Even seen people with 2 steps get their stuff stolen on PSN.  We live in an era of constant data leaks from games to passwords and personal info.

Inherently, I can't absolutely say I'd quit gaming per say, but an all digital future would likely lead me to simply collection physical games as much as I can so that I can consume the media in tranquility and peace while I don't interact with future "traditional" generations.

Personally, the way people have consumed digital goods in recent times through subscription passes have devalued the games we play. The recent failings of the Gamepass are proof of it.

Anywoo, there isn't much else to say appart from the OP clear bias in this debate so in the meantime, I'll enjoy the fact that at least Nintendo still sees clear benefit to support physical media with their cartridge based system, so do the customers.

Heck we've never gotten so many avenues to buy so many Indies or nicher games that would've been only digital only otherwise. There's a clear market for it.

Trying to kill it would simply be a pure business oriented decisions to cease the complete control of the means to play our games.

The ownership aspect is more of a DRM issue than a digital one. If P.T wasn't a PS4 exclusive then it would still be easily accessible today thanks to people backing up the PC version. Digital only isn't a big deal by itself but when combined with being locked behind DRM is one of the worst states for a game to be released in.

Benefits of Physical

- Own the Game Case/Disk ✓
 You also own the physical aspect of game and the right to play any time, any any place

- Resale Value ✓

Benefits of Digital 

- Takes up zero room in your house ✓

- Does not deteriorate over time of use x
  Can be taken from you at any time, relies on online connectivity and servers/service provided. Eventually lost to time.

- Does not rely on a working Disk Drive to play ✓

- Cannot be lost or stolen x
  Access can be revoked at anytime as written in the Terms of Service of the software

- Cannot be damaged ✓
  Can be affected patches which physical can role back, but this is usually a non-issue and generally fixed quickly

- Zero Maintenace on the condition of the game x
   Updates are far more frequent in the digital age, the opposite is true.

- Universally played on multiple devices (Disk or Diskless systems) x
  This is generally true for PC and steam deck but most games are tied to their platform and it's rare for a game to be brought and played on all platforms of choice. I hope we see a push away from there where we buy our game license and can play it across any and all platforms of our choosing including PC and Console outside of just the Xbox ecosystem.


I really just wanted to point out and add that many games from the 80's and 90's that people collected over the years are still fully playable and people in this day in age still enjoy retro gaming; which one day current gaming will one day be considered and possibly not preserved. All those games can still be obtained and enjoyed. Since the digital age so many games have been lost to time that are digital only and yanked from existence. You can no longer buy them or play them and you can't even get your money or investment back. Your time, money, and the game completely lost. There are a lot of advantages of digital games but there are many eye opening disadvantages that the OP did not consider. Also didn't list any real advantages of physical game and just jumped right into the deep end of the digital ocean.

My post is going to be unpopular, but most who are anti digital clearly have zero experience with it.

I own hundreds of digital games, movies, books and music. Never had my access revoked. Never woke up and had some mean businessman delete my files. It doesn't have intrusive DRM.  

It works smoothly day in and day out. Frankly it works flawlessly. Can't say that about disk drives. Had two dreamcast units fail, a ps1, ps3, Xbox and Xbox 360.

Preserving games...  digital decimates physical...  a few hundred copies of dragon Saga in the US via physical.  Digitally there is more copies than a person can count.  

Yer, I gotb2 factor set up. 

Switch software sales aren't even close to 50% digital when there's a physical option available. The 50%+ digital share that people all too commonly cite is revenue-based and does include DLC, subscriptions and digital-only games. When given the choice, Switch software is still around 70% physical; not lifetime, but during the most recent fiscal year.

Admittedly, Switch doesn't have a disk drive because it uses a superior physical medium. So in that sense it's correct that disk drives are obsolete nowadays.

You won't have trouble having friends with physical Switch games, because statistically that's the norm. People have to be honest and acknowledge that PC, PS and Xbox are very similar while Nintendo is a different beast. So any fantasies about an all-digital future are just that: Fantasies. You won't see Nintendo develop into that direction, simply because they'd lose too many customers if they did that. Nintendo's long-running policy of giving five times the gold points (or as special offer even ten times as many) for digital purchases in comparison to physical games has hardly moved the needle. Nor have vouchers where on average $/€10 per game can be saved.

I purchase the majority of my games digitally but I would still opt for a disc model even if I had to spend a bit more. However, I can't imagine I would stop gaming if consoles went fully digital. 

Sometimes I wonder whether this guy posts these threads out of ignorance or if he's trying to incite debate/increase forum activity via controversial posts. I don't think this is a very difficult topic at all if you try to understand that people might value different aspects differently and then try to look at it from different perspectives as well.

For me personally, it's about control. I don't want to cede control of relatively expensive products to companies that generally care little of what's beneficial to me. There are already some rare cases where access to games you've paid for is lost because of the publisher's decision or other reasons, probably without any compensation to the owners. I don't expect that to be a major issue with large companies such as Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo, but I have little doubt that they would absolutely at the very least consider dropping old games when few enough people are interested in them anymore. Aside from Microsoft, that's exactly what they've done with backwards compatibility, and Microsoft hasn't exactly demonstrated trustworthiness in the gaming industry either.

Speaking of backwards compatibility, that's actually a major reason why I'm hesitant to go digital on consoles. On PC, backwards compatibility is doing very well, and even if there was a major architectural revolution (e.g. x86-64 -> ARM), even in the worst case old equipment would probably be readily available for decades to come, not to speak of emulation and such. But on consoles, the situation is much worse. Microsoft has demonstrated a sufficient level of commitment to backwards compatibility, but as usual, Microsoft's commitment to console gaming is less certain. But neither Sony nor Nintendo can be considered trustworthy in terms of backwards compatibility, so playing your old digital games will become harder all the time. I also expect games on old consoles to become undownloadable at some point due to shutting down online services altogether for said consoles.

But even on PC, there are comparable concerns! Valve seems like a fairly trustworthy player, and while I don't trust GOG to stay around for a really long time, games on GOG are DRM-free and can be downloaded and played without a client should GOG go down for good (assuming it doesn't go down unexpectedly). But the other clients? I don't trust their longevity at all. The clients are not really essential to the business of the companies operating said clients, so I expect these companies to be relatively eager to shut down these clients once they no longer suit their strategy.

Naturally all this also ties in really nicely with DRM, which I've been opposing since it became a thing. I'm not happy about Steam either in this regard, but Steam has demonstrated a sufficient level of trustworthiness to me. I only worry about what comes after Gabe, but hopefully that won't be much of an issue any time soon.

Anyway, all this massively decreases the value of digitally distributed games to me. I do buy digitally distributed games as well, but I usually buy them after their price has down significantly. Every single game that I'm expected to pay over 10€ for, I consider very carefully, and I very rarely buy games for more than 20€, let alone at full price. And no, this isn't very restrictive to me. I have gigantic backlog of mostly cheap games, so I have little need to rush in to play new games, and I also have the physical option. If there was no physical option, I would probably spend less on gaming, period.

Also, it's not about a disc drive per se, it's about control, which ties in more with the distribution method. I don't really care whether it's a disc, a cartridge, or something else I have good control over once I have it in my possession. Digital distribution rarely has that, aside from GOG (I know there are other, smaller players as well, but that's besides my point).

Of course that's just my two cents (or my wall of text, whichever you want to call it), but I'm sure others have valid points as well. They might not be worth as much to me, but I have no need to downplay their importance either - to each their own - and I have nothing against people preferring digital either.

I'm already 100% digital across Playstation, Nintendo, Xbox and PC.


Dont care for physical anymore.