Retail for me. Retail is almost always cheaper and can share with friends easily. I do buy digital at times if only option or really good sale.

I am better suited with... | |||
| The digital market. | 27 | 18.88% | |
| The retail market. | 69 | 48.25% | |
| Both, but I prefer retail. | 31 | 21.68% | |
| Both, but I prefer digital. | 9 | 6.29% | |
| I'll explain in the comments... | 7 | 4.90% | |
| Total: | 143 | ||
Retail for me. Retail is almost always cheaper and can share with friends easily. I do buy digital at times if only option or really good sale.

| fatslob-:O said: Digital store on consoles suck since they rarely have good deals so physical it is there. |
It's not black & white, there are also very nice digital deals now and then on consoles.
Last month I bought "Gears of War Ultimate Edition (XBO)" for $10 (digital code via Amazon.com) and "Drive Club + Season Pass (PS4)" for €10 (retail version is more expensive and doesn't include the season pass).
Or the "Uncharted: Nathan Drake Collection (PS4)" in December for €24, when the retail version still was around €40. Or the "Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition" for €10 last year. Or "LBP3 (PS4)" for €21 when the retail version still was around €40. Or "Xenoblade Chronicles (Wii) for €20. Or the "Metroid Prime Trilogy (Wii) for €10. Or many PS3 games for $1 in PSN-flash-sales. Or many Vita games in PSN-sales. Or "Forza Horizon 2 (XBO)" for free for gifting my GamerScore-voucher.
And of course there are a lot of great download-only games on PSN/XBL/eShop. Especially in the PS Store they are often included in the weekly deals. If you don't want to miss out on these games, retail is no option.
Frankly, there are enough people who won't suffer from a digital only future to outweigh those who would. I have absolutely no sympathy what-so-ever for holding back technology and progression because of a few.
Also, there are sales and price drops on digital games on consoles all the time. That lie needs to stop.
Usually physical, even though xbox and steam have some great sales. I love my discs. Plus Amazon prime is like awesome XD you even get 20% off pre orders XD

"A digital only future in the console space could create competition that would drastically lower the price of games but it does not suit everybody."
PC userbase embraced digital and now look at them prices... If console players want to keep paying more for inferior versions of games just to keep a plastic box and a disc that's up to them.

This generation I spent
206€ on 14 retail XOne games (including 3 GOTY Editions)
151€ on 46 digital XOne games (including 2 Season Passes)
Not counting:
XBL and its Games with Gold.
EA Access with its games.
Gifted games.
F2P games.
I only buy retail, when it's available offcourse. Digital is way more expensive because you can't sell the games once you finished them.
Retail all the way here.
On PS4 retail and digital 1st party games are €59.99 while 3rd party digital games are €69.99 the vast majority of the time, so €10 more per game. Then add the fact that there's no return policy whatsoever, no loaning a game to/from a friend and the fact that re-downloading and re-installing (sometimes you wanna play your old games again, but have deleted them from your HDD in the past) a digital game takes hours while a physical game takes minutes. An example: I recently replayed The Last of Us and my physical copy took like 2 minutes to re-install, if I had the game digital it would have taken hours.
The choice is pretty clear. Really the only benefits to digital are the fact that you can't break your disc and the ability to pre-load so you can start playing the second you wake up in the morning, but that isn't important to me, at all.
| John2290 said: What6 are you talking about? Why do you think facebook and Google are fighting so hard to get baloons and drones to carry internet service to the billions of people who have sub par service or none at all. You think the world just exists within a first world society where the middle class is the fattest have a look around and think again. there are markets that are currently being opened up or soon will be that dwarf what exists in the first world countries like India, a billion people whose average wage is set to triple in the next ten years and who don't even have outdated internet service. Also, "enough people who won't suffer" what does that mean to you? Because it seems to me that your saying everyone should have internet if they play games and everyone who doesn't should'nt be allowed in. |
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 when going digital only. That's more than enough.
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 must 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.
| John2290 said: What6 are you talking about? Why do you think facebook and Google are fighting so hard to get baloons and drones to carry internet service to the billions of people who have sub par service or none at all. You think the world just exists within a first world society where the middle class is the fattest have a look around and think again. there are markets that are currently being opened up or soon will be that dwarf what exists in the first world countries like India, a billion people whose average wage is set to triple in the next ten years and who don't even have outdated internet service. Also, "enough people who won't suffer" what does that mean to you? Because it seems to me that your saying everyone should have internet if they play games and everyone who doesn't should'nt be allowed in. |
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.