top 42 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 66 points 4 months ago (9 children)

And as someone else pointed out in a different thread. No reselling disks or giving to friends.

Everyone has to buy their own downloaded copy per account.

And they dont have to soend the money for the reader. And the game company doesnt have to distribute hardware and can take more profit from the retailers.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 36 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Great chance to lay off thousands of retail workers ❤️

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    We never had game shops around me that look like the ones we saw online in other countries, those looked like relatively cool places to have around. I also once told a friend coming from the US to buy me a whole bunch of used games from a Gamestop and I was amazed how cheap they were. We only had overpriced originals or super cheap pirated games here, used cheap originals were neat.

    I wouldn’t hang out in such a place as an adult (and I’m icked by retail-as-community-space) but maybe as a teenager it would have seemed nice. Just being able to ask the people working there for opinions or recommendations was probably a big part of how games work for people I’d imagine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    At that point why not just play it on PC? Are people seriously going to buy a console that doesn't even read a disk, just to download a game from the internet? (Or worse, play via a launcher?)

    Also, are the games gonna be cheaper now that they don't need to produce the disks and packaging, transport them, store them in warehouses, stock them on shelves, etc.?

    If supply and demand were a real science, this would represent infinite supply, right? So, wouldn't you expect the price to approach 0.00?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Are people seriously going to buy a console that doesn't even read a disk, just to download a game from the internet?

    Are you seriously asking? Because I've seen time and time again, the answer to those kinds of questions seems to be yes. I think most people just don't care, and they don't need to, they'll only buy a few games in a console's lifespan to play for multiple years, and they'll either just pick up what's popular, or whichever one has a game they want to play.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Do they realize they can get their favorite console's controller with a USB cable so they can still use it to play on their PC?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 56 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 44 points 4 months ago

    It was just bound to happen. The moment Xbox had dropped the ball and PS became the monopolist, it was obvious that they would start doing some extremely predatory shit and that's just it. There you have it. The enshittification at it's finest.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 4 months ago

    They held out until Linux gaming got good. Now they're not needed anymore.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 4 months ago
    [–] 24 points 4 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 24 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I, for one, have plenty of games to last me a lifetime. If I have to build another PC, even at these prices, I will because at least steam is not as predatory.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)

    No resale, no buy.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago

    You got nothing to lose, but your subscription fees.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

    Is this what's happening with the data centers, too? We'll be expected to access the internet through the cloud or centralized servers, so it doesn't matter to big tech that computer parts are unaffordable to consumers? For the record, I am not happy about it.

    Somebody educate me, please. It's worse when I don't know exactly what's happening.

    Edit: strikethrough

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    Yes. We will priced out or in the long term even forbidden from owning the hardware needed to run games and other demanding sofware natively. All this to grant us the honor to rent back what we used to own through the cloud

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago*

    I mean... the internet is the cloud and such? Your local computer isn't generating the internet. The internet is all the accessible things from all the computers plugged in to it.

    Theoretically browsing the internet is an extremely low demand thing to do with a PC. It used to be considered one of the lowest, until modern browsers became mostly one browser and every company decided it's job was to harvest as much of your data as possible.

    Not sure what the image is referencing exactly, but recently Sony announced they plan to kill off disks entirely, and so their games and everything will all be digital download... and also they just straight up deleted 551 movies they'd sold for years to tons of people, with no refunds or fucks given, because... I guess they didn't want to pay to renew their license to sell them? And decided to make it retroactive. Because fuck poor people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago

    I assumed this was memeing the fact that they removed access to movies that people legitimately purchased without a refund, then saw the news that killed physical games...

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Everyone will now avoid sony, right???

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    I know this sucks, but idk how to feel about it. I had a large collection of physical games, much like I'd imagine most gamers do, only to one day come home and find it all stolen. Insurance pulled the rug on me, and I didn't get much for any of it. Since then I've bought everything digital and, while I know it can happen, I haven't had any taken from me since. Of course, buying all the games physically would have been way more expensive as some of them are rare collectables now. I'm just happy I get to play them. I know I could lose it all again on a whim of some CEO, but I just feel there isn't any reasonable solution.

    Make sure you guys keep receipts, take pictures, secure your games, and pay extra for any collectables insurance. And don't let insurance dictate the aggregate value lost, itemize everything and get quotes. You'll still get ripped off, but hopefully you can rebuild what's important if it happens to you.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Thing is, if "digital" actually meant "own" we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Is this one of those things where the old "block chain" could be helpful? Like, a mechanism for actual digital ownership where one can have reasonable assurance that the thing one has downloaded actually belongs to them? That, so long as there's a unique key, one can access that digital item whenever one desires--AND can transfer that to someone else by way of sale or trade?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago*

    I've said this before it's indefinite access you're paying for when you buy a disc not ownership of the game. The only difference is, is that you don't lose access to those games when you buy physical, when you buy digital your games access can be heavily modified.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    At the risk of now upsetting cryptobros (but no, I'm sure they understand all too well): we need laws. not blockchain. Even if the perfect solution was created (looks at physical), there is no incentive for publishers to use it.

    And we've already seen what amazing things publishers have done with blockchain. /s

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    So far, it’s been very rare for digital ownership of games not to stay preserved. Ex: You can’t buy games from the Wii U anymore, but can still install owned ones. Some games are delisted from Steam, but you can install them.

    Notable exceptions: Online games (not helped by discs) and Sony’s big attack on movie licenses.

    In terms of resale ownership, yeah, it’s not so favorable. I’m ambivalent on that, because resale motivated a lot of changes in games - more online, more perpetual GAAS, fewer short singleplayer experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I've never been one to sell games, but I give, lend, and borrow games frequently with my friends. This (and some locked away exclusives) are the only reason I still even own consoles. Sony et al have decided they don't want my money anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    But they’re not getting “your money”.

    When your friends buy your game from you, and then that friend’s friend re-buys the game, those are lost sales. Your friends liked getting the game at a lower price, but if it was sold digitally for half your Used Price, everyone keeps their copy to play later, but the devs (okay, realistically in many cases; publisher) gets more money.

    I’m not stating this to condemn you, honestly I’m far more fine with you trading with friends than the GameStop Used Market (a shitshow that wasn’t good for anyone); but you don’t build a compelling case for Sony to want to sell to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    You seem really intent on inventing scenarios to dispute me. I own a RIDICULOUS amount of games. Games that I purchased directly, usually at launch. My friends do as well, we simply share or give each other some of the games. Or sometimes we lend them and that ends up convincing the other person to buy it. Sony and Nintendo have indeed gotten a boatload of my money over the years and that boat is sailing elsewhere.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I don’t keep my physical games, I buy and sell them regulary, so I keep my cost per game low, even for new titles. My problem with digital is that I cannot resell, it’s just a license I rent for full price

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    Reselling does nothing for Sony though, so losing the customers who are buying and selling used games isn't a loss for them.

    It's like how people freaked out about how Netflix would surely collapse when they cracked down on password sharing, but it's actually brought in a bunch more money for them. Losing viewers who aren't paying for the service was actually a bonus. Even if there had been a bet zero change in subscribers, they'd save money from the reduction in traffic.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    I think that for now Nintendo Sony and Microsoft are keeping old stores accessible even if it costs them because they calculated the negative PR would cost them more (people wouldn't hoard digital licenses for titles that don't have time to play if they knew there's a potential to be removed from their account before first install)

    Ubisoft instead had no problems in removing titles from the Uplay accounts, instead

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›