yvanjean said:
£37.11 sounds like a retail special. Compare MSRP to digital price. |
Yeah I used the retailer I bought it from but even if I use the general retail price of £39.99 vs £54.99 its still a £15 difference, There has been some rather stupid differences before such as Final Fantasy Type-0 launching at £29.99 vs £54.99 its just how bad digital is in the UK.
WoodenPints said:
Yeah I used the retailer I bought it from but even if I use the general retail price of £39.99 vs £54.99 its still a £15 difference, There has been some rather stupid differences before such as Final Fantasy Type-0 launching at £29.99 vs £54.99 its just how bad digital is in the UK. |
Like everything in business the market will right itself. It's up to consumer in the UK to not support inflated price and only buy digital game if it make sense financially. Like this weeks Mad max normally sales at £49.99 (US$71.41) on special for £29.99 (US$42.84).
Everyone in UK should never support a game selling at £54.99 (US$78.56) if it's more then retail regular MSRP. I check the Xbox.com Uk version for the digital price of Division and it is selling at £54.99 (US$78.56) while retail copy at http://www.game.co.uk/ is selling the game for £41.99 (US$59.98) and digital is £49.99 (US$71.41). http://www.game.co.uk/en/tom-clancys-the-division-1043309?pageSize=40&categoryIdentifier=906308&catGroupId=
This just show how much power retailers has in the UK in controlling the price of Digital.
| Darwinianevolution said: The reason why a digital only enviorement can be achieved on the PC space is because there are multiple digital distribution platforms, and have to compete with each other. A digital-only console means that the console manufacturer is the only one that can sell games (any games, not just 1st party exclusives, every game has to go through the digital store), and that would definitively evolve into a lot of consumer unfriendly practics. Also, there are a lot of problems that come with a digital-only option: speed/availability of the internet in your region, space of the hard drives, ownership of the games, DRM... |
Though I do get your point and that is partly correct lets us not pretend that Steam is not a monopoly on PC.
Also the digital retailer does not set prices the content owner does.......
Ka-pi96 said:
This is the key part. It's quite sad really how many people want there to be less options. More options for the consumer is always a good thing! |
Exactly. Gamers should always have options.
As others have said, physical media only sucks if the install times are atrocious, the patches huge, and the limits of the specific format (disk swapping for CDs, DVDs, and those stupid mini-disks, whatever they were called).
Physical games also help in areas with crappy data caps, as you won't be chewing through quite so much data just downloading a game you 'own.'
yvanjean said:
Sound like your using your Cell phone plan? The division day 1 patch was 2GB. Time for you to get a better internet connection for console gaming. |
I'd love to, but there's nothing available here at the moment.
Official member of VGC's Nintendo family, approved by the one and only RolStoppable. I feel honored.
Erm...can i sell a digitally purchased game?
I never get this digital hype. I go in a store or amazon and buy the disc, lets say 60 bucks. If i see its not my style, or finish it, or only touch it 2 days then it bites the dust....i just sell it again, az amazon, and get a solid 40 bucks back...
"taking almost as long to install as digital downloads, taking up just as much hard drive space" you realize consoles aren't supposed to install games from the disc, right?
If all physical games presented the same issue you had then I would agree, but since that's not the case physical > digital.
| walterbates said: Yesterday, I got my hard copy of The Division. Two and a half hours after putting the disc in, I was playing the game. With discs taking almost as long to install as digital downloads, taking up just as much hard drive space, and being much more inconvenient to acquire, I just don’t see the point anymore. Microsoft was planning to make discs practically irrelevant. The idea was to make the Xbox One almost entirely reliant on digital downloads, and if discs were used, they would essentially just be vessels to install the game, and they would prove you had the “rights” to it. Year after year, digital revenue continues to climb as more and more players download games from PSN and XBL directly (and of course PC players have been doing this for years). Now, the process of getting a game on a disc is not simply “pop and play.” Rather, you have to go through a lengthy installation/patching process that can often take nearly as long as it would if you were doing a digital download. But with a digital download, most games allow you to pre-load titles ahead of release, so you don’t have to muck through that on launch day. Not so with discs you acquire on launch day, and you will go through that process regardless. Most of these games will still take up a huge chunk of your hard drive, even if you’re playing them “from the disc.” And most of the time, despite leaving a load of GBs on your console after an install, you will still have to pop in the disc when you want to play. The arguments for discs are often directly conflicting with one another. People say they miss having a physical game collection on their shelf they can look at, and they want the ability to play old games when they want. But the other prime argument is that people want the ability to play a game and instantly turn around and pawn it at GameStop, which makes those other two reasons pointless, as you will never actually have a collection of games, if you keep selling them back for new ones. With how online-connected most games are now, in the future, you may not be able to play them at all with no servers. I’m not saying that’s right, but that’s reality, and it’s a separate sort of problem that has nothing to do with discs vs. digital. Both versions of the game will be affected the same way. The GameStop argument may be the most compelling, and it always was, but this pawnshop economy seems less and less necessary as time has gone on. As I said, PC gaming has ditched discs for years now, and they’re doing just fine. |
They are only conflicting if you are talking about the same game. Games I love and want to keep = I like having them on the shelf to look at. Games I didn't like much and don't want to keep = being on disc I can sell it and get back some money to buy a game I will actually love and want to keep. See, no contradiction there. I will accept an all digital future only if refunds (like on Steam) become standard on all digital stores.
Also, I don;t know about Xb one, but with PS4 you can start playing a game while it is being installed, so the wait time is shorter. And if there's a day 1 patch then with digital games you still have to download the full game then download the patch. So again the time issue is more or less the same. There is that one pre-loading advantage, but that only applies if you pre-order the game. A lot of people don;t get suckered into pre-ordering many or any games, so it's not really a big factor. With a 20+GB game I can probably go out and buy it and start the install enough to be able to start playing in shorter time than having to wait for it to fully download and install from PSN.
Ultimately, MS will be "proven" right because eventually digital distribution will be come the dominant means of selling games. However their strategy of turning discs into single use physical means of digital distribution was and always will be bad, abusive and wrong.
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
