Do you consider digital games to be part of your collection?

[Agressivadue]

When you download a game off of Live Marketplace, Playstation Network, or Wii Shop Channel, do you consider that part of your collection among your classic, 15+ year old games?

It's a tough choice for me. I paid for the game, but collection-wise it doesn't contribute to filling up shelving space and providing the satisfaction of owning a physical copy.

Yes. Something not taking up physical space does not dispute the concept of a collection.

[Sonicwolf]

Here is one thing we all must consider about digital games. For example, Games downloaded on the PlayStation network. If there is no transferrable successor to the PSN in the future and our PS3's break, there will be none of the games we downloaded left. The loss of a console would mean the loss of an entire game collection in the future if the console was no longer supported.

Thats my idea of collectors hell.

I dont want to have to rebuy games every generation on digital download.

[Agressivadue]

Here is one thing we all must consider about digital games. For example, Games downloaded on the PlayStation network. If there is no transferrable successor to the PSN in the future and our PS3's break, there will be none of the games we downloaded left. The loss of a console would mean the loss of an entire game collection in the future if the console was no longer supported.

Thats my idea of collectors hell.

I dont want to have to rebuy games every generation on digital download.

That's the chance we take in any case. There's no guarantee that the place holding someones NEO-GEO collection isn't going to burn down. Insurance might cover the damage, but it doesn't put the cart back on the shelf. From what I understand about the online stores for consoles is that if your console fails, and you at least deal with the in house repair service, your downloads are fully covered, and you DO get your game back.

[ScourDX]

It can't just be about ease. Anybody with a Mario/Duck Hunt cart considers it part of a "collection" right? And those are as easy to find as dirt.

Depends on what kind of collection you are talking about. Some user collect sealed game and they are not easy to find. If you trying to drawn a comparison between how easy to find Mario/Duck Hunt cart vs how easy to download digital copies, then you missed the point.

These day, all the you get from digital gaming is license to play the game and nothing else. You cannot hack open it to see what is in there nor you can throw is as a Frisbee. I ask myself why buy it when I can't do anything else with it and waste on something I don't have control over it. Beside a lot of illegal games allow user to have freedom to do whatever they want without paying anything. Is there any benefit owning digital game currently? - absolutely not until user has better control over what they can do with their purchased item.

For physical media, you have a choice to do whatever you want with it. You can buy Panzer Dragon Saga for expensive price and then post on Youtube on how you going to destroy it. It is the experience of choice given to you which you don't get with digital game.

[Sonicwolf]

That's the chance we take in any case. There's no guarantee that the place holding someones NEO-GEO collection isn't going to burn down. Insurance might cover the damage, but it doesn't put the cart back on the shelf. From what I understand about the online stores for consoles is that if your console fails, and you at least deal with the in house repair service, your downloads are fully covered, and you DO get your game back.

What if the digital download service goes down or the games are removed from download? Its not like you can go out and buy another copy of a digital game at a game store or flea market.

[Agressivadue]

For physical media, you have a choice to do whatever you want with it. You can buy Panzer Dragon Saga for expensive price and then post on Youtube on how you going to destroy it. It is the experience of choice given to you which you don't get with digital game.

That idea is shot down by the fact that nobody makes you buy a digital download of Panzer Dragoon Saga in the first place. Just because I may not want a physical copy doesn't make my digital collection any less valuable to me, or your physical collection less valuable to you.

[Agressivadue]

What if the digital download service goes down or the games are removed from download? Its not like you can go out and buy another copy of a digital game at a game store or flea market.

If the game was downloaded, I still have it. At any rate, if the game somehow became disabled or lost, again, it's the chance we take.

[ScourDX]

That idea is shot down by the fact that nobody makes you buy a digital download of Panzer Dragoon Saga in the first place. Just because I may not want a physical copy doesn't make my digital collection any less valuable to me, or your physical collection less valuable to you.

*cough* Patapon 2 *cough* :roll:

[Agressivadue]

*cough* Patapon 2 *cough* :roll:

OK, so who's got the gun pointed at your head?

[Icarus Moonsight]

I recognize that there is no gun in that case. I do not own Patapon 2 either. I refuse to buy, on principle, what really should have been put on a UMD for full retail. I have no gun on Sony either, but if they want me to pay money for something, I expect what I want for the exchange, otherwise, no sale. If I'm left behind in the future, I really don't mind much. I have plenty to do until someone starts offering games through physical media again.

You have physical (carts, disks and optical), licensed digital (anything sold or distributed as dlc) and unlicensed digital (roms and images). Physical media will always be preferred for me. It's specific to the original hardware and is transferable and sell able. I do buy licensed digital games, but it has to be at a price point that compensates me for lacking my preference for the properties of physical media. And, yes, digital is part of a collection in my view.

[c0ldb33r]

When it comes to downloaded software, I don't feel that I actually own anything, which is why I refused to pay more than like $5 for any DLC.

[kedawa]

If I'm spending money and not getting anything physical in return, I would consider that more of a service than a purchased item. Digitally distributed content on consoles cannot be sold, traded, or easily backed up. It has no resale value whatsoever.

[DonMarco]

I've never spent more than $5 at Steam. Never intend to.

Those games and the ones I "have" on XBLA I wouldn't consider part of my collection. I guess you could call them part of my library, but that's not really like a collection. I think a big part of collecting anything is being able to showing it off. There's a huge difference with shelves filled with games boxes and DVD cases compared to a list on a screen.

Related topic (for me): the strategy guide industry has had digital representations of their guides for a few years, I wouldn't ever consider buying one over the physical kind, even if they were cheaper or more comprehensive.

[TonyTheTiger]

What if the digital download service goes down or the games are removed from download? Its not like you can go out and buy another copy of a digital game at a game store or flea market.

No, but you can seek out a console with the game already installed. Despite how frustrating and expensive that could be (and something I likely would not do myself) the option could exist. But this is sort of a risk we all take even with physical media. If you have a one of a kind prototype and something happens to it, you also can't go to the nearest game store or flea market either.


If I'm spending money and not getting anything physical in return, I would consider that more of a service than a purchased item. Digitally distributed content on consoles cannot be sold, traded, or easily backed up. It has no resale value whatsoever.

Well, that's not entirely true either. Consider how Dell sells PCs. They sell the computers with Windows preinstalled. Ignoring the fact that they also send a Windows disc packed in, part of the price of the total machine includes at least something for the preinstalled software. If you were to buy a computer completely clean it would cost less. The same mathematics could be factored in on the used market. So non-physical data does have value.

That being the case, the issue isn't so much that DLC has absolutely no value on the second hand market. The real issue is that it's highly inconvenient on the second hand market since it involves the buying and selling of bulky consoles for what ends up being a higher price than the value of the individual game itself. The second hand market can still exist. It will just end up being more trouble than it's worth for most people. Then again, sealed game collecting is likewise more trouble than it's worth for most people. To each his own.

We've not seen the results of digital distribution yet. Whether a certain game with limited availability will allow Xbox 360s with the game installed to sell for a premium remains to be seen. And that's of course dependent on whether or not piracy renders the legitimacy of the purchased copy negligible.


Depends on what kind of collection you are talking about. Some user collect sealed game and they are not easy to find. If you trying to drawn a comparison between how easy to find Mario/Duck Hunt cart vs how easy to download digital copies, then you missed the point.

These day, all the you get from digital gaming is license to play the game and nothing else. You cannot hack open it to see what is in there nor you can throw is as a Frisbee. I ask myself why buy it when I can't do anything else with it and waste on something I don't have control over it. Beside a lot of illegal games allow user to have freedom to do whatever they want without paying anything. Is there any benefit owning digital game currently? - absolutely not until user has better control over what they can do with their purchased item.

For physical media, you have a choice to do whatever you want with it. You can buy Panzer Dragon Saga for expensive price and then post on Youtube on how you going to destroy it. It is the experience of choice given to you which you don't get with digital game.

The trade off is perhaps valuable to some people. That being both space saving, gas saving, time saving, etc. So there are benefits. Whether or not those benefits outweigh the costs is for each consumer to decide.

But my point was that assuming the digital distribution aficionados are right and ten years from now we'll see nothing but digital downloads with all physical media rendered obsolete, would that mean that owners of Xbox 900s and Playstation 8s will have to say that they own no game collection whatsoever?

I think convenience plays a role here. At this point, when digital downloads are the exception, it's convenient enough to be able to brush them off. But if they do become the norm then it will be harder and harder to ignore them unless everybody on this site is eventually willing to accept that their collections will not be able to grow past a certain console generation.

Granted, I don't believe digital distribution will become that prominent anytime soon. But if it does happen, then what? I think most people, even many people in this thread, will suck it up and just start accepting that their idea of what constitutes a "collection" has to change because the hobby itself changed.

[SegaAges]

The way I see it, I paid for it, and now have a copy of it on my hard drive. No, it is not in cd/dvd/cart form, it is in hard drive form.

I mean, it is a game that i bought no matter which way i look at it.

[Berserker]

The way I see it, I paid for it, and now have a copy of it on my hard drive. No, it is not in cd/dvd/cart form, it is in hard drive form.

I mean, it is a game that i bought no matter which way i look at it.

But didn't you already own the hard drive before you paid for the game? So really what you're paying for is to have the bits you already own flipped in such a way as to form a game, along with what's usually an extremely limited set of usage rights.

In a way it's almost as if you're paying to place restrictions on something you already own. It's an abstract and really kind of twisted idea, but it's the way of the future, and if we want to stay current in gaming then I suppose we'll have to reconcile with it eventually.

As for me, I want to play new games, but I don't want to drink the koolaid so wholeheartedly. I imagine I'll end up on some middle-ground where I begrudgingly accept digital distribution as a sort of necessary evil, but also treasure and appreciate the games I own in physical form all the more so because of it. And I'll never consider downloaded games to be the same as my physical collection.

[Bojay1997]

No, but you can seek out a console with the game already installed. Despite how frustrating and expensive that could be (and something I likely would not do myself) the option could exist. But this is sort of a risk we all take even with physical media. If you have a one of a kind prototype and something happens to it, you also can't go to the nearest game store or flea market either.



Well, that's not entirely true either. Consider how Dell sells PCs. They sell the computers with Windows preinstalled. Ignoring the fact that they also send a Windows disc packed in, part of the price of the total machine includes at least something for the preinstalled software. If you were to buy a computer completely clean it would cost less. The same mathematics could be factored in on the used market. So non-physical data does have value.

That being the case, the issue isn't so much that DLC has absolutely no value on the second hand market. The real issue is that it's highly inconvenient on the second hand market since it involves the buying and selling of bulky consoles for what ends up being a higher price than the value of the individual game itself. The second hand market can still exist. It will just end up being more trouble than it's worth for most people. Then again, sealed game collecting is likewise more trouble than it's worth for most people. To each his own.

We've not seen the results of digital distribution yet. Whether a certain game with limited availability will allow Xbox 360s with the game installed to sell for a premium remains to be seen. And that's of course dependent on whether or not piracy renders the legitimacy of the purchased copy negligible.



The trade off is perhaps valuable to some people. That being both space saving, gas saving, time saving, etc. So there are benefits. Whether or not those benefits outweigh the costs is for each consumer to decide.

But my point was that assuming the digital distribution aficionados are right and ten years from now we'll see nothing but digital downloads with all physical media rendered obsolete, would that mean that owners of Xbox 900s and Playstation 8s will have to say that they own no game collection whatsoever?

I think convenience plays a role here. At this point, when digital downloads are the exception, it's convenient enough to be able to brush them off. But if they do become the norm then it will be harder and harder to ignore them unless everybody on this site is eventually willing to accept that their collections will not be able to grow past a certain console generation.

Granted, I don't believe digital distribution will become that prominent anytime soon. But if it does happen, then what? I think most people, even many people in this thread, will suck it up and just start accepting that their idea of what constitutes a "collection" has to change because the hobby itself changed.

Nope. As many of us have posted in other similar threads, when consoles go pure digital, our collecting days are over. Whether you like it or not, just having a number of a particular thing, even if it's something I like, doesn't make it a collection. I think you are thinking about collecting much too broadly. I have thousands of DVDs and CDs, but I don't consider those to be a collection. I have several hundred books, but they aren't a collection. They are a library of media that I own, but I am doing nothing to preserve and protect them. On the other hand, I have almost a thousand vinyl records and those are a collection. My iTunes library is not, however, a collection.

My collections are something that has an open market value (i.e. the games or records can be sold on Ebay or other sites individually), can be bought or sold freely and contain items of varying rarity. None of those things can be said of a digital download. Even if I own a console down the road that has particular games on it, I won't consider that part of my collection. It doesn't meet the three criteria and while it might meet the rarity criteria down the road, it will never meet the first two.

[Agressivadue]

when consoles go pure digital, our collecting days are over. Whether you like it or not, just having a number of a particular thing, even if it's something I like, doesn't make it a collection. I think you are thinking about collecting much too broadly. I have thousands of DVDs and CDs, but I don't consider those to be a collection. I have several hundred books, but they aren't a collection. They are a library of media that I own, but I am doing nothing to preserve and protect them. On the other hand, I have almost a thousand vinyl records and those are a collection. My iTunes library is not, however, a collection.

My collections are something that has an open market value (i.e. the games or records can be sold on Ebay or other sites individually), can be bought or sold freely and contain items of varying rarity. None of those things can be said of a digital download. Even if I own a console down the road that has particular games on it, I won't consider that part of my collection. It doesn't meet the three criteria and while it might meet the rarity criteria down the road, it will never meet the first two.


You can think whatever you like, but you can't tell me that my collection of downloads, or DVD's for that matter, is worthless because YOU don't consider them a collection. A library in any format is a collection by definition. Last time I checked, everything you're denying collection status can in fact be sold on ebay. I don't get what part of that you don't of these facts you don't understand? It's like if I knocked some b***h up and I don't claim the kid as mine or have anything to do with it but pay child support, it's still a kid to someone.

[TonyTheTiger]

Whether you like it or not, just having a number of a particular thing, even if it's something I like, doesn't make it a collection. I think you are thinking about collecting much too broadly. I have thousands of DVDs and CDs, but I don't consider those to be a collection. I have several hundred books, but they aren't a collection. They are a library of media that I own, but I am doing nothing to preserve and protect them. On the other hand, I have almost a thousand vinyl records and those are a collection. My iTunes library is not, however, a collection.

That's where we differ then. I don't put much so much of a personal stake in the word. A "collection" to me is pretty much the dictionary definition.

Dictionary.com:
"a group of objects or an amount of material accumulated in one location, esp. for some purpose or as a result of some process: a stamp collection; a collection of unclaimed hats in the checkroom; a collection of books on Churchill.

I, for instance, would easily say that your lot of books is a "collection." It just happens to be a collection you don't have much stake in. Maybe the difference is between what constitutes a collection vs. what constitutes a collector. I suppose it's possible to amass a "collection" of books by sheer accident even though you aren't actively "collecting" them. They just sort of come through various means.

In that sense, collecting is a hobby in and of itself. The items being collected don't really matter when it's the act of doing the collecting that brings joy. Along that train of thought, then I can perfectly understand why somebody would stop actively collecting should games go all digital. If the act of collecting itself becomes less enjoyable and eventually comes to a halt then that person is not really a collector anymore. But I don't necessarily think that if this person continues to buy games, digital or otherwise, the resulting mass of content could by definition be called a "collection." We could argue over the connotations but it's certainly not incorrect diction to call it that.

For the record, I'm not much of a collector myself. I have a few goals but they're ultimately minor. My game lot got to its size simply because I play a lot of games. I put a reasonable amount of effort to keep it in nice condition and the like but the act of collecting itself doesn't interest me. But is it wrong to say I have a game "collection"? Webster's doesn't think so, at least.


My collections are something that has an open market value (i.e. the games or records can be sold on Ebay or other sites individually), can be bought or sold freely and contain items of varying rarity. None of those things can be said of a digital download. Even if I own a console down the road that has particular games on it, I won't consider that part of my collection. It doesn't meet the three criteria and while it might meet the rarity criteria down the road, it will never meet the first two.

We don't really know just yet whether the first two will somehow factor in. It's far too soon to be bringing the axe down on the matter. Digital distribution is quite literally in its infancy. But, even if you're right, I'd say your definition is actually too narrow. You're defining a word based on whether or not the group of things (whatever they may be) has qualities you personally value. Somebody else may hold different qualities at a higher value. And others might differ from that.

It sounds like you personally don't find much pleasure in actively collecting digital media. That's fine. But that doesn't really factor in much when talking about what constitutes a collection. What it reflects on is which kinds of collections you would like to pursue and which ones you wouldn't.

[ScourDX]

You can think whatever you like, but you can't tell me that my collection of downloads, or DVD's for that matter, is worthless because YOU don't consider them a collection. A library in any format is a collection by definition. Last time I checked, everything you're denying collection status can in fact be sold on ebay. I don't get what part of that you don't of these facts you don't understand? It's like if I knocked some b***h up and I don't claim the kid as mine or have anything to do with it but pay child support, it's still a kid to someone.

It is someone's opinion and why are you get so worked up?


That's where we differ then. [omit long post].

I don't get why you bother posting long post and trying win these argument. People here just post their own opinion. You may not agree with them, but why bother quoting word from dictionary and posting long post. Are you trying to win a debate?

[Agressivadue]

It is someone's opinion and why are you get so worked up?

I'll show you:


When it comes to downloaded software, I don't feel that I actually own anything, which is why I refused to pay more than like $5 for any DLC.

The above is an opinion. I don't agree with it.


just having a number of a particular thing, even if it's something I like, doesn't make it a collection.

This is just stupid. There are indisputable facts here. Nobody's going to tell me I don't have something because they don't believe it. The fact that someone doesn't believe what I do isn't the problem, it's that this person seems to imply that their idea of a what a collection is, is the bottom line.

[TonyTheTiger]

I don't get why you bother posting long post and trying win these argument. People here just post their own opinion. You may not agree with them, but why bother quoting word from dictionary and posting long post. Are you trying to win a debate?

In a sense. Well, yes and no. No as far as the topic is concerned. It is asking whether YOU consider digital games part of your collection. So there an argument would be pointless. It's pretty subjective. It's not asking whether digital games CAN be part of a collection.

But as for that second question, which is an extension of the topic, I am. Not necessarily trying to "win" so to speak. Just trying to point out that there isn't some kind of fatal flaw with the mere concept of a digital download collection which is the vibe I've been getting.

[Bojay1997]

You can think whatever you like, but you can't tell me that my collection of downloads, or DVD's for that matter, is worthless because YOU don't consider them a collection. A library in any format is a collection by definition. Last time I checked, everything you're denying collection status can in fact be sold on ebay. I don't get what part of that you don't of these facts you don't understand? It's like if I knocked some b***h up and I don't claim the kid as mine or have anything to do with it but pay child support, it's still a kid to someone.

Maybe you should spend some time actually reading what I wrote. I didn't say all those items were worthless. I can obviously sell them or give them to charity or do a million other things with them, some of which have a quantifiable financial value. Of course, I can say that about every single thing I own. I don't consider everything in my home, my car and office to be a collection. They are items. A collection is something more than just a pile of random items that can be sold.

[Agressivadue]

A collection is something more than just a pile of random items that can be sold.

Good game. You just gave us a loose definition of a collection, you do see the light after all.

[Game Freak]

I do count them, simply because I dedicated the money to buy it rather than a physical game at GameStop. I don't have a lot of games (maybe 7 Wii Shop games at most) and one Steam Game, TF2, but aside from that, I find it an affordable way to add an extra dozen titles to my game count :) especially when I only buy Steam games when they are on sale XD