spemanig said:
Console gaming doesn't have billions of consumers. It has millions. As of last year, Steam had over 125m active users. That's enough for any console manufacturer to be confident that they'd have hundreds of millions of consumers to chose from. I'm saying what I said. I have no sympathy for someone who wants technology to needlessly hold itself back because they can't enjoy it themselves yet. Enough people can which means enough people will. The world has been financially and technologically ready for a digital only console for at least 5 years. Gaming is a luxury, not a necessity. If your country hasn't set up the infrastructure to allow for that luxury to maintain itself there, well that's unfortunate. Hopefully one day it will. The internet didn't delay itself just because some countries couldn't implement it yet. Digital only consoles won't, either. That's just the reality of the situation. Progress will be made, and that is the last thing that is going to stop it from doing so. I'm trying very hard not to be offensive here, but my opinions on the matter are very black and white. |
Though i largely agree with you(you need internet for updates and online play anyway, so if you can do that you could go full digital) i don't think any of the three will dare to take the step. We have all seen what happened when MS announced XBone as digital only, and any of them would simply lose a lot of customers if they went digital only. If Sony wend digital only i would move to Xbox for most of my gaming. Frankly Nintendo is probably the only one that could get away with it, since their exclusives are the practically the only things selling anyway's.







