Capn12 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 12:02 PM) Sure. Now, how big is a game? Uncharted 3 was a 44gb download. How long does that take to download? Why wouldn't I want the option? Personally, I enjoy the experience of picking up the game and unboxing it. I'm sure being 30 I'm just an old fogie. I'd love to still have the opportunity to walk around a Blockbuster, too. It isn't age that designates the desire to have physical media, it is personal preference and past procedure. I'm 36, and think it is absolutely silly that we're still having to buy physical media for games/movies/music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:00 AM) That is all speculation really. If the Xbox1 cost the same as the PS4, but had no optical drive, I'd gladly buy one. Are there really THAT many households that are without means to play DVDs/BRs? I'm pretty sure those are probably also going to be the households that aren't looking to drop $400-500 on a gaming console. Some folks are ok with moving forward with an easier method of media usage, some folks don't want it to change. Regardless, sooner than later, the digital game media will go the way of the DVD with respect to Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, etc. When I need a new blu ray player I buy a PS3. Im not talking about households who are buying $50 dvd players, Im talking about households who have the money to buy DVDs the day they are released because they dont want to wait 40 for Netflix. And what do you mean, digital media will go the way of DVD with respect to Netflix. Can you name what internet service has Star Wars, or do I still need to buy the DVD? What about Lord of the Rings? Im not sure why you think its such an advantage to have no physical copy of something that you spent your money on. Why would you want to take that risk? If you have the type of money to spend $400-$500 on a console, you should have the $5 extra to buy the physical copy in case something goes wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:06 AM) It isn't age that designates the desire to have physical media, it is personal preference and past procedure. I'm 36, and think it is absolutely silly that we're still having to buy physical media for games/movies/music. But you don't have to buy physical media for games/movies/music. That's a completely inaccurate statement. Right now you can download anything you want through various channels. Pull up PSN and download any game you want. It's personal preference. Who's forcing you to buy anything physical? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) Seriously? Having 2 drives is becoming the norm. You run applications from the SSD and use the SATA for storage. Any disc based storage system is quickly becoming dated. The point still remains that you don't have to remove the optical drive in order to fit a 2nd drive. QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) Of those people that don't have the Internet...how many can't tether to connect once a day? Of those people, how many can even afford a $500 console. It's a demographic that doesn't exist. Mercedes doesn't make a s***ty version of their cars for people that can't afford them either. If they don't have internet access... tether to what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:05 AM) You're such a small demographic that you don't matter. Sorry. Best Buy is struggling. Record stores barely exist. A company trying to drive innovation can't worry about people that refuse to change. Refuse to change? LOL I just am not a sheep who thinks that somehow its in my best interest to let someone else have my stuff. That isnt about change, that is just about common sense. For the same price, would I 1) rather let someone else have my bike but they promise that Ill always get to use it whenever I want or 2) have my bike in my garage. Guess what, the answer is 2. Because even if the other person is the most honorable up standing citizen in the world, there is still a chance that one day they screw up and I cant get my bike when I want it. If that isnt simple enough for you, I dont know. Edited June 20, 2013 by Soxbadger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 10:48 AM) See, I agree. Why not have the physical media version of a game, regular price. Also, a digital download version of the game, a bit cheaper, but requires the connectivity of the console, etc. Why can't that system be implemented? Clearly, they have the capabilities. I'd love to not have to keep up with physical media anymore. This. Instead of going all the way with one or the other, do both. They already do this with a lot of blu-ray moves. Disney especially. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:06 AM) It isn't age that designates the desire to have physical media, it is personal preference and past procedure. I'm 36, and think it is absolutely silly that we're still having to buy physical media for games/movies/music. It is personal preference. And in my opinion the market shows that more people prefer the option to buy physical media. Why do I believe this? Steam has been in existence since 2003 and many hardcore gamers still buy physical media for many different reasons. Steam is great for a $5 game, not so great for a $60 game. Since consoles are generally aimed towards the $60 game it doesnt make sense to remove the option to buy physical games. I assume that both Xbox and PS will allow you to purchase games online and download them to your machine (they already do, Ive bought some old Final Fantasy games for $10), so it wont hurt anyone to have the optical drive, because the dl system is already there. Why people dont want choice is mid boggling. QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:17 AM) This. Instead of going all the way with one or the other, do both. They already do this with a lot of blu-ray moves. Disney especially. They already do both. I can dl full games on my PS right now. Edited June 20, 2013 by Soxbadger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capn12 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 12:07 PM) When I need a new blu ray player I buy a PS3. Im not talking about households who are buying $50 dvd players, Im talking about households who have the money to buy DVDs the day they are released because they dont want to wait 40 for Netflix. So, you want your console to be more of an entertainment center that you can do multiple things on. Kind of like watching movies or playing games that other people have, but you don't own? Is it easier to meet up with said person, ask to borrow the movie/game, take it home, watch it, meet back up and give it back...or...access digital media via that entertainment console the instant you decide that you want to see/play it? It seems the latter was a feature that up until recently, was going to be made possible... And what do you mean, digital media will go the way of DVD with respect to Netflix. Can you name what internet service has Star Wars, or do I still need to buy the DVD? What about Lord of the Rings? The fact that some entities have sticks up their asses with respect to who they will allow to publish their media, has no bearing on what is the better option down the road. Im not sure why you think its such an advantage to have no physical copy of something that you spent your money on. Why would you want to take that risk? If you have the type of money to spend $400-$500 on a console, you should have the $5 extra to buy the physical copy in case something goes wrong. Because physical media can't go missing/scratched/broken/etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) Seriously? Having 2 drives is becoming the norm. You run applications from the SSD and use the SATA for storage. Any disc based storage system is quickly becoming dated. Of those people that don't have the Internet...how many can't tether to connect once a day? Of those people, how many can even afford a $500 console. It's a demographic that doesn't exist. Mercedes doesn't make a s***ty version of their cars for people that can't afford them either. This is just ignorant. A large number of Americans don't live in big urban areas, you know that right? It's not about affordability, it's about access. Comcast isn't spending tens of thousands of dollars to install fiber optic lines that feed 10 houses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) Seriously? Having 2 drives is becoming the norm. You run applications from the SSD and use the SATA for storage. Any disc based storage system is quickly becoming dated. Of those people that don't have the Internet...how many can't tether to connect once a day? Of those people, how many can even afford a $500 console. It's a demographic that doesn't exist. Mercedes doesn't make a s***ty version of their cars for people that can't afford them either. Comparing XBox and Microsoft's business model to a car company's is a poor comparison to begin with, but comparing them to Mercedes is worse. They are far more like Ford/GM/Chrysler in that they want a car in every single driveway in America, not to sell luxury vehicles to the wealthy. Yeah, some people can't afford it, which is why they're still playing an old and often used original XBox. Doesn't mean you should stop marketing to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:06 AM) It isn't age that designates the desire to have physical media, it is personal preference and past procedure. I'm 36, and think it is absolutely silly that we're still having to buy physical media for games/movies/music. I agree with you, but the tech is just not there yet. It's not worth the hundreds it would cost me to get enough storage to keep all of my digital content like blue ray movies and games. Nor is it worth it to me to pay someone for access to a "cloud" when I can just buy the damn physical product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 In most cases I would prefer to just download games and not have to go and get them. There are a few circumstances where I might want the physical copy, but in general I like not having to switch discs when I switch games and I like not having to go to stores just to pick up a game that I can download at home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:20 AM) It is personal preference. And in my opinion the market shows that more people prefer the option to buy physical media. Why do I believe this? Steam has been in existence since 2003 and many hardcore gamers still buy physical media for many different reasons. Steam is great for a $5 game, not so great for a $60 game. Since consoles are generally aimed towards the $60 game it doesnt make sense to remove the option to buy physical games. I assume that both Xbox and PS will allow you to purchase games online and download them to your machine (they already do, Ive bought some old Final Fantasy games for $10), so it wont hurt anyone to have the optical drive, because the dl system is already there. Why people dont want choice is mid boggling. They already do both. I can dl full games on my PS right now. Right, you can install games from the disc too to speed up loading times, but you still can't install the game and then play it. That's what I want...to BUY the physical media, THEN install it, THEN not need the disc again. You need an activation code to prevent pirating and stealing games, but I want that option too. OR why shouldn't I be able to download a game once I have a physical copy and new activation code. I'd like to download Fallout 3 to my system, as I did with Left 4 Dead 2, but I will have to pay for the digital copy of it. Why should I? I've already bought the physical copy. Edited June 20, 2013 by witesoxfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (Capn12 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:21 AM) So, you want your console to be more of an entertainment center that you can do multiple things on. Kind of like watching movies or playing games that other people have, but you don't own? Is it easier to meet up with said person, ask to borrow the movie/game, take it home, watch it, meet back up and give it back...or...access digital media via that entertainment console the instant you decide that you want to see/play it? It seems the latter was a feature that up until recently, was going to be made possible... The fact that some entities have sticks up their asses with respect to who they will allow to publish their media, has no bearing on what is the better option down the road. Because physical media can't go missing/scratched/broken/etc? 1) You arent understanding. I want both. I have Netflix and DVDs. I dont want NETFLIX or DVDS. I want to be able to BUY PHYSICAL games and DOWNLOAD GAMES. 2) Yes it does, because it shows that there is still a NEED for both. If I want X and the only way to get X is to buy Y, then I need to buy Y. It doesnt matter if Z is more convenient better, because I want X and the only way to get it is Y. 3) It can, but that is why both is better. If you have it 1) physically and 2) digitally, the chances that something goes wrong, decreases. So far Ive yet to see why having both options is a negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capn12 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Until every household has the availability of broadband access, it is hard to argue the 'always connected' model. I'm all for it myself, but then again I have ISP choices in my area. It is hard for most of us to imagine not having the choice of ISPs that will provide necessary bandwidth, and quite often a forgotten point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capn12 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 12:25 PM) Right, you can install games from the disc too to speed up loading times, but you still can't install the game and then play it. That's what I want...to BUY the physical media, THEN install it, THEN not need the disc again. You need an activation code to prevent pirating and stealing games, but I want that option too. OR why shouldn't I be able to download a game once I have a physical copy and new activation code. I'd like to download Fallout 3 to my system, as I did with Left 4 Dead 2, but I will have to pay for the digital copy of it. Why should I? I've already bought the physical copy. Yeah, in an ideal world, this would be the option I'd be ok with as well. But we're still tethered to having the actual disc, to enjoy a game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:25 AM) Right, you can install games from the disc too to speed up loading times, but you still can't install the game and then play it. That's what I want...to BUY the physical media, THEN install it, THEN not need the disc again. You need an activation code to prevent pirating and stealing games, but I want that option too. And you should have that option. Its technology thats existed for like 20 years in computers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:25 AM) Right, you can install games from the disc too to speed up loading times, but you still can't install the game and then play it. That's what I want...to BUY the physical media, THEN install it, THEN not need the disc again. You need an activation code to prevent pirating and stealing games, but I want that option too. OR why shouldn't I be able to download a game once I have a physical copy and new activation code. I'd like to download Fallout 3 to my system, as I did with Left 4 Dead 2, but I will have to pay for the digital copy of it. Why should I? I've already bought the physical copy. Id be a fan of this too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorStSox Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 What's the percentage of people tha don't have access to high speed Internet? Access, not affordability. As far as checking in, it's a small amount of data, so you can tether to your phone to check in. If you don't have the ability to tether or have high speed Internet, the system is not for you. Such is life. All games you buy go into your account which is in the network. You always have access to them and so do your friends, if they're on your family list. Sure, a physical copy is nice to have, but not a necessity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) witesoxfan, Well that would be the best, but video game developers are greedy and want you to have to buy multiple versions of the same product. Which is partially when Im not a big fan of everything being online. DLC is already messing with games. I swear some games are being released unfinished because they can just go back and add in DLC for $5. Edited June 20, 2013 by Soxbadger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:42 AM) Well that would be the best, but video game developers are greedy and want you to have to buy multiple versions of the same product. Which is partially when Im not a big fan of everything being online. DLC is already messing with games. I swear some games are being released unfinished because they can just go back and add in DLC for $5. How much money has Ubisoft made because of all the different AC installations? There was a time when you bought the game once and got the whole thing and it took 60 hours to beat. /damnkidsgetoffmylawn We are in total agreement on this. Edited June 20, 2013 by witesoxfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 So The Last of Us is an awesome game, huh? Gonna got out and get me a copy this weekend. About the XBox One vs PS4 situation, I've been a PlayStation guy since 96 and nothing about the XBox makes want to switch consoles. Also, I must be in the decided minority that actually perfers the Sony controller to the XBox. Not a fan of Halo either, I've played it at my nephew's house and I thought it was meh, as long as I can get my CoD fix, I'm good to go... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 11:56 AM) So The Last of Us is an awesome game, huh? Gonna got out and get me a copy this weekend. Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 12:56 PM) So The Last of Us is an awesome game, huh? Gonna got out and get me a copy this weekend. About the XBox One vs PS4 situation, I've been a PlayStation guy since 96 and nothing about the XBox makes want to switch consoles. Also, I must be in the decided minority that actually perfers the Sony controller to the XBox. Not a fan of Halo either, I've played it at my nephew's house and I thought it was meh, as long as I can get my CoD fix, I'm good to go... No I agree. I've also always been a PS guy and whenever I played games with my friends on Xbox I hated it. Maybe just because I'm used to it, but to me, PS's controller design is perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 12:21 PM) No I agree. I've also always been a PS guy and whenever I played games with my friends on Xbox I hated it. Maybe just because I'm used to it, but to me, PS's controller design is perfect. I think both controllers are fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.