The problem for me is the fact that I have 80 plus albums on CD and another growing collection of vinyl. At this point, I have most of the "classics" and it would cost a furtune to double dip.

So for me, my rule is this. I buy new albums that are analog recordings on vinyl and everything else on CD. If I need something to work out to, I rip my albums and go AAC or MP3 since it doesn't really matter when you're listening to a song on your smartphone. Otherwise, everything is played right off the vinyl/disc at home through speakers. 

Yeah, I definitely wouldn't want to re-buy my entire collection.  You made me curious about how many albums I have.  Turns out I have 386 (mostly albums, with a few EPs and singles mixed in) on CD, plus 4 box sets.  So yeah realistically, there is no way I'd re-buy all that on a new format.  I could definitely see re-buying some of my favorites, especially if they were remixed in hi-res 5.1 surround.  Re-buying an album just to get hi-res stereo would be less appealing, but if the price were right I might go for it for some of my favorites.  On the bright side, every DVD-A player I've ever seen can also play CDs, so re-buying albums wouldn't even be necessary.  At some point, I would like to have all my new purchases transition over to hi-res 5.1 DVD-A or some comparable format.  Sadly, I just don't think that's going to happen.

By the way, I'm sharing my entire Steam game library with my gf. What a time to be alive.

Digital distribution of well-financed games is a scam, removing power from the consumer/gamer and putting even more of it into the publisher. All of that increased revenue and legal control benefits a few owners and doesn't even do anything for the devs themselves.

I can't wait for last-century physical media to be abolished completely for everything.

Not only do you have the cost concerns where it drives up prices for consumers (Even digital-only consumers), but it's slow and archaic, developers would probably benefit greatly if they removed the slowest common denominator in a console like the optical drive, suddenly streaming assets becomes significantly more feasible and load times are reduced for everyone.

However, for it to become a reality, console internal storage capacities need to increase, when games start pushing 50-60Gb+ that anemic 500Gb HDD is not going to last the distance... And who want's ugly external hard drives clogging up their entertainment area?
I wish both Microsoft and Sony had the foresight and supported the option of user-replaceable multiple 3.5" internal drives so power users could rock 6,000Gb or more in their machines.

They wanted the transition to control the market. Only competition drives prices so low on PC. For console, you have 2 and sometimes 3 options for multiplats. Especially when they are cutting out the middle man, thats more for the manufacturer, the publisher, and if they're lucky the devs too.

Are you sure you are still talking about consoles?

I mean, what the heck would a console power user be doing?

The world has to be ready, it's not. Not everyone can download a 50gb game every time it comes out. Ignoring the fact I think developers need to calm down on their install sizes (just compress sounds a little), many consumers around the world cannot justify it if they have a download limit or restrictions on download speeds.

This said digital sales will never take over until the games companies lower their costs, we all know why as you pointed out but in my view it needs to be done by competition on their consoles. Sure Sony has the PS Store, but that has fixed costs and they don't match UK high street price competition. I mean, PSN currently have a same, in it Lego Marvel is down from £55 (it's been this price for a long time) to £41. In a store on any high street, online or supermarket even for a disc copy it's £20. No wonder people don't want to buy from digital stores, especially as you can't return it/exchange it.

In order for digital future to occur there has to be some changes. For me personally, these are competition, direct from the PS menu, so other digital shops exist but games can still be downloaded from PS Store by these digital shops provide a code which is directly input into the store to download stuff. Having the PS Store, Amazon and Game all competing at the same time will reduce costs. PS Store will naturally become cheaper as it will under cut the retailer mark up. I also think some kind of returns/exchange policy should be introduced. Considering it can all work with digital keys and you have to be online to purchase the games, there should be a way to return a game (at a reduced cost) for exchange in store credit and the licence key is removed. Might be hard to implement but will help compete against used sales on the highstreet as when you buy digital it's only ever new.

Just some ideas... doubt either will happen. Especially if 1 company control the digital store.

Last night before I went to bed I put far Cry 4 and GTA V to download on my PS4. This morning when I woke up, they are downloaded and ready, waiting for the official release to remove the lock.

Tomorrow morning at 6 a.m. I can play the games if I want to (of course, I will sadly need to go to work), with no need to wait for the mailman who might or might not show up for days, or to go to the store and pay for my game and their lease at the same time.

On Friday (or thursday if I'm lucky) I'll come home to Dragon Age Inquisition at my house after it is delivered. £17 cheaper than PS store, I can then buy another game with the money saved.

While some benefits of a digital future are here, in terms of price, it just doesn't compete and for this reason will never win.