Are digital downloads killing game collecting?

[g00ber]

I'm getting more and more concerned that we are reaching a point where developers are deciding that digital downloads are better for business than physical media (i.e. DVD's, Bluerays, etc.)

Sony and Microsoft have built their online marketplace to increase profits in the digital sector (i.e. PSP Go, PSN, Xbox Live Marketplace).

How is this going to affect our ability to collect and invest in our collections of games?

We are seeing the effects of this when we see people selling consoles, and mentioning that they have 'x' number of games installed on the hard drive (as if that were something tangible and worth something). Contrary to popular belief, hard drives eventually fail (even the best ones), possibly costing you the loss of your downloaded content. There is also the eventual closing of older services (i.e. Original Xbox Live) which will remove your ability to re-download your purchases should something happen.

What is your view on this new medium?

Is this a method that big M$ and Sony are using to deter reselling of 'used' media, and increase profit?

Should we boycott digital downloads? Let's speak with our wallets.

I'd like to hear YOUR opinion.

[BetaWolf47]

When you look at it that way, it is hurting collecting. Especially years down the road, if games like LostWinds and Mega Man 9 & 10 never get a rerelease, values for systems with these games on them might skyrocket. Let's say you can't obtain a game any other way, even in physical form, other than buying a system that its downloaded to. That will be a pain in the rear.

You're forgetting that it's also helping us collectors out too. Digital downloads are encouraging non-collectors to sell hard copies of games and download the digital version from Virtual Console or PSN. A lot of younger gamers and people that are less materialistic don't care if their games are hard copies or soft copies. If Final Fantasy VII hadn't been released on PSN, it might be a lot harder to obtain.

[XYXZYZ]

Digital downloads

Isn't that redundant?

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

Isn't that redundant?

I want some analog downloads.

[megasdkirby]

The problem with downloads is that, at one point or another, it will not be offered again. Once that happens, the game will pretty much "cease to exist", and even though there are "installed" copies on a console, it's only for that specific console. In the future, if that console "breaks", then one might end up never playing the game again.

Having a physical media that contains the games at least prolongs it's longetivity. That way, if I want to play Mega Man 10, for instance, I can simply insert the game disc, even if the servers that others obtained it originally are long gone. This is why I love the compilations available on the Xbox 360: once the game is no longer offered online, I can simply use the disc I purchased seperately to play the game in question. I trully believe Sony and Nintendo should do the same practice for their downloadable games.

The same rings true with online only games. If a game can only be enjoyed online, it's practically useless once the servers shut down. Having an offline option, like PSO, is very important for those who wish to play long after the servers are no more. But games like Final Fantasy XI, once it's "offline", are pretty much worthless. Heck, PSO for the original Xbox is useless if one does not have the gamertag in their console. Thankfully, I managed to make several backups of my old gamertag, so I can now play the game offline as many times as I wish, for many years to come. Those who were not able to get a gamertag and recently purchase the game, are out of luck. Unless their console is modified, there is no way to play the game online.

[TheDomesticInstitution]

It may hurt future collectors. It shouldn't have much of an effect on people collecting plastic carts and discs from the prior three decades.

[TonyTheTiger]

I think the fears that digital downloads will eventually vanish are somewhat overblown. At some point our old cartridges might become useless, too, once the plastics and metals in the games and systems start falling apart. Enjoy the games while they're here rather than worry where they'll go 50 years from now. If there's one thing I've learned, piracy prevails. This stuff will be preserved.

[BetaWolf47]

On a sidenote, I think people here are paranoid about things ruining collecting. First it was "Is ebay ruining collecting?" Next it was Yahoo! Articles, and now this. The world does not have to cater to our hobby, folks.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I think the fears that digital downloads will eventually vanish are somewhat overblown. At some point our old cartridges might become useless, too, once the plastics and metals in the games and systems start falling apart. Enjoy the games while they're here rather than worry where they'll go 50 years from now. If there's one thing I've learned, piracy prevails. This stuff will be preserved.

While I'm not taking a "stance" on DLC being good/bad for the community (box/manual/disc collectors are entitled to hate DLC for obvious reasons and I don't feel the need to try to convince them otherwise) I do agree with that sentiment if the end goal is just to be able to PLAY the games.

Nearly every single antiquated media format has been digitally preserved for modern distribution (both grey-market and legit commercial) via roms, emulation, reproduction and/or simulation. And I'm sure people are pro-actively doing so with modern DLC games.

Yeah, every single thing won't make it through the legit commercial route, but if it can be ripped and archived, somebody will figure out a way to crack and play it in the future.

Patience is a virtue.

[TonyTheTiger]

On a sidenote, I think people here are paranoid about things ruining collecting. First it was "Is ebay ruining collecting?" Next it was Yahoo! Articles, and now this. The world does not have to cater to our hobby, folks.

I just don't see how anything can "ruin" collecting. Collecting is just the act of amassing stuff you like, often within a certain category. Different events can make that process easier or harder, cheaper or more expensive, but "ruin" it? I doubt it.


While I'm not taking a "stance" on DLC being good/bad for the community (box/manual/disc collectors are entitled to hate DLC for obvious reasons and I don't feel the need to try to convince them otherwise) I do agree with that sentiment if the end goal is just to be able to PLAY the games.

I'm somewhat indifferent about DLC. Just like anything else there are benefits and detriments. I can't say I'd be entirely happy about the industry going 100% DLC but I don't see it as fire and brimstone. Like Alan Grant says in Jurassic Park, we'll have to evolve. We can all agree the medium itself isn't going anywhere and that's enough of a consolation for me.

[HYB]

While I don't care for downloadable media myself, I don't think it's killing collecting. True, having exclusive DLC can hurt the wallets collectors who are completionists and simply want to have everything included like me. But it's true that they can lower the market price for hard copies, although I haven't noticed that much of a change.

Still, it pisses me off that I need to pay for DLC just to satisfy my sense of a game being complete. Especially since it's unlikely I'll ever use it myself.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I'm somewhat indifferent about DLC. Just like anything else there are benefits and detriments. I can't say I'd be entirely happy about the industry going 100% DLC but I don't see it as fire and brimstone. Like Alan Grant says in Jurassic Park, we'll have to evolve. We can all agree the medium itself isn't going anywhere and that's enough of a consolation for me.

Agreed.

[ScourDX]

One biggest issue with DLC is the regional locking. Which means it actually prevent people from actually accessing the game. Also the game is lock to specific account or hardware. If your account or hardware fails, you have to repurchased the game.

[Slate]

How do you suppose Microsoft will handle this when the next console comes out, If at all? Will one be able to transfer their games to the new console with their account? That would be nice.

Austin

[FxMercenary]

I thought that Sony made a guarantee that anything you purchased from Playstation store will be available to re-download via your username on future console releases free of charge.

[CDiablo]

Im pretty sure hackers will figure it all out, just like you can get XBOX180 dlc to a system even though it was taken offline. Hopefully idiots will figure out that DLC/"content licensing" is shit and stop supporting it so we get physical based games for a long time to come.

[Bojay1997]

I'm getting more and more concerned that we are reaching a point where developers are deciding that digital downloads are better for business than physical media (i.e. DVD's, Bluerays, etc.)

Sony and Microsoft have built their online marketplace to increase profits in the digital sector (i.e. PSP Go, PSN, Xbox Live Marketplace).

How is this going to affect our ability to collect and invest in our collections of games?

We are seeing the effects of this when we see people selling consoles, and mentioning that they have 'x' number of games installed on the hard drive (as if that were something tangible and worth something). Contrary to popular belief, hard drives eventually fail (even the best ones), possibly costing you the loss of your downloaded content. There is also the eventual closing of older services (i.e. Original Xbox Live) which will remove your ability to re-download your purchases should something happen.

What is your view on this new medium?

Is this a method that big M$ and Sony are using to deter reselling of 'used' media, and increase profit?

Should we boycott digital downloads? Let's speak with our wallets.

I'd like to hear YOUR opinion.

I feel like we did an almost identical topic not too long ago about whether or not downloaded games were part of a "collection". The reality is that some stuff will only ever be available digitally and it changes the nature of collecting that item in the sense that you can't transfer it or in some cases use it anywhere but your own personal system. Having said that, physical media looks like it will be sticking around for quite some time to come given the consumer and retailer demand for it. As such, I'm not too worried about it.

[Astrocade]

I'm ambivalent towards DLC. I don't think we'll really know the full ramifications of the industry trend towards non-tangible collectibles until ten or twenty years from now.

We're not too concerned right now because the items we're discussing are still within our immediate reach. But what about twenty years from now when the servers for all these games are gone, or when the last "original" download of Mega Man 9 disappears? I'm positive that someone will have a hacked and P2P file of the game, but what kind of legacy is that? Collectors (notice I said collectors, not gamers) want that piece of plastic to put on their shelves. Notice the guys that are putting games found only on the VC or XBL onto carts and printing up their own labels and boxes. There will always be a market for tangible items that you hold in your hands, which is the reason why emedia will never kill printed matter. An internet exclusive comic will be about as worthless ten decades from now as it is today, whereas Action Comics #1 fetches a cool million on the auction block.

There's several games released only on the Famicom Disk Drive that are lost today. No ROMS exist for certain games that were available only via download at authorized Nintendo dealers. Many people don't realize that the Intellivision was capable of going online back in what, 82 or 83? There's twenty or thirty games that were available only through online play that are lost forever; not even the Blue Sky Rangers have any existing records of those games.

Now look at even the rarest 2600 prototypes. They've all been discovered more or less in the last decade. Why? Because they physically exist. Somewhere in someone's garage, there is a ROM chip for a game that no one ever got to play. Compared to the FDD and Intellivision situation, there's a number of games that many people got to play, but they don't exist anywhere anymore.

We'll just have to wait and see how this develops. I think DLC hurts collecting in the long run.

[Bojay1997]

I'm ambivalent towards DLC. I don't think we'll really know the full ramifications of the industry trend towards non-tangible collectibles until ten or twenty years from now.

We're not too concerned right now because the items we're discussing are still within our immediate reach. But what about twenty years from now when the servers for all these games are gone, or when the last "original" download of Mega Man 9 disappears? I'm positive that someone will have a hacked and P2P file of the game, but what kind of legacy is that? Collectors (notice I said collectors, not gamers) want that piece of plastic to put on their shelves. Notice the guys that are putting games found only on the VC or XBL onto carts and printing up their own labels and boxes. There will always be a market for tangible items that you hold in your hands, which is the reason why emedia will never kill printed matter. An internet exclusive comic will be about as worthless ten decades from now as it is today, whereas Action Comics #1 fetches a cool million on the auction block.

There's several games released only on the Famicom Disk Drive that are lost today. No ROMS exist for certain games that were available only via download at authorized Nintendo dealers. Many people don't realize that the Intellivision was capable of going online back in what, 82 or 83? There's twenty or thirty games that were available only through online play that are lost forever; not even the Blue Sky Rangers have any existing records of those games.

Now look at even the rarest 2600 prototypes. They've all been discovered more or less in the last decade. Why? Because they physically exist. Somewhere in someone's garage, there is a ROM chip for a game that no one ever got to play. Compared to the FDD and Intellivision situation, there's a number of games that many people got to play, but they don't exist anywhere anymore.

We'll just have to wait and see how this develops. I think DLC hurts collecting in the long run.

I think the lost data of 25 years ago is not really all that relevant to the situation today. Just because something is put on physical media doesn't necessarily mean it is better preserved than a computer file somewhere. There are lots of prototype carts that have been damaged or failed completely. I am fairly confident that the vast majority of modern DLC is backed-up in many, many places. I am equally confident that if there is a continuing demand for physical media, companies will seek to cash in on it. Do you really doubt that Capcom will release a disc-based DLC game collection at some point?

[buzz_n64]

Yes, DLC will slowly kill game collecting. Certain games are no longer available to download (XBLN: Double Dragon, Smash tv, that Doritos game....) Price, availability, and everything is controlled. For the games you do have, you can't sell it, copy it, or obtain physical copies of them for that system. I want to boycott DLC games, but I can't get the games any other way, so I am forced to support and download them. I hope they test out DLC/physical copies on more titles, and maybe they will see people are willing to pay more for a physical copy.

[mobiusclimber]

It's hurting MY ability to collect because it drives down the price on common but desirable games like the Donkey Kong Country series or Final Fantasy VII. So if those easily obtained and easily marked up and resold games are no longer "easily marked up and resold" I have less money in my pocket to spend on games I actually need in my collection! Damn you DLC! *shakes fist* Damn you to hell!

[Astrocade]

I think the lost data of 25 years ago is not really all that relevant to the situation today. Just because something is put on physical media doesn't necessarily mean it is better preserved than a computer file somewhere.

I disagree. But of course, if you don't find the examples I listed relevant simply because they're not current, I can see where you're coming from.


There are lots of prototype carts that have been damaged or failed completely. I am fairly confident that the vast majority of modern DLC is backed-up in many, many places.

I don't share your confidence. I shudder to think that the only way I may possibly get to play certain VC titles is if some hacker decides to pirate the game and hoard it for twenty years. I don't like not being able to own a physical copy, and when the only means to do so involves illegal activity, then I'm not quite so optimistic about there being an overabundance of certain material down the road.


I am equally confident that if there is a continuing demand for physical media, companies will seek to cash in on it. Do you really doubt that Capcom will release a disc-based DLC game collection at some point?

Yes I do. If they've helped to create a market that shuns hard copy in favor of DLC, then they will probably not try to jeopardize the exclusivity of said content by re-releasing it on a disc, thereby underscoring the importance of DLC. It all depends on how much demand is there.

Remember when Resident Evil 4 was supposed to be a GC title only? Well, the demand for it was so great (and Capcom saw more $$$ potential) that they released it for the PS2 as well. Supply and demand.

RE4 is a far cry from say, some retro homage assembled by Nintendo exclusively for use on the VC. The game may have a small but loyal following who will download it for a few points, but Nintendo would be crazy to spend a bunch of cash putting it on disc knowing that the core audience for such games is extremely limited. Such games are more likely to slip through the cracks. Suppose Nintendo pulls it from the selection at some point, and then your hard drive dies and your copy of the game goes +pooft+. Sure you can scour torrent sites hoping that there exists a cracked copy that you can emulate in some fashion. BUT that's a lot of bullshit to have to go through to get a game that you already owned.

Wouldn't it be easier for Nintendo to offer both versions in *some* sort of a preservable fashion? When you buy or download certain content, wouldn't it be great if you could request a hard copy as well? Maybe even pay a couple of bucks for said copy? There's a lot of people like me that just aren't satisfied unless they hold the thing in their hands. I don't care if it's a cheap 20 cent disc with a paper wrapper that says "Halo Expansion"- at least I know it's there forever.

[Therealqtip]

Havn't we had about 9,821 of these threads?

[kupomogli]

Havn't we had about 9,821 of these threads?

I think maybe 9,822.

Anyways. There are some games that I'd like to own that are DLC only. I already own Siren Bloodcurse due to importing the Asian version, but I'd also want to own Wipeout HD, yet Wipeout HD Fury is the only one available and doesn't come with any of the Wipeout HD content.

While I'm not interested in the game, a lot of PS3 owners that want to own a copy of Record of Agarest War are getting screwed because it's DLC only on the PS3, while the 360 version isn't only getting the game, but getting a very nice looking Special Edition(which I'd want solely for how good it looks if it drops to a manageable price range.)

Preorders as well. Having preorders of DLC instantly makes the game you purchased incomplete. Because they have these offered as unlock patches rather than able to unlock in the game. Some games such as Red Dead Redemption being only a gun or a costume, or Yakuza 3 being a couple costumes and extra tournament battles isn't so bad. But games like Dragon Age Origins and Dante's Inferno where quests and additional storyline parts are DLC even though included free with a new purchase of the game. If you decide to format your system or the data gets corrupted or something at a time the servers are shut down, looks like you're missing out on content that you purchased for but can't play.

So it's not just killing game collecting, but gaming altogether. Some people like to replay their games and in the coming years when the PSN and XBL networks are shut down, there's no way you can get this DLC afterwards XBL for the regular XBOX no longer exists, just think about all the DLC you can no longer acquire and think about how the same thing can happen for the current gen systems.

[Bojay1997]

I disagree. But of course, if you don't find the examples I listed relevant simply because they're not current, I can see where you're coming from.



I don't share your confidence. I shudder to think that the only way I may possibly get to play certain VC titles is if some hacker decides to pirate the game and hoard it for twenty years. I don't like not being able to own a physical copy, and when the only means to do so involves illegal activity, then I'm not quite so optimistic about there being an overabundance of certain material down the road.



Yes I do. If they've helped to create a market that shuns hard copy in favor of DLC, then they will probably not try to jeopardize the exclusivity of said content by re-releasing it on a disc, thereby underscoring the importance of DLC. It all depends on how much demand is there.

Remember when Resident Evil 4 was supposed to be a GC title only? Well, the demand for it was so great (and Capcom saw more $$$ potential) that they released it for the PS2 as well. Supply and demand.

RE4 is a far cry from say, some retro homage assembled by Nintendo exclusively for use on the VC. The game may have a small but loyal following who will download it for a few points, but Nintendo would be crazy to spend a bunch of cash putting it on disc knowing that the core audience for such games is extremely limited. Such games are more likely to slip through the cracks. Suppose Nintendo pulls it from the selection at some point, and then your hard drive dies and your copy of the game goes +pooft+. Sure you can scour torrent sites hoping that there exists a cracked copy that you can emulate in some fashion. BUT that's a lot of bullshit to have to go through to get a game that you already owned.

Wouldn't it be easier for Nintendo to offer both versions in *some* sort of a preservable fashion? When you buy or download certain content, wouldn't it be great if you could request a hard copy as well? Maybe even pay a couple of bucks for said copy? There's a lot of people like me that just aren't satisfied unless they hold the thing in their hands. I don't care if it's a cheap 20 cent disc with a paper wrapper that says "Halo Expansion"- at least I know it's there forever.

I agree from a collecting standpoint, I always seek out the physical version of something. As such, I own several European PSP and PS3 games that were only released as downloads over here. Having said that, physical media will die eventually as well, so even if there are a million copies of a game out there, unless someone either on the publisher/developer side or the hacker side finds a way to back the data itself up, it doesn't matter if you collect the physical media or a download.

I collect for literally every system, so the chances of ever collecting every game that has ever been released is zero anyway, so I don't get too concerned if some of the DLC games out there only exist on my hard drive and aren't really in my collection. They are in my library and having worked for a large studio with a video game publishing arm, I know all of our data was backed up in all sorts of ways. 25 years ago, this wasn't the case, but whether or not the code was burned to a disc or to a cartridge, there are still some games that have been lost forever. It's sad I suppose, but again, there is so much good stuff out there I will never play, I'm not gonna get too upset that some modem only game for the Intellivision that the programmers don't even remember might be lost forever.

When it makes sense to release something on disc financially, it seems like publishers will do it. We are getting Pixeljunk and Fat Princess on UMD for $10 and $20 respectively in the next week from Sony. I have no doubt Capcom will do the same and release their download stuff in a collection when it makes financial sense to do so. Smaller developers may not, but if I really want the games that bad, I will download them and enjoy them without worrying too much about what might happen decades from now.

[duffmanth]

I think downloadable games will become more common as time goes on, but I also believe physical games on disc/cartridge will still be around for quite some time. From a profitibilty standpoint, it probably makes more sense for companies to put their games out as a download only, but I think if they tried to do this exclusively, there would be a huge consumer backlash, especially among avid game collectors, which I'm guessing most gamers are? Myself, I have always and will always prefer physical games, but I have purchased the odd download, mostly older, cheaper games. I will never purchase a current gen game at full price via download because a) they take up too much room on your HDD, b) they take too long to download, c) if your HDD fucks up, you could lose your games. The gaming market is big enough so that digital downloads and physical games can live side by side.

[Bojay1997]

I think downloadable games will become more common as time goes on, but I also believe physical games on disc/cartridge will still be around for quite some time. From a profitibilty standpoint, it probably makes more sense for companies to put their games out as a download only, but I think if they tried to do this exclusively, there would be a huge consumer backlash, especially among avid game collectors, which I'm guessing most gamers are? Myself, I have always and will always prefer physical games, but I have purchased the odd download, mostly older, cheaper games. I will never purchase a current gen game at full price via download because a) they take up too much room on your HDD, b) they take too long to download, c) if your HDD fucks up, you could lose your games. The gaming market is big enough so that digital downloads and physical games can live side by side.

I think most gamers are not in fact collectors. I don't know if a study has ever been done to try and determine how many video game collectors there are, but if I had to hazard a guess, I would say in the thousands or perhaps tens of thousands at the most versus millions of total gamers. Most gamers I know regularly sell or trade their games or get most of them from Gamefly or a similar service. As such, their physical library is only ever a few dozen games at a time.

[duffmanth]

I'm just going by most of my gamer friends, who are casual to avid collectors for the most part. But yeah you could be right, as I also have many friends whose gaming collections are just a constant recycling program.

[retroman]

i would rather have the hard copy over download anyday. If i can get the hard copy, i do.

[swlovinist]

I have recently had a different opinion of digital download medium. While I prefer to have a physical copy of a game if I had a choice, I have warmed up to downloading more games and not thinking twice. From a gamers standpoint, the games are usually cheaper and there is no threat of damaging the game content of being on a disc. From a collectors standpoint, it is really going to suck finding some of these games when the services of downloading the games goes away. What made me think differently of downloadable video games? The iphone is a gamers paradise. While there is not any physical copies of games, all the games are a split second away from being played. Plus, the fact that most games cost from Free to a mere $4.99 makes gaming affordable. If the tradeoff of having physical copies of games means that I actually get to play more games, then sign me up.

[Ed Oscuro]

Do a search and you'll see this topic isn't new here. So: Dumb old topic gets same old response: If you like to play games, go play games; if you like to have things on shelves, go put things on shelves.

At this point it's water under the bridge. There's no good reason to boycott a more open (therefore egalitarian) method of distribution with lower costs, which ultimately drives down prices later on. Sure, you have to wait a while for some A-list titles to go below $10 on Steam, but it happens; I go to a brick-and-mortar store and never see them drop prices on their titles. Spending money on pressing DVDs and shipping them around the country is money that won't be spent on development, and is potentially unsold inventory that was killing certain segments of gaming. A lot of the good casual games that are out now, for instance, would have never survived the shitty old system.

If you care enough about collectibles there's always art books, soundtrack CDs, and the like, but I generally hate the gimmicky crap passing as "collectible" now. This all reminds me of the post-Upper Deck era of baseball cards (specifically the Topps "Black Gold" 1995-era series) turning into series after series of manufactured collectibles and artificially limited editions. I hate that even more than the stale gum packs.

[Astrocade]

If you care enough about collectibles there's always art books, soundtrack CDs, and the like, but I generally hate the gimmicky crap passing as "collectible" now. This all reminds me of the post-Upper Deck era of baseball cards (specifically the Topps "Black Gold" 1995-era series) turning into series after series of manufactured collectibles and artificially limited editions. I hate that even more than the stale gum packs.

Remember when Topps came out with those Stadium Club series that were ultra high gloss? I remember reading the back of one of the packs and it recommended purchasing a pair of kid gloves to use while handling the cards. LOL

[Astrocade]

I think most gamers are not in fact collectors. I don't know if a study has ever been done to try and determine how many video game collectors there are, but if I had to hazard a guess, I would say in the thousands or perhaps tens of thousands at the most versus millions of total gamers. Most gamers I know regularly sell or trade their games or get most of them from Gamefly or a similar service. As such, their physical library is only ever a few dozen games at a time.

I'd say that's probably a pretty accurate estimate. Hell, go into a Gamestop and look at the ration of used games with covers versus games without the original packaging. I'd say at my local store, at least 70% of the used games are missing the original box.

That would lead me to believe that most people get the game, toss out the box and label, and play the game for a few days before they trade up for another one. Way more of those people out there than there is collectors.

[g00ber]

I guess that's why i'm collecting all the titles I want now before every thing becomes a 'digital' download.

Current Hard Drives are not a permanent solution, and unless they make the games transferable (which they most certainly will not), i'll continue to only purchase hard copies..

Just look at the other topic about 'Record of Argarest War'. I was gonna buy that title, because i'm really into RPG's for the PS3, and now I just wont because I can only buy and download it.

I've also thought 'well, why can't I just allow someone else to download a game on their console'? According to Sony, that is a offense that will get you banned from online on the PS3. I'm sure Microsoft has similar restrictions.

Add to this that broadband users in my area get a cap in the amount they can download per month, and you are constantly in jeopardy of capping your download because you got a couple games along with some other stuff in a month.

This whole download system is rediculous IMHO. Call me old school, but when I buy something, I want to be able to do what I want with it, whether it be trade it, sell it, or destroy it.