So you know the answer to this is PC gaming and yet you refuse to learn how to game on a PC? Not being technical is not an excuse anymore, gaming on a pc is as simple as installing steam, hell even building a PC (which you don't have to do if you don't want to) is practically plug and play now. If this really worries you this much then take a couple hours and learn how simple it is to game on a PC.
If the issue is PC games being forever backwards compatible I don't think you're being fair to the OP.
There are games from the early to mid 2000s that don't work without fan made patches. Anything before then feels like a crapshoot, sure you can generally get stuff to work but a lot of the time the hoops you have to jump through are a tedious bore. I can understand someone not wanting to bother with that shit.
I've had this problem with two games purchased from steam this year (bloodlines and DoW 2) the first one wouldn't work without a fan patch and the second had GFWL bullshit that made it unplayable until it was patched out later in the year.
My answer to the problem is hoard your shit. Set up your old stuff on a spare TV don't let that stuff get boxed up and eventually disposed of.
Consumer rights being eroded is a big issue. The lack of resale rights sucks but honestly the bigger problem with the all digital future is the robustness (or lack thereof) of the online services. Even Live went down for a while on Christmas due to DDOS.
I got a new CPU for Christmas (I7 4.2) and before I open my case up ive decided to pick up a new graphics card.
The 970 seems like the best when it comes to performance/price ratio. However I cant shake the idea that an AMD might be the way to go, primarily because both PS4 and Xbone are using AMD graphics hardware and most AAA titles will optimize for one of the two. I'm not worried about it right now as raw horsepower on the 970 should be fine. I'm more worried about sometime down the track when developers are squeezing every little thing out the machines that devs will use solutions that might not work as well on Nvidia hardware.
But then I honestly haven't kept up with hardware in many years.
Is my worry unfounded, or with the off the shelf nature of the 2 consoles make this issue totally irrelevant?
Its either the Raid 2, big trouble in little china, first of legend or drunken master 2.
Everyone saying shit like The Rock or Die Hard obviously didn't notice that there wasn't that much fucking action in those films. They are fun popcorn flicks but the actual screen time devoted to violence is piss poor.
I will give games 2-4 hours, that's my critical period. Usually if I'm sill playing something after that time passes I'll 99% beat it unless important life stuff comes up. Even "bad" games if they can keep me hooked in some way. It's less good/bad than "holds my attention/loses my attention".
I'm kinda shitty about it because PS+ is frankly broken where I live. The games were laggy, more laggy than live.
I can understand this isn't a big deal for peeps living in decent places with good net. But it would mean that this will be an unplayable mess online for me. While Live would have probably been "passable" (not great but playable). As it is I might buy it for PC, that for some reason that feels intrinsically wrong.
I thought I might be over open world after Watch Dogs and Mordor (Mordor was a great game but the open world didn't add to it) then I played sunset overdrive and GTA and realised that its not open world games that bore me, its open world games that are just open world because that's what's standard now. Make the worlds interesting put nooks and crannies in them, make the side quests more than simple pick three flowers bullshit I still really love open world.