Support NeoGAF

[gspat]

Following various bits of news headlines in video game news, I'm left with a terrible, sinking feeling.

Microsoft's new "Scarlett" console to have streaming only version.

Nintendo's Assassin's Creed is Second Streaming Title

Sony's PS5 Infrastructure Upgrade Rumors

We as gamers/consumers will finally get the netflix style gaming experience everyone whispers about, but at the cost of actually owning the games we play.

The Good(?):

Of course, the upside of something like this is that updates to the games should be hidden and instantaneous, you'll just start playing one day and the game will have already been updated.

All your save data will exist in the cloud, since everything was generated there in the first place.

Probably a very small SSD to hold the Operating System (OS) maybe even something NVME for boot up and speed of the OS.

Monthly fee to replace PSN/Switch online/XBox Live with a netflic style service for each console... Everything from their library they are willing to add to each service.

Will definitely cause a push towards higher speed internet globally as the needs of a multi-biliion dollar market segment (gaming) will need it and gamers will demand it.

The Bad(?):

No financial incentive for game companies to add to their games with DLC besides (maybe) new maps for FPS. Add-ons like the Witchers' "Blood and Wine" would probably not be made. Sony's streaming solution does not have multiple instances of games where some have extra content and some don't. You get what they decide you should have.

Your save data is as safe as the cloud it's in. That's as good as it gets.

Once streaming is what they deem as "Good enough", the following generation will no longer have physical media created for it. You will never own a video game again. When they decide no-one is playing a certain game anymore, expect the game to quietly disappear from the service to never be seen again. There will be no way for game preservation to happen and future generations of gamers may(will) have no way to access these games. They would have a very high chance of being lost forever.

The prices of each consoles services would end up sky high, with possibly different tiers of access for including the playable catalog/online play.

ISPs will be able to get into the act too, and finally be able to charge you a higher monthly for streaming services (No difference to them if it's netflix or a game strean). Too bad we didn't give enough of a shit for net neutrality!

The Ugly(?):

We'll be able to pay through the nose for games as a service!

There will be some upsides, but the downsides are very disconcerting, at least to me.

Your favorite niche game that isn't quite as popular as others may disappear on you at any time. And it won't be coming back - Even when it "should" hit public domain 75+ years later, because it won't exist any more by then.

We all see this as the ultimate future of console gaming. Some of you may think this is going to be much later rather than sooner. I think it's already started and will only become more all-encompassing.

I personally expect this by PS6/Xbox "Scarlet" +1/The Next Switch, and I don't like it.

The only thing I can see, at least in terms of preservation of these games is that there has to be a public trust put in place, funded by the games companies, where all games would need to be added in all their iterations as they are released. That's the only way to ensure they will be available for future generations.

We have a similar issue with Movies and TV. No-one thought to preserve them and many are now lost forever.

We should probably be proactive for a change.

I can definitely see my bank account being vacuumed unless the major companies consolidate their libraries, and each create a console with a certain experience in mind.

IE: Low end (Portable - 720p/1080p)/Mid Tier (4K)/High End (8K) - Each company making their own versions of each tier they want to, with it's own "experience" they feel their own tech can provide.

Well, That's my wall of text. I had to get it off my chest.

TLDR:

We're screwed.

 

[Northeastmonk]

I have loved buying digital this gen, but whenever I open my SEN account online I see games like Digital Devil Saga 1 & 2, Mega Man Legends, and Puzzle Street Fighter. Now, if I were go with the flow and sell my console and upgrade these games would just sit there forever. I actually want to play these games. Why did these console companies focus so much on their digital store fronts just to close them? What am I going to do with my Wii copies of OoT and Sin and Punishment? I download it once and it just sits. My Wii U has a better selection of VC games than my Switch does at the moment. Why can't Sony do something with my ENTIRE PSN digital library? Why does it have to sit there waiting for me to boot my PS3 up when I'm so use to my PS4 by now.

Apple did something like this with 32 bit apps. Instead of allowing the iOS to operate, they just said "we won't support 32-bit apps anymore. So, all our 32-bit games are abandoned. We obviously have to downgrade iOS versions. No one really cares. I didn't get a refund for BioShock iOS. Dead Space and Mass Effect on iOS don't work any more. They all cost me money.

Its not a big deal if you're streaming multiplayer across your system to 30-100 different people at once. It sucks for the owner or legacy products. I still enjoy buying digital, but I wonder where its all going. The cloud is huge now a days. Companies will put their files in online storage, they rely on the cloud to save their files in case they get cryptolocked. The cloud is becoming reliable. I can definitely see Triple A games being streamed. We already have people spending $1,000's on F2P games that host all its data in the cloud. Making an internet connection a requirement is becoming a standard. It essentially already is in the business world. You cannot manage your company without the internet. I feel like the general public will start to believe this and they'll ignore the reason to why we want ownership versus some monthly subscription based model.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

I personally don’t care. I rarely replay games, rewatch movies or shows, listen to most albums more than a few times etc. Thus I have no real need to own media content. Just give me cheap, convenient access and decent quality and I’m fine basically renting everything. At the end of the day that stuff just isn’t important to me and isn’t what matters in life as I head into middle age.

 

[GermanZepp]

The only thing you own in your life, if you are lucky, is your life. Games come and go m'dude.

To stay on topic: If you read the small letters you don't own a digital game either, right? We as a games entusiast have to make the transition to full digital like any other media today. I mean, first is going to be full digital before the could and streaming i supose, or maybe Sony aproaches as a mixture of all this things. In my view fisical in the future will be only for collector editions, digital will be legacy from PS4 and going foward and the cloud gonna push a little more next gen.

Edit: gramar and stuff.

 

[gspat]

I personally don’t care. I rarely replay games, rewatch movies or shows, listen to most albums more than a few times etc. Thus I have no real need to own media content. Just give me cheap, convenient access and decent quality and I’m fine basically renting everything. At the end of the day that stuff just isn’t important to me and isn’t what matters in life as I head into middle age.

I get what you're saying.

But if the games you love today literally no longer exist in the future, how will you be able to share them and your experiences with them, with your kids / grandkids at some point in the future?

"Nothing in life is truly important, until it is."

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

If I was 20 years younger and starting to get into videogaming, all this subscription stuff would be very convenient. We know that most kids are already accustomed to digital-only due to smartphones. If I had an empty wallet and lots of free-time I'd be more interest.ed This is also why I used to love RPGs and text-adventures (lots of content for the price). I didn't have a ton of money growing up. The ability to pay $10 (or whatever) a month for a huge list of Xbox Game Pass games would've been amazing.

But as an adult, my situation is the opposite: I have the cash to buy these games outright but not a lot of free-time, which means that any subscription service is going to go to waste. Lengthy games padded with a lot of extra content are actually worth less (to me) compared to an arcade or puzzle game because the time-to-enjoyment ratio is significantly worse. I still enjoy them, but I am extremely picky. Being picky means that I play a much narrower range of games, true, but if I am diligent I get to play the best games (according to my personal tastes) while filtering out all the crap. It's a better use of my time and my money. I am not strapped for cash. I don't need to rent games anymore. Rather, I like the "convenience" of pulling my game off the shelf and playing it without hassle. It's me and the game. No internet connection required.

Plus, I don't like being at the whim of a corporation for which games I'm "allowed" to play. Years ago, I had too many difficulties with Steam's unreliable "Offline Mode" (it's probably fixed by now, but back then it persisted for months) and I've already lost a few games off my PSN account due to licensing expiration (The Simpsons arcade, X-Men arcade, and TMNT: Turtles in Time Reshelled). This is not acceptable.

 

[Dunki]

Here is the funny part.
You never owned any software. You owned the right to use this software. Even if you bought a physical copy you never owned games. If you owned the software you were also given the source code and you could change it like you want to. EULA or tos especially say this if you actually read them. In many of these agreements also it is noted that you normally could not even sell these games at all. But this is getting overlooked by companies since the effort to track all this would be way more expensive in the end.

 

[hariseldon]

Same thing happened with music, note how all the storage locker services are being killed off. Pain in the arse of course if you have stuff that isn't on your streaming service of choice. Currently in the process of binning Amazon and swapping to a Raspberry Pi media server.

 

[Nymphae]

Here is the funny part.
You never owned any software. You owned the right to use this software. Even if you bought a physical copy you never owned games.

Have a gold sticker pedant. I don't care if I legally don't own the fucking source code, we're talking about owning a physical copy of a game vs. having a digtial copy.

 

[Dunki]

Have a gold sticker pedant. I don't care if I legally don't own the fucking source code, we're talking about owning a physical copy of a game vs. having a digtial copy.

Yeah and all I am saying is that the only thing that is different here is that you own a piece of plastic (disc) more. We in Germany often differentiate between Besitz und Eigentum. I do not really know the english definition of it.

 

[Nymphae]

Yeah and all I am saying is that the only thing that is different here is that you own a piece of plastic (disc) more. We in Germany often differentiate between Besitz und Eigentum. I do not really know the english definition of it.

What about delisted digital games? Or games like Tony Hawk where subsequent re-releases or digital versions won't have the licenced music from the originals?

 

[gspat]

Here is the funny part.
You never owned any software. You owned the right to use this software. Even if you bought a physical copy you never owned games. If you owned the software you were also given the source code and you could change it like you want to. EULA or tos especially say this if you actually read them. In many of these agreements also it is noted that you normally could not even sell these games at all. But this is getting overlooked by companies since the effort to track all this would be way more expensive in the end.

Many jurisdictions have already declared that EULAs / TOS are not enforceable.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

By the way, y'all want to help with preservation? Adopt a CRT TV or a CRT PC monitor.

If nothing else, stash it in your attic (or wherever) and you'll be able to sell it to a grateful enthusiast for a few hundred bucks in 10 years. Not even kidding.

 

[jshackles]

Plus, I don't like being at the whim of a corporation for which games I'm "allowed" to play. Years ago, I had too many difficulties with Steam's unreliable "Offline Mode" (it's probably fixed by now, but back then it persisted for months) and I've already lost a few games off my PSN account due to licensing expiration (The Simpsons arcade, X-Men arcade, and TMNT: Turtles in Time Reshelled). This is not acceptable.

To add to this - I've been a physical game collector since as long as I could remember. I can take my copy of Mega Man off my shelf, put it into my NES, and start playing it. I enjoy the convenience of having the Legacy Collection digitally, so I don't have to - but I have no illusion that in 30 years I'll be able to play it on anything I have at that time. However, I imagine that 30 years from now when the mood strikes me to play it, I will still be able to pop my cartridge into my NES and play it.

I've bought all my PS4 games this generation on disc for the same reason - as long as I can maintain the hardware, I can put those discs into a PS4 in the future (even without PSN or any connection whatsoever) and play them. They might not have the latest updates (don't get me started on how much I despise day one updates) but they're very playable. I assume this is probably the last generation where this will be a viable strategy, and I feel like that's quite a shame.

 

[gspat]

The only thing you own in your life, if you are lucky, is your life. Games come and go m'dude.

To stay on topic: If you read the small letters you don't own a digital game either, right? We as a games entusiast have to make the transition to full digital like any other media today. I mean, first is going to be full digital before the could and streaming i supose, or maybe Sony aproaches as a mixture of all this things. In my view fisical in the future will be only for collector editions, digital will be legacy from PS4 and going foward and the cloud gonna push a little more next gen.

Actually in the future, "Collector's Editions" probably won't even include the game (disc, cart or otherwise) as there won't be any way to use it.

 

[DeliciousDoc]

I would think the people who spend the most on games are the collectors. I buy games and don't sell them unless I had a mediocre (or worse) experience with the game. I spend a couple of 100 dollars (maybe 300?) on games a year. I want games I could potentially play many years in the future. I may only start the game a few years later.

My brother buys a game then sells it when he is done. If he paid 60$ and he sells fairly quickly he is counting as a sale (assuming it wasn't used from the beginning since I doubt he cares) but whoever buys his copy doesn't count as a sale.

The market is catering to my brother and assumes people like me who spend a ton will just deal with it. I wouldn't.

 

[hariseldon]

Yeah and all I am saying is that the only thing that is different here is that you own a piece of plastic (disc) more. We in Germany often differentiate between Besitz und Eigentum. I do not really know the english definition of it.

The point is that physically you can use that bit of plastic to play that game on any compatible hardware should you wish to do so, regardless of legality. When you don't have that, the game, music, film, etc can be removed at any time without notice (which happens a hell of a lot on Amazon Music for instance, hence me ditching the fuckers).

 

[Nymphae]

Plus, I don't like being at the whim of a corporation for which games I'm "allowed" to play. Years ago, I had too many difficulties with Steam's unreliable "Offline Mode" (it's probably fixed by now, but back then it persisted for months) and I've already lost a few games off my PSN account due to licensing expiration (The Simpsons arcade, X-Men arcade, and TMNT: Turtles in Time Reshelled). This is not acceptable.

Yeah I don't get how this hasn't been more of a story honestly, people are up in arms about fucking cross-play policy being anti-consumer, but there are multiple cases of games you've paid for just being made unavailable. I should get money back or something if they remove a game I paid for from the store.

 

[hariseldon]

Yeah I don't get how this hasn't been more of a story honestly, people are up in arms about fucking cross-play policy being anti-consumer, but there are multiple cases of games you've paid for just being made unavailable. I should get money back or something if they remove a game I paid for from the store.

Wait that's a fucking thing? With Steam the game stays - you can make backups and choose not to update too if there's a patch incoming to remove the music (see one of the 3D GTAs). Of course the best choice is still to get your games on GOG...

 

[Dunki]

Wait that's a fucking thing? With Steam the game stays - you can make backups and choose not to update too if there's a patch incoming to remove the music (see one of the 3D GTAs). Of course the best choice is still to get your games on GOG...

Steam allows you to download everything you have purchased on there even when its gone from the store. hell Dying light is on the Index here in Germany but I bought it before and still can download and play it^^

 

[Nymphae]

Wait that's a fucking thing? With Steam the game stays - you can make backups and choose not to update too if there's a patch incoming to remove the music (see one of the 3D GTAs). Of course the best choice is still to get your games on GOG...

Yeah, I didn't realize it was as widespread as @ DunDunDunpachi mentioned, I personally have experienced this with PT (I still have the game on my console though), and the 2D Scott Pilgrim game for PS3, I paid for that and removed it at some point, and now I am not able to redownload it. Not sure if you can back up PSN games in any way, but it's not like they're sending you a notification to back stuff up before it gets delisted. It's bullshit.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

I get what you're saying.

But if the games you love today literally no longer exist in the future, how will you be able to share them and your experiences with them, with your kids / grandkids at some point in the future?

"Nothing in life is truly important, until it is."

I hate kids and got a vasectomy years ago.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Yeah I don't get how this hasn't been more of a story honestly, people are up in arms about fucking cross-play policy being anti-consumer, but there are multiple cases of games you've paid for just being made unavailable. I should get money back or something if they remove a game I paid for from the store.

I have no evidence, but my hunch is that the combined force of targeted corporate shills + fanboys + complicit "journalists" was bent on sweeping the issue under the rug. I was met with a lot of insults and patronizing when I suggested that Steam was garbage because it took my games away when no I had no internet connection (an issue with the client prevented syncing with their servers for "check in").

"Just use offline mode" (ignoring the fact that an issue with the Steam client prevented me from connecting, even after reinstalling, trying a different OS, etc) was the most common dismissal. Microsoft has an obvious vested interested in digital ownership so there was a lot of hate from that camp, too. As I mentioned, my particular issue is likely fixed but back then I saw other examples of this issue on forums. It wasn't just me. What's interesting is that those users were also berated and dismissed if they mentioned frustration with their digital library.

Many of the current-day arguments against physical ownership came from that time period. "You don't own the game anyway hurr hurr" while ignoring that no-DRM options like GOG.com exist.

If digital-only was just a convenient option, there wouldn't be much of a debate. But instead, these arguments are usually framed along the lines of "digital is the future. That's just a FACT. And if you aren't on board with that FACT and you voice disagreement, then you're a [whatever]". It was really creepy and ideologically-driven, as if physical ownership was anathema and needed to be forgotten.

 

[gspat]

I hate kids and got a vasectomy years ago.

Removing yourself from the genepool?

That's... Unfortunate.

But that has no bearing on the issue from the OP.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Removing yourself from the genepool?

That's... Unfortunate.

But that has no bearing on the issue from the OP.

It does in terms of being one less reason (sharing games with offspring) to care about having permanent access to games (or other media).

Media ownership is pretty moot for people like me who consume content in a very disposable (i.e. one-and-done) manner. It's why movie disc sales are down so much--streaming makes more sense for the average Joe who watches something once and usually never again (or only many years later). Gaming has long been the same for me. I got into it seriously with the NES and I don't own ANY of my old consoles or games--and I've never once regretted getting rid of anything. I've always sold hardware and games off when I'm done to defray costs of the newer stuff as I'm just one who wants to always have new experiences vs revisiting things.

Owning media is for the enthusiasts who take it much more seriously and have their hobbies as a main part of their life and identity. The concerns you note are incredibly valid for those types and I hope physical media sticks around a long time to cater to that market. Hell, even as a disposable consumer I like physical media as it's cheapest to buy physical and sell when I'm done when it comes to games. It's not worth it for movies with how cheap streaming and rental options are.

 

[gspat]

It does in terms of being one less reason (sharing games with offspring) to care about having permanent access to games (or other media).

Media ownership is pretty moot for people like me who consume content in a very disposable (i.e. one-and-done) manner. It's why movie disc sales are down so much--streaming makes more sense for the average Joe who watches something once and usually never again (or only many years later). Gaming has long been the same for me. I got into it seriously with the NES and I don't own ANY of my old consoles or games--and I've never once regretted getting rid of anything. I've always sold hardware and games off when I'm done to defray costs of the newer stuff as I'm just one who wants to always have new experiences vs revisiting things.

Owning media is for the enthusiasts who take it much more seriously and have their hobbies as a main part of their life and identity. The concerns you note are incredibly valid for those types and I hope physical media sticks around a long time to cater to that market. Hell, even as a disposable consumer I like physical media as it's cheapest to buy physical and sell when I'm done when it comes to games. It's not worth it for movies with how cheap streaming and rental options are.

In cases such as you describe, I completely understand and agree with you. We really do live in a completely disposable society.

The other part of the OP deals with media preservation and future generations (even if you don't/won't/can't partake in that aspect). As you say, the content you use is disposable. Once enough of society gets on the same bandwagon you are on, the experiences you enjoy will simply not be available for others in the future to enjoy. Why do you feel that future generations shouldn't be able to partake in the same experiences you enjoyed?

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Why do you feel that future generations shouldn't be able to partake in the same experiences you enjoyed?

Oh I do think content should be preserved for sure. I just don’t view digital content as some boogeyman. In fact I think it’s better for preservation. There’s a finite number of carts of NES, SNES etc. games but no limit to how many copies of Roms can be produced and saved. Same with digital movies, music, ebooks etc.

The only real issue is the solely online games that require servers to play and that’s just the nature of the beast with online games. There meant to be played with others online and the experience is moot for later generations if there’s no player base anyway.

The problem is games that are forced online in all modes that don’t need to be. Like Destiny. The content you can play and complete solo shouldn’t require being online.

 

[Ceadeus]

Well if it comes to this, I'm totally out. Anyway I already have a life time backlog.

 

[Yoshi]

It might be something that happens down the line, but then I'm out. I refuse to buy downloads, or subscriptions and I sure as hell will not tolerate streaming. I will just buy and play old stuff then. But I think we have at least 10 years to go still where we will get some form of physical releases of games that can be played offline. Probably more.

 

[gspat]

Oh I do think content should be preserved for sure. I just don’t view digital content as some boogeyman. In fact I think it’s better for preservation. There’s a finite number of carts of NES, SNES etc. games but no limit to how many copies of Roms can be produced and saves. Same with digital movies, music, ebooks etc.

The only real issue is the solely online games that require servers to play and that’s just the nature of the beast with online games. There meant to be played with others online and the experience is moot for later generations if there’s no player base anyway.

This is only true to a point though.

Let's take a hypothetical Dark Souls 4 or 5. It's a single player, but digital only game.

Once the hype and initial fervour for the game dies down, the number of players will drop drastically.

There is no financial incentive for the publisher of the game to allow the game to be online once there are only a few players of that game left. It will eventually be removed from the playable catalogue.

What then happens to that game? There is no financial incentive to keep it stored digitally either. It will probably be seen as "Digital Luggage" and simply a waste of storage space. Anywhere it's stored will be weighing the disposal of it as simply "freeing up space". In the digital future, there really will be only a finite number of copies available due to it only being available from a finite number of catalogues in the first place.. The act of removing it from a playable catalogue could realistically mean it could be gone forever.

Do we simply ignore it's removal and disposal?

 

[Deleted member 752119]

This is only true to a point though.

Let's take a hypothetical Dark Souls 4 or 5. It's a single player, but digital only game.

Once the hype and initial fervour for the game dies down, the number of players will drop drastically.

There is no financial incentive for the publisher of the game to allow the game to be online once there are only a few players of that game left. It will eventually be removed from the playable catalogue.

What then happens to that game? There is no financial incentive to keep it stored digitally either. It will probably be seen as "Digital Luggage" and simply a waste of storage space. Anywhere it's stored will be weighing the disposal of it as simply "freeing up space". In the digital future, there really will be only a finite number of copies available due to it only being available from a finite number of catalogues in the first place.. The act of removing it from a playable catalogue could realistically mean it could be gone forever.

Do we simply ignore it's removal and disposal?

From a capitalist standpoint, all these remasters, virtual consoles, retro consoles show that there’s financial incentive to preserve games—so that the can sell them again to future generations (and double+ dippers). Though that only preserves things that remain marketable in the future of course so niche things are left out.

That said my point is more that users can back up digital copies. Not legally, but hell pirates are unintentionally doing more to preserve content than the content creators/owners ever will. That will get harder when everything is streaming/cloud based down the road of course.

That stinks, but just is what it is in a capitalist world where the content creating/publishing companies only care about profit and not making and preserving art. It will require something publically funded like the Library of Congress to collect and preserve everything, along with changes in copyright law so things enter the public domain sooner if we’re truly to save everything for posterity.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Do we simply ignore it's removal and disposal?

I've heard from some other members here on GAF that this issue has already caused hundreds of games to be forever lost e.g. browser games and cell-phone games.

 

[Elenchus]

What makes you think you “own them” now?

 

[Grimmrobe]

I am not aware of any great game or great movie that has disappeared. The mediocrities disappear.

Even with 2,500-year books that have been lost, we still have quotes from them in books by later authors who had had access to the originals, and through these quotes we have been able to grasp the essence of these lost books.

Preserve as much as you want, and can. But I am not worried.

 

[Grimmrobe]

I've heard from some other members here on GAF that this issue has already caused hundreds of games to be forever lost e.g. browser games and cell-phone games.

And I say good riddance.

 

[GoldenEye98]

With online gaming you are already at the mercy of how long servers are left online. ie You can own Halo 2 but online is gone...

Edit: come to think of it...moving to a unified streaming platform could perserve online multiplayer aspects of gaming better than with the current local hardware/centralized server setup we have...

 

[gspat]

I've heard from some other members here on GAF that this issue has already caused hundreds of games to be forever lost e.g. browser games and cell-phone games.

I'm actually aware of a preservation effort in place for old flash games.

 

[TheGreatYosh]

Unless there is a paradigm shift. We aren't going to own anything anymore.

 

[Woo-Fu]

You don't own the games you play now, you own a license-to-use and a media kit if you bought physical.

 

[ipukespiders]

When I loose the ability to buy/keep the games (er, license) I'll just turn my back on the industry and play my existing library of titles. Even today I "own" more than enough games to last me a long time.

 

[gspat]

I am not aware of any great game or great movie that has disappeared. The mediocrities disappear.

Even with 2,500-year books that have been lost, we still have quotes from them in books by later authors who had had access to the originals, and through these quotes we have been able to grasp the essence of these lost books.

Preserve as much as you want, and can. But I am not worried.

As far as games go, we're relatively lucky in that regard. We still have time.

The most obvious example of a movie is Fritz Lang's "Metropolis" no longer exists in it's original form. Even the best copy we have is missing scenes.

TV shows are terrible. Many classic shows such as "Doctor Who" are completely missing episodes (or even complete runs!) because they were simply erased to make room for other TV shows.

Yes, we have "snippets" of old books, but that was because there really was no effort put towards preservation at the time, and apathy and censorship was / is / will be a thing. It would be much better to also have the originals, but we actually have the means to not allow that to happen now.

Video game preservation is something we can deal with now, instead of whining about it in the future.

 

[Grimmrobe]

When I loose the ability to buy/keep the games (er, license) I'll just turn my back on the industry and play my existing library of titles. Even today I "own" more than enough games to last me a long time.

I laugh when I hear people say such stuff. So you don't want to play the Total Recall full-jacked-in-VR games that are coming?

You'll be playing your Game Child Advance when I and the rest of us are playing these games?

Have fun lol.

 

[Schrödinger's cat]

Here is the funny part.
You never owned any software. You owned the right to use this software. Even if you bought a physical copy you never owned games. If you owned the software you were also given the source code and you could change it like you want to. EULA or tos especially say this if you actually read them. In many of these agreements also it is noted that you normally could not even sell these games at all. But this is getting overlooked by companies since the effort to track all this would be way more expensive in the end.

Yes. A million times yes. This is how it works. This is how software (and most media) sales have always worked.
Digital or physical makes no difference. Because you are purchasing restricted access, never ownership.

 

[Grimmrobe]

Yes. A million times yes. This is how it works. This is how software (and most media) sales have always worked.
Digital or physical makes no difference. Because you are purchasing restricted access, never ownership.

You guys who keep bleating this are missing the point.

No one cares who owns what.

We care what WE CAN PLAY.

We CAN PLAY physical games for as long as we want to.

We CANNOT PLAY online games if the company pulls them.

So you might as well not bother dragging in this pedantic point time and again: We know we don't own the source code, and we don't care.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Yes. A million times yes. This is how it works. This is how software (and most media) sales have always worked.
Digital or physical makes no difference. Because you are purchasing restricted access, never ownership.

Okay, so call it access. Doesn't change the issue at hand.

Digital "access" is inferior to physical "access" until they can reasonably guarantee that digital is about as reliable as physical.

Until then, I'd rather have my "access" sitting on the shelf instead of in some database somewhere halfway across the country.

 

[Muffdraul]

The whole "owning physical copies" is pretty moot these days anyway. Your physical copy is essentially an unfinished beta, in need of a day 1 patch, and then multiple patches after that. At some point, those patches will no longer be available, your console with the patches already installed will die, and you'll be stuck with your unfinished beta copy. Enjoy.

 

[gspat]

Yes. A million times yes. This is how it works. This is how software (and most media) sales have always worked.
Digital or physical makes no difference. Because you are purchasing restricted access, never ownership.

You completely miss the point. Once the copyright expires, NO-ONE OWNS IT. This is why preservation is important - For that time when even the original owner won't give two farts in a windstorm about it because they won't be able to monopolise monetisation of it.

 

[Nymphae]

Digital or physical makes no difference. Because you are purchasing restricted access, never ownership.

Tell that to my physical copy of THPS that contains the original music tracks. Why are some people focused on pedantically arguing that we never actually own this stuff? As far as I'm concerned, I own that game in every way that is meaningful to me, it's sitting on my shelf and no one can delist it from my shelf or alter it in any way.

 

[MP!]

you never actually owned the physical games you paid for... that was a licensing fee. That software was licensed to you. You paid for permission to use their software. I get that it sucks that it's going away... but legally no one has ever owned anyth piece of media they have "purchased"

 

[hariseldon]

pirates are unintentionally doing more to preserve content than the content creators/owners ever will.

That's not a new thing. If you look at most of the ROMs available for the Atari ST for instance, they're almost all pirate discs from the likes of Pompey Pirates, Automaton, D-Bug, etc. The companies around at the time are mostly not around anymore, and those that are have gone through many changes of personel, and data on floppies doesn't last long, so the original source code is likely gone for 99% of old games.