Founded the company, but doesn't work here anymore as a FYI.
David Darling now heads up Kwalee, a digital only company.
His views don't reflect that of Codemasters, we still plan to support retail going forward for the foreseeable future.
I don't see how game installations on consoles = DRM. I also fail to see how needing to be connected to the internet to play offline games really helps to push the cause of leaving physical media behind.
I don't care about lending and selling used games. I care about the total cost of my gaming hobby. I pay more for console games than PC games despite selling some of my console games when I'm done with them (and all the hassle that brings).
By selling DRM-laded digital licenses at retail, you get all the benefits of digital (no disc swapping) with the advantage of having more stores selling the same thing. Stores have sales. That an you can install using the disc rather than waiting for a huge download to finish.
I understand that viewpoint.
It's just not an issue for me. I've had my consoles always connected since the original Xbox and thankfully my internet is reliable and uncapped, and I can set up a WiFi hotspot on my phone for the rare cases when my home connection is down. I plan on buying all my Xbox One games digitally, as I already do on PC, Wii U, and iPad. I just would have liked if the retail Xbox One games were also just digital licenses (basically, so you don't have to swap discs) because I would have occasionally bought discs when retailers had sales. I'm getting gigabit internet early next year so the whole download times issue will be less of a concern.
Basically, I don't want to swap discs, and I want to be able to buy games from as many stores as possible. And I don't buy used games. That's why Microsoft's DRM didn't bother me.
But you can re-sell dead bodies.
I don't think anyone should outright excuse DRM just because it makes game buying/playing easier..
Not true at all if you look at the continuing and growing success of tablets and other digital-only platforms that sell games. Consoles, before now and currently, offer little value to retail outside of accessory sales that net them fat margins if they aren't already involved with used trade where they similarly get a large portion of sales. New software and hardware don't fetch much at all for them, so going all digital just means more shelf space for other things to sell. A whole generation of kids have grown up into digital only world with their iPads and Android tablets and, of course, phones. PC in North America is all practically DD only. There's room for DD-only consoles...there has to be since it's going to be a reality by start of next-next-gen in five or so years, but there's most certainly a current market that's growing and friendly to DD libraries being the de facto standard on a platform.Console won't survive without retail presence. Good luck trying to convince retailer carrying and advertising your console without any game revenue.
Microsoft had solved individuals' data caps?
I wonder why...
They solved nothing. They just created further restrictions in an existing business model.
They've let the market pull them back but I think that was a mistake.
Huh. What's Codemasters up to for Next-Gen? 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand 2?
I agree with that opinion, but I really wish both MS and Sony would have some sort of digital rental or subscription service. I'm not talking about PS plus I'm talking about access to every game on the service for a standard monthly fee. I'd pay upwards of $30 a month.
So they wanted this:
![]()
I'm ok with that.
PC games provide a perfect example. Many PC games at retail are nothing more than a disc and a Steam key. You use the disc to install the game but don't need it in the drive to play it. This means you can install huge games fast and don't have to worry about a bandwidth cap. This was pretty much identical to what Microsoft was going to do, save for the fact that Steam's offline mode is far more generous.
This means you can buy digital games at retail, and retailers still have sales. I already provided an example. I bought Far Cry 3 at a Gamestop store a few months ago for $20. It was $24 in last month's Steam sale.
Founded the company, but doesn't work here anymore as a FYI.
David Darling now heads up Kwalee, a digital only company.
His views don't reflect that of Codemasters, we still plan to support retail going forward for the foreseeable future.
He brings up a good point of the physical drive What if Microsoft did this with two SKUs?
SKU 1: Xbox One, Kinect, BluRay drive $500
Allows used games
Physical games $60
Digital games $50
SKU 2: Xbox One. Kinect, no physical drive $450
Does not allow used games
Digital games $50
This would push people to go digital only while allowing the option for used games.
Huh. What's Codemasters up to for Next-Gen? 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand 2?
I would definitely go for something like that, but I wouldn't want to pay that much. Maybe it could only apply to smaller/indie games.
Yeah that XBO sure did a 180 by putting an optical drive back on their console to appease the whiners.
Wat?
I've always wondered about this when the occasional developer lamented that the digital future is not here yet. You all already have the option to only sell your games digitally. Just do it if you think it'll do better for you and let the market decide how the future of distribution will look like.Who exactly is stopping Codemasters from releasing their games digitally only for a cheaper price point on consoles?
Here we go. Look for more devs to start showing approval for digital/DRM this generation. They're setting the groundwork for the inevitable digital future.
Devs want this, and they can only pass the blame onto MS for so long.