The question of whether to buy games physically or digitally has been hotly debated for 15 years. There are undoubtedly many arguments for and against both. On the physical side, there's the fact that you can actually own your games and do whatever you want with them, including reselling them, and they're generally a lot cheaper. The advantages of digital include, above all, greater convenience (both when purchasing and using it), the fact that it does not contain a data carrier that can be lost or broken, and that it is significantly more environmentally friendly than all means of transport and materials , packaging and intermediaries.
Regarding the physical, among other things, we note that a disc can actually disappear or break and your game no longer exists, that using it is more complicated than simply installing everything, that you cannot avoid a cheaper fully digital console buy, and that some titles simply don't physically exist. In the digital sector, the games are significantly more expensive and you don't own them. You will therefore never be able to sell a game that you have completed or that you do not like.
This last point was highlighted when Discovery and Sony recently announced that they would be removing video content that was actually purchased on the PlayStation Store. Of course, the number of users affected was quite small, but the agreements are designed in such a way that the games can be withdrawn at any time without you being able to do anything about it.
This is an announcement:
This happened, for example, during Stadia's recent bankruptcy. Anyone who had a large game collection lost everything. Google has handled the situation well with refunds, but what would happen if Steam closed? All your purchased games and save files would disappear. To my knowledge, only GOG is currently a major service where you actually own your games and can access them online without the company's launcher
This scares many players. The ability to continue playing your titles in the future is a major concern, although it's far from certain that the HDMI ports will work forever. It's already becoming difficult to use a Super Nintendo with an RGB cable on a flat screen TV, and who's to say that the TV of the future will even have jacks for cables in these wireless times? But there's still something particularly irritating about the idea of buying games for thousands of dollars, only to find out one morning that you've been banned from a service for questionable reasons or that a deal has gone sour, meaning the title you bought yesterday works suddenly not anymore. It's really about the big companies versus the small ones, and you know that in this case you've already clicked on your terms by agreeing to many agreements that you didn't read when you booted up your console and your games.
Plus, a title you bought at full price can be updated at any time in a way you really hate, meaning the developers are essentially destroying something you paid for. Can you imagine another scenario where we would agree to this? Buying an armchair that has been altered to be uncomfortable three months after purchase, your expensive frying pan that is suddenly no longer suitable for meat, or your Star Wars movie box with the original trilogy in its place replaced by the new ones, shabby editions crushed original form George Lucas. Our gaming rights are really limited and there's not much we can do about it. We approved all of this before we even started playing.
This is an announcement:
So should you buy the games physically? Not necessarily. Because the problem here is that physical discs these days often look more like tokens than something that actually contains a playable product. It's not uncommon for me to find that the new CD I put into my console to install a game isn't being used, but all the data is still downloading online. I have no doubt that in 20 years those who try to play a game from a CD after the servers are shut down will be deeply disappointed because in many cases the game will not work at all. The same goes for those who have downloaded games. Even if they often work offline, they still need to be checked from time to time. And without verifiable servers there will be no game. Switch owners in particular avoid these disappointments, but even there it is becoming increasingly common that when purchasing a physical copy, the game data is not included in whole or in part of the game, and I have to assume that the Switch 2 (which, according to rumors, still due to be released this year) will be more digital-friendly.
Also, Ubisoft recently commented on this physical vs. digital thing, casually saying that we gamers need to get used to not owning our games. And by and large we're there, but I think the parallels he draws with the films are wrong. Because even if I no longer own a VHS, DVD, or Blu-ray, it's not hard to get virtually any movie I want legally (although there are some exceptions) for a very low price. However, when it comes to games, we are talking about dedicated hardware that usually only works with a specific console. Microsoft was the best when it came to backwards compatibility, as the Xbox Series S/X allows you to play titles from the Xbox, Xbox 360 and Xbox One. But it is far from complete and there are several titles that are no longer available for a console at all and cannot be purchased digitally, as in the case of the Nintendo DSi, meaning that the downloaded copies that people have are the newest ones available. On the other hand, there is no art in watching the talented and beautiful Anita Ekberg in the 1960 film The Sweet Life. This film works just as well no matter what cinematic medium you use.
So games are a very special case, but the idea that game companies would run endless servers to satisfy the indescribably small number of gamers who want to download very old titles is obviously not realistic. Digital games may be ridiculously expensive, but they don't guarantee lifetime server support.
I think price is the biggest disadvantage of digital games. It's not really surprising that you have to pay $70 to buy a new game (the equivalent of a 90-minute tennis session and a trip to the cinema for two people) and considering the amount of entertainment the video offers, it's not really that surprising Games are and will remain cheap. However, $70 is complete madness when the CD costs around $50, as some electronics chains run a promotion on premieres and quickly drop their prices afterward.
The idea that a game should always be the cheapest online is unrealistic, but the difference is too big today and is only made possible by the fact that we are happy to pay for convenience and there are no competing online stores. Apple was fighting Epic to be the only vendor selling products for iOS, and similarly, there's no alternative on the Xbox Series S/X if you don't want to pay the price that Tekken 8 costs in digital at launch . Sony was even sued, accusing it of charging too high prices on the PlayStation Store. You can't check what another store is charging for the same digital game because there are no options, but you can when it comes to physical formats. And when you finish the game after a few weeks (mainly the single player titles and games you don't like), sell them on eBay or Facebook and get a few bucks back. This difference is so big that even I, who definitely prefer digital games, often buy physical games during promotions, and most of my digital games were purchased during sales.
Where am I going with this? Well, there are several advantages to physical and digital gaming, but there are also some really serious disadvantages, most of which come from the fact that we don't really own our games in the same way anymore. The retro wave that is overwhelming us today with outrageous prices for older titles is something that I don't think the current 25-year-old generation will see the day when the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series S/X go retro. In fact, I'm not sure a game in this format will still be playable in 20 years – but until then I'll be retired, drinking lemonade on the porch in a hopefully more peaceful world that understands that collaboration leads to better results for humans and animals as war. And I'll hopefully have some old video games that are worth at least a little money.
Unlike many of us who own old music CDs, perhaps records, comics, films and retro games, a generation is growing up that has none of these. They have access to everything through subscriptions, but have very, very little popular culture compared to slightly older generations. Is it a problem ? Maybe, maybe not, but it is clear that it will at least be very different.