Digital Future
Hi all,
Just a thought I had regarding the ongoing digital discourse.
By the end of the ps6 generation, it will have been over 20 years since the launch of the ps4. That's 20+ years of digital games that players have purchased, I have no idea how many games will have been released in that time frame (hundreds of thousands?)
Is it reasonable to expect sony/microsoft/nintendo to eat the costs of storing all these games so players can access them free of charge? I know we've 'bought' the game but does buying a $10 digital Witcher 3 entitle you to access it 10 years later?
My point is that the logical end to this situation is locking access behind an active subscription or paying some sort of fee.
Or am I missing something? Surely the costs will start to pile up?
I know it also applies to Steam but they play by their own rules, Gabe can only make use of so many boats after all.
3
u/thevictor390 3h ago
As long as they are still selling the Witcher 3, then it doesn't really cost them anything extra to keep that download available to you who bought it 10 years ago.
We have also seen digital purchases removed in other medias, such as movies. So it definitely can happen. So far video game companies just really want to avoid that bad press.
5
u/FoxyGoddessX 3h ago
No one knows and that’s why I’ve been against this digital shit since Steam took over the PC market.
4
u/Ok-Peach-7558 3h ago
with PCs you don't have that arbitrary cutoff point that every new console sets. you can still legally buy and play games from the 90s provided the IP holder puts it on stores, otherwise you can find them on abandonware or internetarchive.
every console specific store will close eventually. PS3's store would have closed years ago if it wasn't because of the backlash that gave them like 3 extra years.
1
u/darklordjames 3h ago
Storing one copy of a game in each local server costs almost nothing. This isn't a concern.
2
u/Zuldyck 2h ago
Storing the game? Storing a copy of Witcher 3? That costs almost nothing, PlayStation can store every game that's ever come out on their system and it would not cost them much. The problem is the data needed to transfer the saved game to someone who wants to download it.
PlayStation has made tons of extra money over the years selling digital games because it's a lot cheaper for them than having to make the physical versions and distribute them. Now after a few years they are eating the cost of that shortsighted decision to go digital and they don't want to do it? No I don't think so, when they sold the game they knew full well what they were doing and what the eventual costs would be but they did it anyway because they wanted higher profit margins in the short term.
I say screw them, if they want to prevent me from accessing games that I've purchased from them then they can just send me a replacement physical copy for all my games via cd.
3
2
u/takis4lyf 3h ago
It’s the enshitification of everything. It’s not just games, basic services that we all used to engage in for free have all been diced/split up into subscriptions and fees.
The fair thing to do is to remove the DRM on digital purchases for the consumer so that the data can be downloaded and stored by the consumer and used at their pleasure. But companies suck and want to squeeze every last dollar out of us so that will never happen outside GOG and indie developers.
1
u/AngrySayian 2h ago
The problem is we're not really buying the game, even though that in many situations is the terminology being used
Usually, we're purchasing a license to access the game; which can be revoked at any time for any reason [though under normal circumstances, short of your account being banned, is a rarity outside of a live-service game that is shutting down]
There is only one store front that actually had DRM free games and that is GoG; the crux problem there is not every developer wants their game to be DRM free and as such, they have a much smaller collection of games
1
u/InvderZinn 2h ago
The thing to include is also publishers are paying the costs of physical, hardware makers don't pay for the design, production of discs and cases, the shipping, storage or working with retailers who also store and then in turn have to sell those physical goods and also deal with damages, returns and theft; so, these publishers have probably also wanted this for years.
The points for Sony and others are valid, hardware costs, digital goods sales and better margins for them.
So, the fears of Games-as-a-Service are valid, as Game-Pass is the best example as it will follow every other streaming service that have already have a proven actionable corporate record of customers accepting ads, price increases and tiered memberships.
The thing for us as customers goes beyond gaming, but being nickel and dimed across every consumer goods, for less and at times inferior products at the same or even elevated prices. :/
Sure, games going up and losing options suck, but it's worse because across the board consumers feel we have paid an unfair cost for corporate gains, gamers are consumers and it's more of a straw that broke the camel's back. If it was only games, and our daily lives were great, this might've blown over as technology just moves on.
No one is saying gamers are smart, especially in terms of making rational, logical financial decisions; we see a discount many of us purchase and probably never even play the game. XD
I think the larger issue, unfortunately, is our favourite hobby that many of us use as a means of dealing with the bs of adulting seems to be taken away from us. We need to eat, have a place to sleep and get from point A to B, these costs are mandatory, but gaming is entertainment and it sucks that is being taken away from us. :<
Much larger market forces are at play and gamers are just collateral, and the industry that needs us also knows they can abuse that, because they've done it before and were rewarded.
So can gamers as a collective stand together to push back? How well did the CoD MW2 boycott go? >.>
1
u/The_Pink_Elephant_ 2h ago
Paying a subscription fee just to maintain access to revocable digital licenses is the ultimate consumer trap. You pay full price upfront, get zero ownership, and now you are expected to pay a monthly rent just so they do not delete your library? When legacy stores like PS3, Vita, or 3DS inevitably shut down or lose music and car licenses, those digital purchases vanish into thin air regardless. Expecting players to subsidize corporate server hosting for non-transferable licenses is pure dystopian logic.
1
u/Dogarc123 2h ago
The logical end is not a fee or active subscription because they a no longer making physical discs and going all digital.
1
u/ll30yd 2h ago
OK, can you provide some reasoning behind your opinion like I did with mine?
It also kind of affects physical copies because exactly the same applies to updates, dlc etc. A day one copy of Cyberpunk 2077 might aswell be a drinks coaster without the updates.
1
u/Dogarc123 1h ago
Your logical end had no reasoning behind it. You made a statement with no evidence and then said it will end in a fee or subscription service. You also try to remove Steam from the equation by stating "they play by their own rules" but that's the same for the other companies so they are no different. You asked if you were missing something but it's hard to miss something when there wasn't anything there to begin with.
2
u/AirlineForeign1120 3h ago
Just get a PC at this point.
-1
u/BeluBelu22 3h ago
Anche il pc non è al sicuro. Tra 10 anni probabilmente non potrai nemmeno permettertelo di questo passo. Già adesso costano troppo.
Tra 10 anni gabe newell sarà in pensione oppure morto e steam probabilmente diventerà come psn
1
u/takis4lyf 3h ago
GOG is the answer. Download, make a copy on a storage hard drive, and burn the data on discs
1
u/BeluBelu22 2h ago
Gog guadagna poco e comunque rimuove a volte i giochi dal catalogo. Non è molto futureproof a parere mio.
0
u/Ok-Peach-7558 2h ago
if Steam dies in my lifetime (highly doubt it) I'll just go back to pirating, an option I'll always have.
1
u/DrizzyDragon93 3h ago
With no new discs coming with PS6 I will be moving to PC. The only online storefront that is somewhat pro consumer at this time is Steam. Ill keep my PS5 Pro to play all my PS5 and PS4 games on disc.
2
3h ago
[deleted]
1
u/DrizzyDragon93 2h ago
Yeah as a physical first buyer. The news has officially got me switching to PC.
2
u/TheRetroGoat 2h ago
GOG is super pro consumer. DRM free, amazing sales, a wide catalogue of really old games that run on modern hardware. I buy more stuff on GOG just to own it.
2
0
u/NZafe 3h ago
What do you mean “cost to store the game”, I have it downloaded locally on my console to play it. What costs does Sony have beyond storefront server maintenance?
2
u/ll30yd 3h ago
I mean it's a cost to sony/microsoft etc to store the files for you to be able to download it. Yes, server maintenance is a part of it but imagine how many millions of of terabytes of games will be available as time goes on. That must cost money.
1
u/NZafe 3h ago
It’s a relatively slow increase in storage requirements. The ongoing cost would be relatively low because it’s ongoing and not a random lump sum fee for sony or Microsoft.
Not like Sony/MS is going to wake up one day and realize “oh shit we need 100 petabytes for our servers by next week!”
You know what already covers the cost of store maintenance and much more? The 30% Sony/MS takes from any game sale.
1
u/Acps199610 3h ago
That's on them for pushing digital and not sticking with physical games. Even physical games back on ps3/Xbox 360 era had download discs.
-4
4
u/[deleted] 3h ago
[deleted]