Will "digital distibution" take hold?

[ClassicGameTrader]

My perspective comes as somebody who understands broadband as a business.

I pull "12-14 mbps" down through Comcast supposedly.

I pull under 500k off of PSN at very best. It takes 12 hours to download a demo or better.

Imagine 1 million people trying to download Halo the day it came out off of Live. Everybody would be getting 50K down max, servers would be so overloaded.

More than half the geographical country has to settle for either DSL, Dial up or Satellite. Some of these people could throw a stone and hit a Gamestop or Walmart but it would be physically impossible to download the latest game. Even if Microsoft upgraded their servers X1000.

Most ISPs are also starting to cap usage, so now people who manage to download too many games would be forced to pay overage fees. Can you get overage fees for spending too much money at the store?

Plus you couldn't take games to a friends house anymore like the first 30 years of gaming?

Once every single person in the entire county is connected directly to fiber or some much more advanced ISP getting 50+ mbps, there would be a slightly better chance.

So yes, maybe in 50 years....

[Jorpho]

Weren't the World of Warcraft people experimenting with distributing patches through some sort of Bittorrent functionality hidden from the user? That might allow for faster mass-downloads, no?

[CosmicMonkey]

Digital distribution is the future, and I really can't wait until it becomes the norm. And not just for games, I'm talking all media: shows, movies, books etc.

It's better for al parties involved (profit wise), and much better for the environment. I personally think that environmental issues are slightly more important than being able to sell your games second hand.

At the end of the day, it's all 1s and 0s. Does it really matter if those 1s and 0s are stored on one of your precious NES minty carts, on a HDD or on a server 300 miles away? No. As long as you have access to that data when you want it, then it's all good. People really need to stop being so pathetic, childish and materialistic. It's not like it's the end of gaming, just the next evolutionary step in gaming.

[Rob2600]

Digital distribution is the future, and I really can't wait until it becomes the norm. And not just for games, I'm talking all media: shows, movies, books etc.

It's better for al parties involved (profit wise), and much better for the environment. I personally think that environmental issues are slightly more important than being able to sell your games second hand.

At the end of the day, it's all 1s and 0s. Does it really matter if those 1s and 0s are stored on one of your precious NES minty carts, on a HDD or on a server 300 miles away? No. As long as you have access to that data when you want it, then it's all good. People really need to stop being so pathetic, childish and materialistic. It's not like it's the end of gaming, just the next evolutionary step in gaming.

I agree 100%. It's funny how some "hardcore" video game enthusiasts embrace cutting edge technology with open arms - 1080p HDTVs, 7.1 surround sound systems, high-speed internet for online battles, Bluetooth headsets, etc. - yet, those same people are stuck in the past regarding digital distribution. Some people even supported over-priced failures like the 3DO, but refuse to support the next step in data storage. I don't get it.

Society is at a turning point right now. Wouldn't it be nice if we, as a community, banded together and supported environmentally-friendly technology? Not only would that be another step toward protecting our surroundings, but it would also give video gaming - and video gamers - a positive reputation for once. We'd be in the spotlight, not because of another school shooting, but because of positive social change.

Instead of: "Wow, you sit in your parents' basement playing Halo all night? You're a dork and a loser."

people's reaction could be: "Wow, the video game community is making a statement by pushing forward with green technology. That's awesome!"


We could be trailblazers...or we could trail behind everyone else.

[j_factor]

Digital distribution is the future, and I really can't wait until it becomes the norm. And not just for games, I'm talking all media: shows, movies, books etc.

It's better for al parties involved (profit wise), and much better for the environment. I personally think that environmental issues are slightly more important than being able to sell your games second hand.

At the end of the day, it's all 1s and 0s. Does it really matter if those 1s and 0s are stored on one of your precious NES minty carts, on a HDD or on a server 300 miles away? No. As long as you have access to that data when you want it, then it's all good. People really need to stop being so pathetic, childish and materialistic. It's not like it's the end of gaming, just the next evolutionary step in gaming.

It's not just about being able to sell my games second-hand. It's also about being able to buy games second-hand. I can't tell you how many times I found out about an interesting game way after the fact. When a game goes out of print, you can buy a used copy somewhere. When a download is no longer offered, you're pretty much fucked.

I've already experienced this with music once (albeit it's a minor case). There was this new, unsigned band that I was interested in. On their website they had two songs for free download, and a few other songs as pay downloads. I downloaded the two free ones but decided to hold off on the non-free ones because they had an album coming out, which was probably going to have all the songs on it anyway. Well, the band broke up, the album never came, and those songs that I could've downloaded for a dollar each back in 2005-2006 are nowhere to be found. If they had released them on a CD EP or something, I would at least have a chance of getting it.

Also, I game on a budget. To save money, I often buy used, clearance, and sale games. That kind of stuff just doesn't happen with downloads. If digital distribution takes hold, I won't be able to buy nearly as many games as I do today.

[Dastardly Dylan]

Well as we all know, it's already started with NES games and up, even getting modern games playable on the PC. I think this is going to start to happen more and more, but it will not take over. Not unless people are careless enough to go out and buy the game and be happy and make the big companies happy you went out and bought their game and have them rolling around in their money laughing at us.

[Rob2600]

Jfactor, I understand your point about buying used games. However, in order for progress to be made, people will have to tweak their buying habits and lifestyles.

Besides, with digital distribution, I imagine prices would be low enough that people wouldn't have to wait for games to go on sale or wait for a used copy. I bought World of Goo on WiiWare for, what, $15? Had that game been released on disc, it probably would've cost $30. Likewise for LostWinds and Dr. Mario Online Rx.

That's three new, full games for $45 total. If anything, digital distribution is better for gamers on a budget.

[YoshiM]

While I did post back in '07 about digital distribution being the future, I'm adding a caveat onto there-the buyer should have some rudimentary control over the content in case their hardware goes bad. Thankfully Sony and Microsoft has the right idea with PSN and Xbox Live. At least for the near future, your downloads are safe to a point, even if you replace the hardware. I'm more worried about situations like Nintendo's VC and WiiWare where you can't transfer your games to a new console. If your Wii dies, you have to send it in to Nintendo for repair in order to get the content transferred. No if's, and's or but's. Of course there's content available for the Wii I want but after getting burned on my original Xbox with premium content, I'm hesitant to pull the trigger on Nintendo's system.

As for j_factor's situation with the music-it's the chance you take no matter what the media. Just because something was printed/pressed doesn't mean it's indefinitely available. About sixteen years ago a co-worker of mine was in a band and brought the tapes they had professionally produced (as CDs were too expensive at the time) to sell. I him-hawed a bit but finally bought a tape. The next year the band broke up. It's hard to say how many tapes they had made but I have a pretty good feeling those songs will never be available again. Oh sure there's a chance I might be able to get my hands on a tape but the likelihood ranks up there with winning the lottery.

[CosmicMonkey]

Exactly.

I'm sure Studio Liverpool has seen more profit from selling WipEout HD at £13 as a download-only title than trying to sell it as a Blu Ray at £35. I'm almost sure that the same goes for the developers of the WiiWare titles Rob mentioned. And at least these developers know that there's not going to be any pirated copies of their games floating around the interweb either, me hearties.

I completely agree that the system isn't entirely perfect at this moment in time, but it will change and evolve over time.

[j_factor]

Jfactor, I understand your point about buying used games. However, in order for progress to be made, people will have to tweak their buying habits and lifestyles.

Besides, with digital distribution, I imagine prices would be low enough that people wouldn't have to wait for games to go on sale or wait for a used copy. I bought World of Goo on WiiWare for, what, $15? Had that game been released on disc, it probably would've cost $30. Likewise for LostWinds and Dr. Mario Online Rx.

That's three new, full games for $45 total. If anything, digital distribution is better for gamers on a budget.

I disagree. Those games were made for Wiiware to begin with, with that pricing in mind. There isn't any such thing as a $30 Wiiware game (yet). Those games are also much smaller than the vast majority of games released on disc. It's hard for me to imagine that retail prices will really be cheaper with digital distribution. It'll just even out. The cost savings by not having to press discs and print manuals is offset by the lack of competition between retailers and the fact that non-physical inventory doesn't "need" to be sold.

If anything, digital distribution may be a good thing because perhaps otherwise a game like World of Goo would have a harder time getting released. But I'm not saying we shouldn't have digital distribution at all, I'm just saying it shouldn't replace hard media. I like World of Goo, by the way, but I would've gladly paid $20 for a disc version.

[Rob2600]

I disagree. Those games were made for Wiiware to begin with, with that pricing in mind. There isn't any such thing as a $30 Wiiware game (yet). Those games are also much smaller than the vast majority of games released on disc. It's hard for me to imagine that retail prices will really be cheaper with digital distribution. It'll just even out. The cost savings by not having to press discs and print manuals is offset by the lack of competition between retailers and the fact that non-physical inventory doesn't "need" to be sold.

If anything, digital distribution may be a good thing because perhaps otherwise a game like World of Goo would have a harder time getting released. But I'm not saying we shouldn't have digital distribution at all, I'm just saying it shouldn't replace hard media. I like World of Goo, by the way, but I would've gladly paid $20 for a disc version.

Valid points, but there would still be competition from other publishers/other titles. For example, why would Konami release it's digital games for $60 each when Activision and EA are releasing them for $35 each?

And yes, WiiWare/digitally distributed games are relatively small at the moment, but we're not talking about 2009 or 2010...we're talking about 2018. By then, 5 TB solid state drives and 15 MB/sec internet access will be standard.

[j_factor]

Valid points, but there would still be competition from other publishers/other titles. For example, why would Konami release it's digital games for $60 each when Activision and EA are releasing them for $35 each?

I don't envision such a thing happening. They will all have to pass through the same "gate", and the "gatekeeper" (Sony/MS/Nintendo) will set standard pricing. They will allow for budget games but most games will be the same standard retail price. Much like the current situation with disc-based games.

And yes, WiiWare/digitally distributed games are relatively small at the moment, but we're not talking about 2009 or 2010...we're talking about 2018. By then, 5 TB solid state drives and 15 MB/sec internet access will be standard.

Thanks for bringing up storage. Drives are increasing in size but so are games. Will drive capacity really "catch up" enough? With a 5TB drive, if games are 250GB each, that's only enough space for 20 games. 250GB is a very modest estimate when you consider that MGS4 is supposedly almost 50GB, and the largest games on Playstation were 2.6GB (four discs) at best. That's an increase by about 19 times in two generations (and there may yet be larger games this gen). 50GB times 19 is 950GB.

[Rob2600]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, the main reason Metal Gear Solid 4 takes up 50 GB is because of all of the high-definition prerendered video scenes. By 2018, home video game consoles will be so powerful that I'd think every cinema scene could be rendered in real time, thus reducing the amount of disc space required.

Then again, I thought we were at that point already. Why, in the year 2008, with our insanely fast CPUs and tons of RAM, are some developers still relying on FMV?


Regarding PS and PS2 games, again from what I understand, a four disc game isn't really four CDs or DVDs worth of data. Game data is redundant across all discs and the rest of the storage is used for, once again, FMV.

If developers optimized their code and assets...and stopped relying on FMV...games would require much less space.


And my 5 TB estimate was conservative...as in, a budget $300 home computer in the year 2018 will come with a 5 TB drive standard. I'm sure by then, there will be much larger drives available as well. It's 2008 and we're already up to 1.5 TB!

[Jorpho]

If developers optimized their code and assets...and stopped relying on FMV...games would require much less space.

Whaaa?! Developers spending time and money optimizing their code and assets to save space instead of making a quick-and-dirty render that they can enhance with all kinds of fancy lens-flare and other effects?

Now that's a real pipe dream.

[Phyeir]

One of the biggest things that may prevent the prevalence of digital distribution to the point that there were no disc-based games are all of the broadband companies putting caps on the amount of data that can be downloaded each month. The caps that seem to be getting passed around are at 250GB. Now, while this may not seem that bad when you consider that you are going to get anywhere from 5-25 games for that space, when the next gen comes, that will probably shrink to just 5-10 games, and that isn't counting all of the rest of your surfing downloads, like movies and TV.

If the actual means of getting the games are strangled, then that would be a huge hindrance.

[Rob2600]

One of the biggest things that may prevent the prevalence of digital distribution to the point that there were no disc-based games are all of the broadband companies putting caps on the amount of data that can be downloaded each month. The caps that seem to be getting passed around are at 250GB.

To quote heybmtm:

There is no doubt in my mind that the major cable companies are in the process of creating "online gamer packages". They'll run $80-100 per month and be the only way you can have a decent connection to XBL or PSN.

In their mind, online gamers aren't the "average customer" and should therefore pay a premium for the service. This is coming soon.

And again, we're not talking about digital distribution taking over in 2008 or 2009...we're talking about 2018 - 2020.