I'd much rather have to swap discs than fight against my shitty American internet every time I got a new game.

This might sound counter intuitive but being a PC Gamer for the past 2 years has made me miss the shit out of discs. What Steam, netflix, and mp3 has done for the respective mediums is wonderful; but at times I feel over saturated with available content that I end up numb in my decision to actually pick something. I look at my 100+ game collection in steam, paralyzed as to what to play.

When I want to play something it's nice to pick up physical game boxes and decide which one I want to throw in. The mental process of giving the machine something and receiving an experience is strange but needed for myself.

Another important factor is selling the shit I'm down with, the extra $20 I can get out of these games are nice but that's not my main concern. When I look at my game collection I want it to be the best of the best and whatever the current releases are. There are some games that after they're finished I really have no interest in, and this process of selling the things that aren't important to me is helps me not become a hoarder.

I respect those who want to go all digital, it makes sense to not have the clutter. But I really hope we don't complete abandon physical media.

@chavtheworld: That sucks Surface does that, hmm.. There's an option to do that,yea, but not default.

Also fun fact: Steam's main sale proponent (Jason Holtman?) now works at Microsoft. So I'm sure we're gonna start seeing some similar Xbox sales soon, along with ID(at)Xbox too.

I kinda wish they had stuck with their always online model. Provides more scope for further innovations.

I don't think it's as black and white as you are making it out to be. Yes, men in suits make bad decisions with money every day. No, that is not the only reason games come in over budget or underperform in sales. Games are expensive. That is a fact. If people who bought used games/pirated bought the games new, those games would make more money. That is also a fact. Neither, however, are 100% dependent on the other.

Ohhh exciting.

It would have been a weird and crazy future for sure.

This is actually a very good point. It can be super overwhelming when its so easy to just start something up.

@chavtheworld: I think the problem with that logic is that a lot of people, as well as game companies, assume that 1 used game sale/pirated game equals 1 lost sale. I am of the opinion that a lot of people who pirate or buy used would never under any circumstance have bought the fully priced product.

hmm intresting blog op but I feel you're giving ms more credit then they deserve. theres a video I think you should watch that will shed light into why console players got so upset over this. www.youtube.com/jimquisition/why pc gerts away with (I can't copy and paste I'm on my phone so you'll just have google but it should take right to the vid)

I was under the impression that GOG doesn't use DRM and they are a legitimate outlet for discounted games. If that's true then there are alternatives and your statement becomes a bit less valid. Again, I'm not 100% on this.

No.

This is some really bad Stockholm syndrome shit. Jesus Christ.

Living in a country where everything is always way more expensive than it should be, and which is tiny at the same time, every buisness here is living of the convenience of shoppers. I can pretty much assure you MS would probably never would have limited competetion strongly. Just because they can. But it certainly would be interesting if they would provide API hooks to voluntairly "seralize" disc based games, to ditch the disc. Lately I did buy several console games digitally for pure convenience. Which worries me when it comes to Nintendo...

I also think that is pretty accurate.

Sadly you're probably right!

Exactly! I have paid £5-10 more than it would have cost me from Amazon or a shop to get 3DS games digitally off the eShop. We're suckers for this shit.

@chavtheworld: Being a new Nintendo console owner is scary. Having a job helps though.

Totally agree with above post. To the user who responded to me, you sound a lot like game pubs. It isn't my fault( or any consumer's) a company didn't meet its target.

There has been no evidence that used games hurt big publishers. Also don't make assumptions about what people do and don't know asshole. I'm out.

This all presumes Microsoft can get the feature correct which so far has not exactly been encouraging with erroneous signon and other quirks. The "all digital future" was not promised by Microsoft anyway so I'm not sure what is missed.

Forza 5 was the best thing about the Xbox One. But it sure as shit wasn't us who ruined that one. Despicable.

I equate going with the always on DRM Microsoft was suggesting with entering a pool by being pushed off a cliff with a blind fold on while drunk and high instead of thinking things through and realizing that you can just use the stairs or the diving board.

We'll get to our all digital future. I'd just rather pick the best option rather than the first option. That plan was all kinds of crazy.

I just want to make a point here. All of X1 exclusives but DR3 have micro-transaction. You read that right ALL OF THEM, except the one that is a 3rd party exclusive. These are not F2p games. These are 20-60$ titles. You would trust a company that green-lit this bullshit, with basically a monopoly on every single games being sold on their system? That is fine but don't act like logical people are crazy when they shit on Microsoft for it.

Just in case some one think I am being dramatic, Forza have a dlc exclusive car you can buy for more than 100 us dollar.

The problem was Microsoft never told us what we were getting in exchange for giving up an ability we had always had with consoles. Sure, there were vague promises of a family plan with "details to be announced", but that's the shit you lead with, not hide in the fine print. The problem is it doesn't look like they started with a feature and then realized they needed certain limitations to control the feature.

I'm one of those people you mention who have hundreds of games on Steam, but that's not just because of the convenience of downloading games, it's because I could get Alan Wake for $3.50 and Dark Souls for $7.50. Giving me the great deal caused me and many others to buy into their ecosystem, not some promise of future deals. Steam doesn't do this because they're some altruistic group. They have competition in digital sales from GOG, GMG, Amazon, Humble Bundle, and Indie Royale. Valve is not a platform holder (yet). Meanwhile, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo don't have that same competition to encourage lower prices. If MS wants to move to that all digital future they still could, start your sales now, give download codes (in addition to physical discs) to retailers like Amazon, Best Buy, and GS, they can price cheaper because of lower costs on storage and shipping, encouraging more people to buy the cheaper digital version. However, that means less money to MS on each digital purchase.

It's really not that hard. Don't force consumers, encourage them.

Is it that bad?

I agree a lot with what you said, especially this first part. Microsoft did a super poor job of explaining (or better, showing) why we would want these changes. That's why we (the internet) rallied so hard against it, because it didn't make sense. Especially not with a company that is as distrusted as Microsoft is (hey, I think they're alright. But I also think EA is alright, so I must be crazy).

The stuff you mentioned about sales and stuff, surely one day both Sony and Microsoft have to catch up to that point? Surely? At least get closer to it, I mean.

My blog was purely hypothetical, and assuming Microsoft were gunna do the right thing. As many people have pointed out, the initial trend with microtransactions in first party games seems to show they might not.

What about those of us who can't afford to buy all our games new?

I was just thinking about this last night. I was one of the ones that hated always online and no used games. But being able to say the name of any game you own and have it launch without putting the disc in would be pretty great. I'm curious if they could make that opt in.

I think you've got this backwards, teens and 20 somethings are the ones trading in games, buying used, late 30s and beyond people don't want clutter in their houses would be less likely to even go to a place you could trade in a game let alone actually doing it, downloading a game is convenient, if the internet is out it's a novelty not the end of the world because they likely have other interests and things to occupy their time.

In the end I think its more of the internet hive mind that's raging regardless of age, if the digital transition really bothers someone so much, they are likely spending too much time in general with this hobby.

You can do that right now. That's exactly how it works currently if you buy digitally. If you want that feature (it's definitely convenient) just buy digitally. Done!

@video_game_king said:

"Fuck off, you dirty poor fuck."
- microsoft

You're right. Definitely an incentive to purchase digitally. Though I won't be able to resist some special/collector's editions. Would be nice of those start coming with a digital download code.

You probably can't even afford a Surface™ to expand your multimedia gaming experience. Pssssh.

@chavtheworld:

You know, maybe not? Forza 5 is a weird game man, the driving and presentation is excellent, better than it's ever been. The way the progression, accessibility and community features have been stripped out is just mind blowing though. They have taken everything that I came specifically to Forza to experience and either removed it completely or restructured it in such a way that it prioritizes micro-transactions over natural game progression. I bought the Limtied Edition too and I haven't even received all of the bonuses that I paid for with that. The whole thing is sour as hell.

There is a thread over on NeoGAF that enumerates the micro-transaction fiasco. The current price to own all available cars (Including 1st day DLC) when bought in groups of the highest "value" token packs comes out to ~$1700.00 USD. This is without any upgrades or XP/Money boosters. It's like a free to play game that costs $60.00 (Or in my case $80) it's INSANE.

Again though, that driving, just superb. It's insulting to the artists and engineers that their work is valued so poorly that whoever was responsible for the business model has hidden it behind such exploitative design.

I'm bitter. In case you couldn't tell.

You can keep that "convenience" bullshit for yourself. I prefer to physically own products for the most part. Even without a data cap on my internet, I don't want to have to download 40GB's of stuff. I'm not some sort of recluse who can't be bothered to go for a walk and get the game I want.

The way we have it now is infinitely better because it's the best of both worlds. You want digital, you can have it digital. You want physical, you can have it physical. None of this one or the other bullshit.

Fuck options!

That game looked incredible until I found out about this stuff. Now I feel like people shouldn't buy it out of principle. Not a good precedent for this generation of consoles. I hate to use words like this and I could never endorse others using the same language, but supporting crap like this is drivatarded.

The problem with the digital future on consoles is the lack of support for legacy content. PC systems, for the most part, try to maintain backwards compatibility with software and since they're an open platform the community of PC gamers can take it on themselves to emulate compatibility where needed.

With consoles, only time will tell, but If we want to get rid of our 360 hardware then all those games we bought on XBLA are thrown out with it. For digitial to work they have to create a system where the content you buy is attached to an account and not dependent on hardware. Microsoft hasn't proven, or communicated, they understand that concept so digital is a risky investment with console manufacturers.

As soon as you made the Steam comparison, I stopped reading. I've said this ever since Microsoft tried to foist their digital future on everyone, but this time I'll make sure I say it extra slowly so you understand.

Steam DOES NOT PREVENT you from playing your games when you are offline. Microsoft's DRM did. There is the problem.

I like switching to battlefield on the fly, just buy digital and let people enjoy disk.

I'd like to say that the title of this blog is one of the best things.

@reisz: Wow that is a huge shame. Asking for that much money in general is ridiculous, but on top of a $60 experience is total madness.

This is the single biggest zombie narrative about the Xbox One that refuses to die. I've already talked this to death until I was blue in the face back when it was a thing, and the lemming-like way certain people thought about these things made die inside a little bit.

Somebody with more stamina for the topic can go over why the original DRM was 100% abusive. It wasn't the Utopian all digital future you thought it was.

As long as the game I'm buying for $60 seems full you can throw up a million dollars worth of microtransactions if you want.

I am 27 and remember the times of going to rent a game. I guess now that I am older, recognize that games do go on sale and understand the all digital future, I am a supporter of the old policy. I play PC games and that is why I wanted that feature. To buy a game in store but just install it and forget about the disc just like the PC awesome. But no, people who think they are getting rights taken away from them that they actually don't have. Remember when you buy a game, you buy a license to play it and the idea is that you can't really sell the license to anyone else. Go see how that works in the work industry. PC software has already moved into this realm. Only people are so used to their damn gamestops. Why does no one complain that you can't sell a used copy of Microsoft office? Or that if Activision is done with a license for Unreal Engine, they can't just sell it to some other studio? I loved going to rent Jurassic Park like 5 times at my local video store, but I know thats not what was supposed to happen. So please stop spreading this idea that you own software. You don't.

They can still put this stuff back in in the future. The console had a day one patch to remove all that stuff, remember?

@xyzygy: I would imagine that they would get hit with a class-action lawsuit like Sony did with Linux on PS3.

If you want to live in an ALL DIGITAL FUTURE you can. I downloaded a bunch of shit on my PS3 the other day and it's great.

On your Xbox One? You can download a bunch of sweet games right now. Same for the PS4. You can actually enjoy every release for the system without even going into a store. Dope, right?

The big difference, that all this thread boils down to? You don't have be online to play them. THATS IT. This is not as high minded and conceptual as you seem to think. The fundamental issue is the ability to play your games without being connected to the internet. Boom. Done. That's why people were pissed, that's why steam has an offline mode, that's why digital purchases work even without an internet connection.

There is absolutely zero consumer advantage to Microsofts original plan.

So, no, I don't have the illusion that I own NBA2k14. I own a license to use that software as represented by either a code, or piece of non duplicated physical media. I play that on a platform. These were my options:

A: You can use your license to play that game anytime, anywhere you want provided you have the platform.

B: You can use your license to play that game anytime, anywhere you want provided you have the platform. And an active internet connection.

Is this really that hard?

At a time when slow internet and bandwidth caps still exist (1.5 Mb/s, 250 GB) an all digital future is unfeasible for not only me but a vast majority of people.

@sdharrison: Exactly, thank you. Nobody was railing against an all-digital future. They were protesting required online connectivity and daily checks or else you weren't allowed to play your own games.

Exactly. Plus, I like having the physical copy of something I purchased that cost as much as current new games.

That is what I plan on doing. But I would much prefer to do it with Amazon's prices, access to all collector's editions, and the possibility to resell, as would have been the case with the original policies. And at what cost? Requiring a goddamn internet connection occasionally? Great, I've had my consoles connected to the internet since Phantasy Star Online's release date.

I promised myself no fucking discs, but the price drops at retail are already making me question it.

Like Amazons PSN?

Amazon Playstation Network Store

Also what stuff do you want from the collectors edition? The figurines and stuff? They have "collector's editions" of Assassins Creed 4 and I'm sure other games on the PSN and probably the Xbox Store.

@spraynardtatum: Amazon PSN is a fantastic start. But Microsoft was allowing discs to be bought anywhere and installed AND resold. The check-in was required because they were allowing you to resell. Obviously this could not work any other way.

Regarding collector's editions, I would just like the option to get everything a game has to offer at the best price (retail or digital). If Forza's Collectors Edition was available to download I would be far less concerned actually.

As others have said, internet infrastructure is just not where it needs to be in order to make this work. Especially with pricing and bandwidth caps in place. In the interim, i'll take my physical media and will go for digital when/where I please.