PS4 Not Playing Used Games, What Is This Hobby Coming To?

[Bojay1997]

I'm not sure what this has to do with the post you quoted, I didn't say anything about retail prices.

But since you brought it up. I think games were more likely to vary in price a decade ago. $50 was the most common MSRP, but it was far from universal. There were lots of $20, $30, and $40 games back then. There were even a few $10 games like The Italian Job and Ball Breakers. $10 in 2002 is equal to $12.80 in 2012 and I'm not seeing any new releases for $12.99. Nowadays, there are very few exceptions to the $60 rule, aside from new editions of previously existing games.

NES and SNES games were more expensive because they were on cartridge. Computer games during that time were certainly not nearly that much.



The merger with EB expanded the name "Gamestop" only. It didn't expand the business, if anything it slightly shrunk it as some locations were closed, being deemed too close to each other.



I guess this is a regional thing, because out here, the number of Gamestops today is definitely not greater than the former number of Babbages + EB Games + Funcoland + whatever else.



Yeah, well, so are lots of things. *shrug*



I don't remember that happening, they cost about the same as they always have.

There is actually quite a bit of price variation in MSRP on modern console games. For example, Anarchy Reigns just came out at $30 yesterday. There are also a number of other games released in the past year on 360 and PS3 that had MSRPs of $30, $40 and $50. When you add in all of the full games being released exclusively on XBL and PSN at $5-$20, you have plenty of price choices, it's simply that the lower end MSRP games aren't being released on retail discs anymore. That doesn't change the fact that they are readily available and at those price points.

I've been a computer gamer since the early 80s and I have quite a large collection of computer games in their original packaging including price stickers. There were $50-$60 games as early as the 1980s (although there were also plenty of games with an MSRP of $20, $30 or $40) and many, many $50-$60 PC releases in the 90s. In fact, I'm looking at my Sierra collection and most of those have $50 price stickers on them from Software Etc.

Your facts on the various Gamestop mergers are just plain inaccurate. Gamestop is actually the product of the 1994 merger of Babbage's and Software Etc. in 1994 which at the time had a combined 700 stores. They reached 800 stores in the US before they declined down to 600 by 1996. At the time of the merger in 2005, after various sales and acquisitions, including Funcoland, Gamestop and EB had about 4000 stores combined. Today they have over 6700 stores with an average of 400 new stores opening per year since 2009. So, they are clearly in an expansion mode. I now have four GS locations within six miles of my home where five years ago there was only one. Other than the closure of local Hollywood Video, we never had any other used game stores in the area previous to this. While it's anecdotal, I'm sure my area isn't isolated in the transformation GS has made in providing a ready venue to trade-in and buy used games.

Three years ago, as sales were collapsing on both DVDs and CDs, the music industry and studios tried various pricing experiments with $10 new release CDs and DVDs. It turned out that sales were just as flat as they were at $15-$20. The same thing is going on with Blu Rays right now and the average movie sells for $20 when a few years ago it was closer to $30.

You're right that lots of things are causing the video game industry to have financial issues. That doesn't change the fact that used sales are a big and growing part of that problem and it is very likely that the business model will change, perhaps into something more akin to Steam with its efforts at allowing consumers to resell digital content licenses.

[RCM]

As other posters have mentioned, there are other platforms (Steam, iOS, Android, etc.) where a secondhand market simply does not exist. Consumers are OK with that 'cause prices are more than reasonable. If Sony's ceiling for physical games is $10 I really don't give a shit if they do this. The problem is they won't, at least for physical PS4 releases. Once games are as mainstream as movies in terms of audience price will hopefully be less of an issue.

[j_factor]

There is actually quite a bit of price variation in MSRP on modern console games. For example, Anarchy Reigns just came out at $30 yesterday. There are also a number of other games released in the past year on 360 and PS3 that had MSRPs of $30, $40 and $50. When you add in all of the full games being released exclusively on XBL and PSN at $5-$20, you have plenty of price choices, it's simply that the lower end MSRP games aren't being released on retail discs anymore. That doesn't change the fact that they are readily available and at those price points.

I do know about Anarchy Reigns, but it seems like there are much fewer of those than there used to be. Ten years ago, I was buying new games left and right without ever spending $50.

I've been a computer gamer since the early 80s and I have quite a large collection of computer games in their original packaging including price stickers. There were $50-$60 games as early as the 1980s (although there were also plenty of games with an MSRP of $20, $30 or $40) and many, many $50-$60 PC releases in the 90s. In fact, I'm looking at my Sierra collection and most of those have $50 price stickers on them from Software Etc.

I was just talking with my uncle about this the other day. He used to have a huge C64 collection. (Oh how I wish he'd given it to me, instead of getting rid of it, but I digress.) He got one in '83 and kept buying games for it until around '91. And he is adamant that most games were $30 or less, a few were $35, and the only rare exception that was more than that would be something packaged with a bunch of extras, like Ultima IV. I clearly remember looking through his games some years ago, some of them did still have the prices on them. I remember looking at Tangled Tales and noticing its faded $29.99 price tag, I gave that one an extra long look because I had never heard of that game.

A disk was always significantly cheaper than a cartridge. I don't know what Sierra games you're talking about, but if they're from the tail end of the floppy disk era when some games went up to 9 disks, that would account for the increased cost. At the same time, there were still cheaper games around, i.e. smaller games.

Your facts on the various Gamestop mergers are just plain inaccurate. Gamestop is actually the product of the 1994 merger of Babbage's and Software Etc. in 1994 which at the time had a combined 700 stores. They reached 800 stores in the US before they declined down to 600 by 1996. At the time of the merger in 2005, after various sales and acquisitions, including Funcoland, Gamestop and EB had about 4000 stores combined. Today they have over 6700 stores with an average of 400 new stores opening per year since 2009. So, they are clearly in an expansion mode. I now have four GS locations within six miles of my home where five years ago there was only one. Other than the closure of local Hollywood Video, we never had any other used game stores in the area previous to this. While it's anecdotal, I'm sure my area isn't isolated in the transformation GS has made in providing a ready venue to trade-in and buy used games.

I suppose I stand corrected on the number of stores. But it's not like that in my area at all. Here, there are malls that used to have an EB and a Babbage's, and now just have one Gamestop. Additionally, there are now much fewer independent game stores than there used to be. Game Crazy and Game Rush are gone as well.

Perhaps you live in an area with a lot of recent population growth / new development.

Three years ago, as sales were collapsing on both DVDs and CDs, the music industry and studios tried various pricing experiments with $10 new release CDs and DVDs. It turned out that sales were just as flat as they were at $15-$20. The same thing is going on with Blu Rays right now and the average movie sells for $20 when a few years ago it was closer to $30.

I thought Blu-Ray prices dropped because it's no longer a novel format, and it's been more widely adopted? New CDs look to me the same price they've always been, $10-15. The only change I've noticed is that now old releases are cheaper.

As other posters have mentioned, there are other platforms (Steam, iOS, Android, etc.) where a secondhand market simply does not exist. Consumers are OK with that 'cause prices are more than reasonable. If Sony's ceiling for physical games is $10 I really don't give a shit if they do this. The problem is they won't, at least for physical PS4 releases. Once games are as mainstream as movies in terms of audience price will hopefully be less of an issue.

While there's no arguing that Steam itself is doing well, PC gaming sure ain't what she used to be. I can't help but feel that Steam has contributed to its decline.

I remember going to Fry's and being in awe at the racks and racks of PC games. Now, not so much. And I can't even be bothered with PC games most of the time anymore.

[ScourDX]

If either Sony or Microsoft is coming out with DRM scheme much like PC always online activation on their next console, say good bye to both. Always online activation never work.

[CDiablo]

It's so weird that PC gaming doesn't allow used games at all, and nobody seems to give two shits about that. I'm normally against this movement away from physical media, but with the PC, I don't seem to care. With my physical console games, I'll usually buy them used, and then I'll resell them when I know they are about to start collecting dust.

With the PC, I can't buy used games, and I can't resell my games, but I don't even care about it. The reason, is that the prices of PC games fall so fast that I feel like I can be patient and wait for the Steam sales. Wait for the Amazon download sales, wait for the GamersGate and Green Man Gaming sales. I'm somewhat of a hypocrite, because I was always crying about how they are taking away our rights with all this digital crap, but then the truth is, if they make things cheap enough, I don't give a fuck. I'm perfectly content as long as it's super cheap. I'm in the minority of gamers that are drifting about 2 years behind current times anyways (with my current backlog), that patience is something I have in spades. I can sit around and wait and wait and wait for those price drops, and then when the price is so freaking low that it's a crime not to buy it, then I'll buy it.

I don't really own it. It's more like a rental, or a lease, but I don't mind because I'm buying my games for about 5 bucks each, which is how much Blockbuster charges you to rent a game for a week or so, and I'll definitely get my 5 bucks worth.

The thing is, we know that PS4 and Xbox Next and Wii U aren't going to be anything like that. We will never see games like Rage being sold for 4 bucks, or Limbo being sold for $2.50. A sale to those companies is $14.99 or $19.99. You won't see anything sub $9.99 unless it's some super indy stuff.

Heres why consoles cant cut off the used market. I am a hypocrite like you as I am very anti digital..........but when the games are between $1-$7(really the most I pay for digital stuff not named Dawn of War) I can live with the fact that I dont physically own it. I dont like steam very much(I am a frequent gog.com user though) but they know if you price it low you will get a ton of sales and that works for them. Consoles dont have competition(Steam has gamersgate, greenman, gog, GFWL, desura, ect) other than other platforms so they see no need do firesale price drops like the PC DD companies. Theres games that have been out on XBLA for 5-6 years that have NEVER seen a sale or price drop and I refuse to buy them until those pricedrops/sales happen(if ever). Consoles DD of retail games feel almost no need to drop lower than MSRP of an on shelf game(which you can probably get cheaper than DD online). They just dont get it. So if you kill used games on consoles you end up with less money for games that are stuck at $60-$70(god forbid) price point because 90% of the time thats where the money goes. Used games are part of the console gaming ecosystem and when you remove anything from an ecosystem it either is ruined or evolves into something sustainable. Once the console manufacturers start looking at the steam business model they can kill used games without a hiccup. Otherwise it will be commercial suicide.

[G-Boobie]

While there's no arguing that Steam itself is doing well, PC gaming sure ain't what she used to be. I can't help but feel that Steam has contributed to its decline.

Can you explain this concept? Because from where I'm sitting, PC gaming is not only alive and well, but the exclusive games are far more interesting that what's coming out on consoles.

(...) And I can't even be bothered with PC games most of the time anymore.

That's unfortunate.

EDIT: OK, I'm sorry, your statements are crazy.

Not only are most console games coming over to the PC, usually graphically superior and with optimized performance, but there's an entire world of games that never, ever see a console that are available on the PC. The Anno series, Total War, S.T.A.L.K.E.R., the Kings Bounty games, Killing Field, Dawn of War, the Legend of Grimrock, Inquisitor, Hawken, DOTA and League of Legends, all the MMOs out there, Sanctum, Civilization IV and V, Dwarf Fortress, Magicka, Sins of a Solar Empire, Amnesia: the Dark Descent, Trackmania and Shootmania, Tribes: Ascend, Planetside 2, Blacklight: Tango Down, Mechwarrior Online, Cryostasis, Galactic Civilizations II, Company of Heroes.... I could go on.

The "indie" space is even crazier. Home, Lone Survivor, McPixel, Cart Life, Pathologic, Capsized, Slender, Frog Fractions, Miasmata, Tiny & Big, To The Moon, Botanicula, The Spiderweb Games catalog, Solium Infernum, Uplink, FTL, Hotline Miami, the Binding of Isaac....

PC games are not, in fact, what they used to be. They're usually better. You might not personally like where they've gone, and that's fine, but any platform where I can get on, day or night, and see five million people playing all over the world and get a match in whatever game I want within minutes? That's a wonderful, healthy ecosystem.

[Nature Boy]

When I really think about the patent idea, it makes sense.

Publishers would prefer that all sales be online only, as they (obviously) get a higher % of the sale value by cutting out the middlemen, plus they don't have to worry about all this used games business that is causing them to go hungry.

But not everybody will connect their console to the internet, so you need an alternative method to get them content, and a disc that can only be used on the machine for which it's loaded sounds an awful lot like an offline version of an online games sale.

I think the transition for all consoles to something like this is inevitable. It just makes too much sense from a business perspective to not make it happen.

I'm not saying I like it, as I will miss collecting games, but I'd learn to live with it I imagine.

[Bojay1997]

When I really think about the patent idea, it makes sense.

Publishers would prefer that all sales be online only, as they (obviously) get a higher % of the sale value by cutting out the middlemen, plus they don't have to worry about all this used games business that is causing them to go hungry.

But not everybody will connect their console to the internet, so you need an alternative method to get them content, and a disc that can only be used on the machine for which it's loaded sounds an awful lot like an offline version of an online games sale.

I think the transition for all consoles to something like this is inevitable. It just makes too much sense from a business perspective to not make it happen.

I'm not saying I like it, as I will miss collecting games, but I'd learn to live with it I imagine.

I was very opposed to digital only, but over the past six months or so, I have really gotten into GOG, Steam, XBL and PSN and frankly, after collecting for over 20 years, I am looking forward to the day when physical releases are few and far between. There is just something about the convenience of being able to quickly play a game already on a hard drive that is lost when I have to find a disc, pull it out of the case, boot it up, etc...

[Bojay1997]

I do know about Anarchy Reigns, but it seems like there are much fewer of those than there used to be. Ten years ago, I was buying new games left and right without ever spending $50.



I was just talking with my uncle about this the other day. He used to have a huge C64 collection. (Oh how I wish he'd given it to me, instead of getting rid of it, but I digress.) He got one in '83 and kept buying games for it until around '91. And he is adamant that most games were $30 or less, a few were $35, and the only rare exception that was more than that would be something packaged with a bunch of extras, like Ultima IV. I clearly remember looking through his games some years ago, some of them did still have the prices on them. I remember looking at Tangled Tales and noticing its faded $29.99 price tag, I gave that one an extra long look because I had never heard of that game.

A disk was always significantly cheaper than a cartridge. I don't know what Sierra games you're talking about, but if they're from the tail end of the floppy disk era when some games went up to 9 disks, that would account for the increased cost. At the same time, there were still cheaper games around, i.e. smaller games.



I suppose I stand corrected on the number of stores. But it's not like that in my area at all. Here, there are malls that used to have an EB and a Babbage's, and now just have one Gamestop. Additionally, there are now much fewer independent game stores than there used to be. Game Crazy and Game Rush are gone as well.

Perhaps you live in an area with a lot of recent population growth / new development.



I thought Blu-Ray prices dropped because it's no longer a novel format, and it's been more widely adopted? New CDs look to me the same price they've always been, $10-15. The only change I've noticed is that now old releases are cheaper.



While there's no arguing that Steam itself is doing well, PC gaming sure ain't what she used to be. I can't help but feel that Steam has contributed to its decline.

I remember going to Fry's and being in awe at the racks and racks of PC games. Now, not so much. And I can't even be bothered with PC games most of the time anymore.

It's not just Anarchy Reigns though. There are a bunch of more niche Xbox 360 titles that have come out in the past few years that have MSRPs of anywhere from $20 to $50. Just off the top of my head, those would include Test Drive Ferrari, Port Royale 3, Let's Dance, Tropico 4, etc...

I'm sure your uncle did pay $20-$35 for lots of 64 games. I did too by shopping at Egghead and other stores that gave a discount. That wasn't MSRP on the vast majority of them, however. Here is a link to the Computer Gaming World magazine archive from 1983 that shows most disc SSI games at $50-$60 MSRP, Infocom disc games at $50 and many other publishers listing MSRP at $40-$60 depending on the game. There were some at $20 and $30, but it was primarily arcade conversions or smaller scope action games. Games on cartridge for home computers were listed at $60 and up.

http://www.cgwmuseum.org/galleries/i...83&pub=2&id=13

As for the Sierra stuff, I'm talking about both the disc and CD-Rom stuff. Many PC games regardless of format in the 90s had an MSRP of $50-$60. Obviously, retailers gave discounts so people may have paid less, but the same could be said of modern console games that collapse in price weeks after release.

I live in a built-out area of Los Angeles and there are far more Gamestop locations than there ever were independent used game stores or other chains just 5-7 years ago. Clearly Gamestop is expanding, at least in large urban areas.

New release CDs and DVDs are back to $15-$20 MSRP. I agree that retailers sell them for a lot less, but the experiment I was speaking of involved the MSRP actually being dropped which meant with sales and discounts, new release DVDs and CDs were $8 or so for a short time. Blu Ray prices have dropped primarily because demand has dropped sharply. People just don't buy movies anymore because VOD, NetFlix and other services are just so ubiquitous. I suspect in a few more years physical media versions of most new movies will be few and far between.

PC releases are extremely vibrant, as others have pointed out, not only are many console games seeing superior PC releases, but there are tons and tons of indie and niche titles like point and click adventures and strategy games that only see PC release. Steam is huge and if anything it has spurred PC gaming after a brief lull in the early 2000s because of piracy and general lack of public demand.

[duffmanth]

When I really think about the patent idea, it makes sense.

Publishers would prefer that all sales be online only, as they (obviously) get a higher % of the sale value by cutting out the middlemen, plus they don't have to worry about all this used games business that is causing them to go hungry.

But not everybody will connect their console to the internet, so you need an alternative method to get them content, and a disc that can only be used on the machine for which it's loaded sounds an awful lot like an offline version of an online games sale.

I think the transition for all consoles to something like this is inevitable. It just makes too much sense from a business perspective to not make it happen.

I'm not saying I like it, as I will miss collecting games, but I'd learn to live with it I imagine.

I agree that gaming going digital only is inevitable, but I think that's still quite a ways off. The video game market is big enough so that both digital and physical games can co-exist.

[The 1 2 P]

The video game market is big enough so that both digital and physical games can co-exist.

And they will both continue to exist for quite sometime. Like others have already said not everyone has an internet connection, let alone a high-speed one. So unless publishers want to pass on free money they will continue to have some sort of disc option.

Kupo already touched on one of the potential uses for this patent but theres also the option to do what they already did during this gen with DC Universe Online. Once that game disc connects to it's first console it becomes completely worthless, although I think thats probably par for the course with console MMORPG's. So I don't think that Sony is particularly going to use this patent for something as sinister as many are anticipating.

Having said that, if they did go and use this to ban the playing of all used games I don't see how anyone could defend that move. It would not only cut off a huge part of the market but they would be willingly giving up their own console market share to their competitors that still allowed used games on their systems. Sony has made a bunch of blunders this gen but making this kind of move would be beyond stupid and I really don't think they would be that cocky....unless they were still the current market leader. Had Sony continued with the PS3 right where they left off with the dominace of the PS1 and PS2 we wouldn't even be having this discussion. They would absolutely use this to kill off used game sales and not give it a second thought. But they were humbled this gen and have learned alot of lessons. And for that reason alone I really don't see them implementing this other than for some sort of pratical applications. The Sony of today is not the same as the Sony of 2006.

[kedawa]

People with no internet connection are a rounding error. Companies aren't going to continue spending money on optical drives and physical media for the sake of a tiny minority of consumers, especially ones that can't be milked with DLC and service fees. iOS is doing just fine without physical media.

[Bojay1997]

People with no internet connection are a rounding error. Companies aren't going to continue spending money on optical drives and physical media for the sake of a tiny minority of consumers, especially ones that can't be milked with DLC and service fees. iOS is doing just fine without physical media.

I hate to say it, but you're right. I just checked the latest stats and 90% of households with a computer in the home have broadband and something like 70%+ of all US households currently have broadband. Dial-up is down to about 3% of US households currently. While there are still some dial-up holdouts and rural areas with no broadband, it's really a tiny proportion of the overall US population and probably even a smaller proportion of likely video game and computer game players. Broadband penetration is only going to increase in the next year or so as we near the PS4 and Xbox 720 release date.

[Leo_A]

Despite the growth of broadband, the infrastructure still isn't there for 100% digital distribution. A lot of people are knocking on bandwidth limits as it is just by being an avid user of things like Netflix.

Until internet infrastructure improves enough and ISP's evolve their policies to adapt (Which is the biggest technical hurdle but not the only problem or thing that needs to change for us to move to 100% digital distribution), retail distribution will still dominate the console landscape. And with the server infrastructure that will be needed just to support a big game launch or two during the course of a year and a few other days like around Christmas, I'm not sure they will ever go all digital. Imagine all the expense and equipment needed for just a handful of day's that probably wouldn't even be working at 10% capacity for 350 days of every year.

My concern at least for the next generation or two is with the removal of our control and freedom over our own disc. A future where I can't insert any disc into any console and fully enjoy the offline experience since there are things like unlock codes to open up access to a single player game and so on stinks just as much as an all download future.

If anything, it's even worse. You'd have physical media with none of the traditional benefits of physical media (Beyond the joy geek's get with lining their bookcases with DVD cases ) and also none of the advantages that the digital route offers (Not having to change discs, faster loading times, less wear and tear on your console, no clutter, etc.).

That's much more my concern for the next 10 years or so than any worry about publisher's ceasing to ship console game's on optical disc to retailers. Digital got its start in the last generation, has become a popular secondary form of distribution this generation, and will likely be on a even footing the next with competitive pricing and same day digital releases for virtually all software.

Then I'd expect at least another generation where retail distribution is an important secondary form of distribution before it disappears completely.

[Bojay1997]

Despite the growth of broadband, the infrastructure still isn't there for 100% digital distribution. A lot of people are knocking on bandwidth limits as it is just by being an avid user of things like Netflix.

Until internet infrastructure improves enough and ISP's evolve their policies to adapt (Which is the biggest technical hurdle but not the only problem or thing that needs to change for us to move to 100% digital distribution), retail distribution will still dominate the console landscape. And with the server infrastructure that will be needed just to support a big game launch or two during the course of a year and a few other days like around Christmas, I'm not sure they will ever go all digital. Imagine all the expense and equipment needed for just a handful of day's that probably wouldn't even be working at 10% capacity for 350 days of every year.

My concern at least for the next generation or two is with the removal of our control and freedom over our own disc. A future where I can't insert any disc into any console and fully enjoy the offline experience since there are things like unlock codes to open up access to a single player game and so on stinks just as much as an all download future.

If anything, it's even worse. You'd have physical media with none of the traditional benefits of physical media (Beyond the joy geek's get with lining their bookcases with DVD cases ) and also none of the advantages that the digital route offers (Not having to change discs, faster loading times, less wear and tear on your console, no clutter, etc.).

That's much more my concern for the next 10 years or so than any worry about publisher's ceasing to ship console game's on optical disc to retailers.

You're working from old data and outdated perceptions. PC full-game sales surpassed retail discs in 2010 by a 30% margin. I suspect with Steam in the mix it's even higher currently. Consoles won't be that far behind. Certainly not 10+ years behind, especially if technologies like Ultra HD come into widescale use where there is no practical optical disc format that can store all that data. Also, Google, Verizon and other companies are already rolling out next generation broadband in larger markets which could give 10X bandwidth to average consumers for a reasonable price within 2-3 years. I agree that we have one more generation of optical disc based consoles ahead, but I am just as confident that it will be the last.

[Leo_A]

You're working from old data and outdated perceptions. PC full-game sales surpassed retail discs in 2010 by a 30% margin.

Hardly

For starters, you completely ignored the fact that a lot of user's are already close to their ISP cap's each month as video streaming grows. And the PC user base for large AAA games is far smaller than the console world and most are downloading large game's at a significantly slower rate. And it's extremely rare to have a PC release sell to a large percentage of your user's so digital sales are more spread out and consistent where as on console's they have to deal with several instances like Halo 4 each year where a game rolls out that quickly sells to an extremely large percentage of your install base. That's something the PC gaming world (The higher end at least versus the more casual heart of it these days) probably hasn't seen since things like Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 rolled out a decade ago.

The strain it's placing on internet infrastructure is far smaller than that what full digital console distribution would place and most of it can be done even with severe ISP capacity constraints. And several major ISP's have actually placed caps for the first time or lowered them in recent years which is also another factor. User's are going backwards with capacity rather than forwards in regards to their internet connection and any hopes that the trend will reverse and take significant steps in the other direction are just hopes that remain to be seen will happen in the near future.

Also, an awful lot of Steam sales and such are small casual titles and older titles that tend to be smaller in size. The ESA survey a year or two ago showed that the percentage of digital sales against physical sales was significantly higher for dollar's than it was by gigabytes distributed. That means that the percentage of those large high value projects reaching PC gamer's via optical disc are significantly higher than the amount of sales by digital and retail. Digital's dominance on things like Skyrim (Assuming that saw an optical disc release...something I can't swear on since I bought the 360 release) isn't nearly at the same level as it is on the smaller more casual products that are increasingly growing more popular on PC's than things like that use to dominate like FPS's, flight simulator's, and RTS games. The stuff more applicable to the console world on PC's still have a large amount of retail sales presence even at this late date.

No matter the debate about how prepared ISP's are right now for this, the fact is that they're not there yet and optical disc are secure for this generation. And I simply don't see optical disc going from likely being on a even footing one generation with digital to being nonexistent the next. Not only do we have the question on just how much progress will take place with internet infrastructure over the next five year's, they also have consumer's and retailer's to deal with.

Both of which are extremely important factor's to consider. Both need to be weened off how things have been gone the past almost 40 years and I see it as highly unlikely that they're essentially going to flip a switch. And such things been predicted before in more limited terms... for instance, several user's here proclaimed that UMD was dead because of the Go and that suddenly they weren't going to be releasing new PSP software on UMD to sell to the 60 million or so UMD equipped PSP's that were out there at the time.

We even had one DP nut that argued on and on about how the PSP Go was a new platform and since console/handheld manufacturer's often don't support the previous generation with new hardware, that something like the Super Nintendo not playing Nintendo cartridges was proof positive that Sony could move onwards with the Go without ever releasing any more software via UMD to cater to the many millions of PSP user's out there that were largely buying their games via UMD.

These companies want to make money. And that seems to point towards increasingly going digital. But they're not so stuck on killing retail releases as quickly as possible that they'd be willing to leave a significant amount of money on the table by doing it prematurely like this nutty DP user thought Sony would do several years ago with the PSP.

Like I said, they want to make money. And for at least a good while longer, that means also releasing your product on optical disc to be sold at retail.

[Bojay1997]

Hardly

For starters, you completely ignored the fact that a lot of user's are already close to their ISP cap's each month as video streaming grows. And the PC user base for large AAA games is far smaller than the console world and most are downloading large game's at a significantly slower rate. And it's extremely rare to have a PC release sell to a large percentage of your user's so digital sales are more spread out and consistent where as on console's they have to deal with several instances like Halo 4 each year where a game rolls out that quickly sells to an extremely large percentage of your install base. That's something the PC gaming world (The higher end at least versus the more casual heart of it these days) probably hasn't seen since things like Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 rolled out a decade ago.

The strain it's placing on internet infrastructure is far smaller than that what full digital console distribution would place and most of it can be done even with severe ISP capacity constraints. And several major ISP's have actually placed caps for the first time or lowered them in recent years which is also another factor. User's are going backwards with capacity rather than forwards in regards to their internet connection and any hopes that the trend will reverse and take significant steps in the other direction are just hopes that remain to be seen will happen in the near future.

Also, an awful lot of Steam sales and such are small casual titles and older titles that tend to be smaller in size. The ESA survey a year or two ago showed that the percentage of digital sales against physical sales was significantly higher for dollar's than it was by gigabytes distributed. That means that the percentage of those large high value projects reaching PC gamer's via optical disc are significantly higher than the amount of sales by digital and retail. Digital's dominance on things like Skyrim (Assuming that saw an optical disc release...something I can't swear on since I bought the 360 release) isn't nearly at the same level as it is on the smaller more casual products that are increasingly growing more popular on PC's than things like that use to dominate like FPS's, flight simulator's, and RTS games. The stuff more applicable to the console world on PC's still have a large amount of retail sales presence even at this late date.

No matter the debate about how prepared ISP's are right now for this, the fact is that they're not there yet and optical disc are secure for this generation. And I simply don't see optical disc going from likely being on a even footing one generation with digital to being nonexistent the next. Not only do we have the question on just how much progress will take place with internet infrastructure over the next five year's, they also have consumer's and retailer's to deal with.

Both of which are extremely important factor's to consider. Both need to be weened off how things have been gone the past almost 40 years and I see it as highly unlikely that they're essentially going to flip a switch. And such things been predicted before in more limited terms... for instance, several user's here proclaimed that UMD was dead because of the Go and that suddenly they weren't going to be releasing new PSP software on UMD to sell to the 60 million or so UMD equipped PSP's that were out there at the time.

We even had one DP nut that argued on and on about how the PSP Go was a new platform and since console/handheld manufacturer's often don't support the previous generation with new hardware, that something like the Super Nintendo not playing Nintendo cartridges was proof positive that Sony could move onwards with the Go without ever releasing any more software via UMD to cater to the many millions of PSP user's out there that were largely buying their games via UMD.

These companies want to make money. And that seems to point towards increasingly going digital. But they're not so stuck on killing retail releases as quickly as possible that they'd be willing to leave a significant amount of money on the table by doing it prematurely like this nutty DP user thought Sony would do several years ago with the PSP.

Like I said, they want to make money. And for at least a good while longer, that means also releasing your product on optical disc to be sold at retail.

While you raise some interesting points, those are the same arguments people made about why NetFlix streaming could never be a commercial success. In fact it has become a massive success. The reality is that servers and routers are cheaper than they ever have been. Cable companies and phone companies already have much of the infrastructure in place to ramp up broadband bandwidth significantly. In fact, in many large urban areas, you can already get substantially faster broadband through FIOS and other services for not much more per month. You also have to use a ton of bandwidth to hit your cap. I have many friends who watch a NetFlix movie every night and have never been warned about a cap. The people I have heard of hitting the cap are people who don't have cable and use their broadband to constantly stream media of all sorts 8-10 hours a day. That's not the average user or even the average gamer. Moreover, a full game download wouldn't be a daily event, it would be something you would do a few times a month at most.

I agree with you that optical discs will be part of the PS4/Xbox 720 generation. It's the following generation which I think will be closer to 5-6 years from now that will likely either be console free or disc free as there will be no viable business reason to include an optical drive just like there is no longer a reason to include an optical drive on the Macbook Pro, iMac or iPad.

[Leo_A]

You really didn't have to quote that whole thing, you know.

You seem to think I'm suggesting that going all digital is a non option for the future. While I'm not 100% sure we're going to go down that route in a few generation's, I'm nearly sure we're going to (And at the very least, digital will become the dominant form of distribution). And certainly the infrastructure to support it is going to happen and is certainly growing and moving towards that direction as we speak. As for video streaming being proof, I'd certainly agree and never was claiming that technology had or was going to cease progressing.

It wasn't terribly long ago where the infrastructure to support something like Netflix really wasn't in place so the opponents just a few short years ago, while correct for the time, were certainly terribly incorrect if they were claiming 5 or 10 years down the road that it wasn't realistic on a widespread basis. I simply don't think we're going to be there at that point for 100% digital console distribution in five years.

If anything, it's going to be like video steaming is now where there's still an awful lot of cable and satellite subscribers, plenty of OTA television viewer's, and DVD and Blu-Ray are still significant factors in the marketplace and look set to be for years to come (Despite people claiming then and now that television viewing will shift towards all streaming). I don't think the infrastructure will be quite there a generation from now for console manufacturer's to leave retail distribution behind. And I particularly don't think that their retail chain or consumer's themselves will be ready to leave optical drives and physical media behind in such a short time.

If by some odd quirk we remember this thread a half decade or more from now, my money is on at least one more generation where physical media holds a role not unlike what digital has on over the past half decade on the three current generation console's (Particularly on the 360 and PS3). We'll see who was right then.

As for computer's, those eschewing an optical drive are a tiny minority of the marketplace and something like the MacBook Pro is hardly representative of the marketplace now or in the near future (And I don't know sure what a iMac is, but I'd hardly classify an iPad as a PC). It's certainly a viable option these days and something that will increase in the coming years. But we're a heck of a way away from optical computer drives joining 3.5" floppy drives. Some expensive high end product like the MacBook Pro is hardly a sign that optical disc drives in computer's are at death's door. Heck, it doesn't even have a HD but instead is utilizing expensive SSD's drives that cost far more per GB of storage space than the most modern HD.

Hardly representative of the average laptop out there now or the average laptop that will be sold the next few years. It's the PSP Go of the computer world jumping in at the early stages when leaving optical drives behind and utilizing SSD's has become an option but hardly a sign of an imminent trend in that direction.

[Rob2600]

I don't know for sure what a iMac is

Seriously?

[Daria]

Leo_A: I've been doing a lot of PC shopping lately. Admittedly mostly tablet-laptops but finding one with an optical drive has been a distinct rarity. CD/DVDs are going the way of the floppy it seems.