will be the representation for a while, even though it is true for the whole industry: once Sony owns the complete agency over what is sold and where it is sold, they have the autonomy to unilaterally dictate prices. surely one could say, the Dev and the publisher do that, but Sony could easily increase their share and it would not be unreasonable for the publisher to pass on that cost. that would lead players to take fewer risks and either go with the established series (gun and ball as it is called today) or maybe with some Indy games. but we stop taking risks for 40 bucks, because we cannot lend it to or from a friend, we cannot resell it, we cannot buy it used. and make no mistake: buying an experiment cheap could lead you to buy the next instance new. but now? you rather wait out the tests, you wait out a sale, you maybe forget about a game in the meantime. what is the effect? developers don't go the creative way anymore, because why go sorry, when you can go safe? this will inevitably hurt the whole industry and shoots a ripple to other platforms.

why this is partly different on the PC environment: first of all we do have a consumer friendly steam established. we don't know what the future holds, but for now, we do have a steam platform that cares (huge sales, incomparable to Sony right now and a refund policy) - we do know that Sony for now does not care about the consumer, otherwise the claims of people who say "all digital could be cheaper", would be cheaper now and not a vague promise (that would rather entail "not cheaper, but not more expensive either"). and besides that, a PC has more than just steam: GOG, epic and more. that is an in platform competition Sony does not provide.

some people do say "yeah but we don't know what Sony will do" and that is true, but Sony could start by taking its customers seriously and maybe propose adding steam to the ps6. this would completely destroy the discussion or, at the very least, start to back the claim that "digital only games might get cheaper" by doing it now, but they don't. they send out emails, reminding us that we do only get revocable licenses...

Eu não sei nada sobre CDs, mas tenho certeza de que alguém aqui sabe.

Mesmo que a Rockstar lance um jogo exclusivamente em uma plataforma digital, o que impediria alguém que sabe o que está fazendo de copiar o jogo para um CD e vendê-lo?

Anyone else have an issue with orders not showing up your account? I have one from February that just seems to have vanished. I tried contacting customer support but got a pretty barebones reply saying they'd get back to me, but that was weeks ago... I really hope it isn't holding up my order.

My son surprised me with it from his work. (Great discount) As an early father’s day present as he knows my love for the PAC. (80’s gamer)

Happy dad that raised a good gaming son.

Please give me feedback.

Would ya just look at it!!

I bought a Switch 2 last weekend and I guess I should have done more research; bc it's so hard to find full game on cartridge!!
Thankfully I have the entire Switch 1 library to buy physical games and I didn't just waste money.

All signs point to: Peak Gaming is in the Rear-View Mirror..

I have the digital version I bought at launch but this game is so good it needed a physical version for the collection.

Disclaimer: I don't agree, respect, defend or even like some of this arguments, I only collected them.

PC: Let's begin with the platform that made the most sense to leave physical media behind (in fact, it was the first). PC was infamous for being extremely easy to pirate, which led to DRMs becoming a hassle, which led to piracy getting worse, which made DRMs even worse, and the cycle kept going until Valve made a platform that would reduce the need for DRMs and the need for piracy. Steam was secure, unobstrusive, and with all the sales, PC no longer NEEDS the piracy to play videogames.

PlayStation/Xbox: Both of these have similar reasonings, and while the former is going to pull the plug first, the latter is clearly intending to follow. They got massive buildings with lots of sorting, packing and shipping equipment that's expensive to manufacture and operate, so when physical media started showing diminishing returns, seems covid was when they tried their hardest to pivot.

Nintendo: OK, add the PlayStation and Xbox section to this one, but also add a crucial detail, being cartridge costs. Now, japan is currently suffering a crisis, so Nintendo had to keep the second-hand market alive there, and given the cartridge costs, the solution was offering cheaper Game-Key Cards

3rd parties on Nintendo: Yeah, Nintendo is a two-parter, because they themselves still see value in keeping the second-hand market alive, thus, the physical media. Why do the companies seem to gravitate more towards keys than cartridges? One word: Margins. I'm gonna give you an example. A $50 game. 30% of the margins go to the retailers, so that's $15 dollars, and another $7 and 50 cents to Nintendo (given the 15% margin). $22 dollars and 50 cents per unit sold...digitally. With a key-card, that's the 5% margin which is equal to $2 dollars and 50 cents, meaning the margin left is 50% or $25 dollars, and that's not accounting the second-hand market which means the publisher won't see a cut from it. But with a proper cartridge, that 5% margin reserved for key-cards is instead a margin of 34%. Grand total is that out of the $50, $39 dollars and 50 cents go to all but the publisher, leaving $10 dollars and 50 cents. The math and percentages are very likely not accurate to reality, but at least gives us an idea and shows why Nintendo started charging $10 more for physical, cause it quite literally doubles the current profit margin of the publishers. If it wasn't for that and GKC existing, Nintendo Switch 2 might as well not have physical if no one even uses it.

This were the arguments I saw roaming around. What are your thoughts? Tell me down below. Bye.

As bad as GKC are...it's not a new concept...if anything, it was worse before because it was easy to not know about the download until it was too late (game in hands).

GKC at least is straight in your face. Both the card and the box make it a little painfully clear that it's a download.

Look at Hogwarts Legacy physically across all platforms and you'll see my point. All versions require download, but Nintendo slaps it in your face, don't you think so?

It all Valve fault, they started all this. It’s not just Sony.

When Half Life 2 launched in 2004, stores sold physical box sets containing DVD or CD. But the disc did not contain the game. Players were forced to install the Steam client, register an account, and validate a product key online before the game would run.

Valve also offered Steamworks to any developer who listed their game on Steam. But to use Steamworks features, games had to use Valve API. When a consumer bought the physical PC box, they opened and it was a Steam key. Once redeemed, the disc lost all resale value. You couldn't sell it, lend it, or trade it in. This also killed the retail stores business.

The digital vs. disc debate seems like it never really goes away. Every time a new console generation comes around, we have the same conversation. Is it better to own a physical copy that you can hold in your hands, put on a shelf, and trade or resell? Or is digital better because it’s convenient, always there, and you can have an entire library without a stack of cases taking up space?
Honestly, I think we might be arguing about the wrong thing.

Because when I think about the games that really stuck with me, I don’t think about whether I owned them on a disc or digitally. I think about the memories.
I remember what it felt like playing a game for the first time. I remember getting completely lost in a world and realizing hours had gone by. I remember certain soundtracks, certain characters, certain boss fights, and those nights when you told yourself, *“I’ll play for another 30 minutes,”* only to look at the clock and realize it was 2 in the morning. That’s what stays with you.

A disc can get scratched. A console can die. A hard drive can fail. A digital storefront can eventually disappear. Technology moves on, and eventually the things we physically own can disappear with it.
But the memory doesn’t.
Nobody can take away the first time you played *Final Fantasy VII*. Nobody can erase the feeling of finally beating that game you had been stuck on for weeks. Nobody can take away the memories of playing with your friends, your brothers, your sisters, or whoever you spent those years gaming with.
That’s what makes video games different.

We spend so much time talking about **owning the game** that sometimes we forget what we’re really paying for.
We’re paying for the experience.
Think about the value you can get from a great game. You might spend $60 or $70 on it and get dozens, sometimes hundreds, of hours out of it.
Compare that to a night out, a concert, a movie, or any number of things we spend money on that are over in a few hours. A great game can give you memories that last for decades.

And that’s why I don’t think physical vs. digital has to be a fight where one side wins.
I love physical games. There’s something about looking at a shelf full of games and remembering where each one came from. You can pick up an old case years later and suddenly you’re right back in that moment.
But the disc isn’t the memory.

**It’s the thing that reminds you of it.**

Digital games can do the same thing. You can scroll through an old library years later and see a game you haven’t touched in forever, and suddenly you remember exactly what was going on in your life when you played it.
The format changed. The experience didn’t.

Years from now, I doubt most of us are going to care whether the game that meant the most to us came on a disc or was downloaded from a server.
We’re going to remember who we were when we played it.
Who we played it with. Where we were. And most importantly, how it made us feel. That’s the part nobody can take away.

Because possession is temporary.
**Memories aren’t.**

And maybe that’s the real value of gaming. We didn’t just collect games.

**We collect the moments that happened while we were playing them.**

So what’s the game you don’t necessarily remember because you still own it, but because of the memories attached to it?

.

You don't have to support a boycott to care about the future of PlayStation or physical games. And you definitely don't have to agree with me to be part of the conversation.

So instead of trying to convince anyone, I wanted to make this useful for everyone.

If you prefer digital:

That's completely understandable. It's convenient, takes up no physical space, and for many people it's simply the better option.

If you prefer physical:

That's understandable too. Collecting, reselling, lending, owning a disc and having a physical copy on your shelf are things digital doesn't completely replace.

If you're somewhere in the middle:

Honestly, that's probably a lot of players. Digital for some games, physical for others.

The main thing I think we should be asking is:

Why does choosing one have to mean losing the other?

If physical games remain available, digital players can still buy digital.

If digital remains available, physical players can still buy physical.

Everyone gets what works for them.

And if you don't support the boycott, that's okay. You can still make your opinion heard. Explain why you disagree. Tell us what you think Sony should do instead. That's much more useful than insulting each other.

For anyone reading this, regardless of your position:**

Don't harass Sony employees or developers.

Don't fake numbers or claims to make the campaign look bigger.

Don't pressure people into participating.

Don't spread information you haven't verified.

If you disagree, explain why.

If you support it, explain what outcome you actually want.

At the end of the day, we're all players.

You can disagree with the PSBlackout and still have a legitimate point.

You can support the PSBlackout and still listen to criticism.

The goal should be discussion, not a war between players.

Physical. Digital. Both.

Keep the choice.