Some devs will only be happy when games are download only, non returnable and non resaleable. Because their games are first in line to be returned or sold on.

Looks like somebody was bullied as a child by retail games.

They started download only, then went retail. Meta is 8.3 users is 8.5 so I doubt it is considered too overrated by customers. I'll be honest I have it on Steam from a sale a year ago and have yet to play it so who knows. But I don't think their hate for retail has anything to do with making shitty overhyped games.

^ there are plenty of metacritic 90+ games clogging the shelves in second-hand shops. Hi Skyrim PS3!

actually torchlight seems to be heavily praised by both critics and customers who chose to review the game.

Regardless, though what he said may be contriversial, it is absolutely right.

The retail business is whats killing any innovation with gaming. It is the reason why last year only 10 of the top 100 best selling games(according to vgchartz) were new ips, and all of those 10 "new ips" were either dance games or party games with the exception of dead island.

On the other hand if you look at last year's big sellers on the digital front, there are countless of new ips. If the digital platform gets bigger it will only help innovation. Sure big publishers will likely keep things the same. But new development teams will be forced to make exciting new games to compete with the big dogs, which wouldn't be possible in the retail market due to the high costs of distributing a game and having the retailer/publisher take a 70% cut of the profits.

Skyrim PS3 has a 5.4 user score. Your right about critic scores, but users tend to be less full of shit. Unless they are spammers of course like in ME3.

What does he care about the boxed market. If he wants to sell his games for $15 on Steam then go ahead. No boxed game is going to stop you.
I'm not going to pay more then $20 for a digital download though. $60 new release prices on Steam are ridiculous.

Btw what's the innovation in Torchlight? I thought it was a rather charming Diablo clone but it didn't hold my interest for very long. I guess just the price was innovative.

@ enrageorange:

I totally see what you mean, but that's not the whole picture. Retail also gave us innovators, Goldeneye, Katamari, Singstar, Wii Sports, and download has given us Farmville, Dead Nation The Last Guy.

You beat me to it. I can understand why a small developer in particular would like to see more growth in the digital space, but I can't think of any good reason for him to wish an end to the retail market. I think we can chalk this one up to hyperbole, though.

As an aside, why is the interview on a Nintendo fansite?

I haven't looked at the data yet, but I'd argue your mixing correlation with causality. The retail space is still far bigger than the digital space, so it receives the most attention (and therefore money), which in turn spawns a desire to play it safe. Digital can buck this for the moment because the market isn't as accessible or developed yet, so the standards there can be lower (and thus less expensive), which leads to developers taking on more risk. If this developer gets his wish, the digital market will receive the same scrutiny, and dollars, as retail, so the cycle will begin again, and the top 100 digital games will be sequels et al. Only now the 70% cut will skip the retailer and go straight to the platform holder/distributor, as well as the publisher who's putting up the umpteen million dollars the game costs to develop, and the umpteen million more it took to properly market it.

You might be right to a degree, but I suspect things won't be as extreme as you believe.