Also, remember the marketing idea of the "Disney Vault"? In the 90s, Disney would take all their movies in and out of print basically, only selling tapes some of the time, and they'd charge top dollar for them, because you couldn't just walk into Walmart and grab a copy of "Cinderella" anytime. They created scarcity easily this way, since before ebay, finding specific things like a certain videotape at a thrift store or something was a lot more work. So they would charge like $25 for a decades-old movie and say "Get it now, before it goes back in the vault!"
I can see this happening with games more after the death of physical media. Create artificial scarcity with limited time windows and charge top dollar for old games because there will be literally no way to get them besides on their digital store terms.
You saw a faked screenshot, but the meme is definitely referencing the direction that the industry is going and mocking this kind of artificial scarcity.
It'd be responsible of them to say that they can only provide 1 million downloads on the first day, or whatever the limits of their contract with the CDN says. Evidence that it's fake!
I learned never to pre-order any game when I was still a teenager and got burned doing so. I suppose there's always new teenagers who these video game companies can do rug-pulls on
Hopefully emulation and piracy will continue to provide a reasonable check valve on this getting too far out of control. I don't personally engage in either at present outside of an old homebrewed Wii U, but I feel like the existence of those is important to remind the digital storefront/platform owners that at the end of the day they aren't actually the only game in town.
Either that or eventually we'll have to get some antitrust stuff happening to open these things up, though Epic's App Store lawsuit does not give me much hope in that direction.
Yes, for play-online titles for sure, but I think everything up to Xbox 360 / PS3 era has robust emulation and wide distribution of the whole library.
Obviously it's gotten harder over the years, but PS4 and PS5 jailbreaks do exist so that means there's a vector for dumping games that were only ever distributed digitally (at least ones released up to the point where the jailbreaks got patched, as the stores will refused to serve new content until you update your system).
There's a bit of a hit-or-miss situation for them, from what I can tell. I recently spent some time trying to figure out which MLB The Show titles worked for emulation, and somehow after the 2010 entry, all of the remaining PS3 ones have a notorious noticeable bug where the middle (from right behind the pitcher going all the way down to the center field fence) the field is covered with random fans or other "debris", for lack of a better world. As far as I can tell, it's been known for years (I think it's an instance of the general problem of Z-fighting), but either no one knows the exact solution, or the people working on the emulators have so many other things to work on that it's not a priority.
On the other hand, the fact that people have spent enough time to write down which entries have this bug and which don't (and potentially even which stadiums have it and don't in the entries that do have the bug, since it's apparently not consistent across them) does lead credence to the idea that the library is pretty widely distributed.
Definitely another case where Nintendo platforms benefit from everyone having a shared understanding of which are the marquee, must-work titles; like every Mario and Zelda and Pokemon game will emulate flawlessly and after that is the long tail playable-but-maybe-buggy ones.
Current-gen console jailbreaks may exist but are inaccessible to the vast majority of the public so I really doubt they will factor into any decisions made by Sony, Microsoft, etc.
Yes, fair, and that matters if the discussion is "I want to buy someone's physical copy of a game released a few months ago that they are finished with". Digital distribution with robust hardware security does in fact completely destroy that market, though notably Switch and Switch 2 physical games tend to keep their value, suggesting that maybe it has less to do with physical media itself and more than the second hand market follows the pricing set by the digital marketplace, and consumers know that Nintendo doesn't really do discounts, even years later.
All that said, I think my main argument with respect to emulation and root access was less about individuals having that access, and more that so long as someone gains that access even through extraordinary measures, the games can be dumped and distributed, at which point true ownership becomes possible (even if it takes a while for them to become playable on emulation or hacked hardware).
There is diminishing importance of ownership as time passes though because there is less and less desire to own such assets as they get older and newer titles come out.
There are exceptions to the rule, but I'd imagine less than 1% of the population cares about owning/emulating PS3 or even PS4 games at this point.
So yes, there is an eventual vector for "ownership" (though illicit, at least in this hypothetical) but I doubt that moves the needle much if at all.
I would attribute Disney's use of scarcity as a primary means to drive film and TV box office and streaming dollars in the Star Wars franchise.
This is already under threat due to the Star Wars AI videos being released on Youtube, seemingly without constraint as of yet.
The videos are not Hollywood quality [0], however they circumvent rules Disney can't easily break like using the likeness of any actor at any age in any circumstance.
These fan made videos get lots of views. Even if they were all removed from YouTube, this will be a difficult thing to stop.
I believe a generally accepted "good" or even "great" unofficial, Star Wars film built without sets or actors using AI is inevitable. And that this will be true for any popular franchise.
The natural corollary to this arc is into games, where using AI to code most or all of a AAA-competitive title would be considered inevitable.
I suspect Disney and Sony have at least someone pointing at this outcome.
[0] I suppose idealized Hollywood quality. They are better than some films.
> The videos are not Hollywood quality [0], however they circumvent rules Disney can't easily break like using the likeness of any actor at any age in any circumstance.
> [0] I suppose idealized Hollywood quality. They are better than some films.
Not only that, but Disney has diluted the the average quality of Star Wars by a huge amount over the past decade. It used to be a big deal culturally every time something official came out in theaters or on TV. Nowadays, there has been enough stuff that even the hardcore fans don't enjoy (even if not everyone agrees on exactly which ones are the worst, overall very few people like everything).
It's a lot easier to make something set in the Star Wars universe that's a realistic level of quality (and potentially competitive with whatever happens to the current iteration of shows/movies) when the bar has also been lowered towards what the current level of AI tooling can produce.
This is unfortunately also all too common with UHD blu ray releases of old movies. Everything is a limited edition resellers price gouge them even more.
But that's not how the numbers work. I bought a PS5 (instead of gaming on Steam or Xbox) because I could buy physical discs, and I like having them. I buy digital games from time to time as well, but if the PS5 hadn't supported physical games at all, I wouldn't have bought one in the first place, just as I most likely won't buy a PS6 because of this announcement.
I'd like to think I will also boycott any future generations of these gaming consoles, but the fact is that we'll get used to this as the new way of life at some point.
Our collective desire to play GTA 6 will outweigh our desire to "stick it to the man".
in europe it's often cheaper to buy a game new in box from the retailer than from the PS Store. Not for long maybe. I will mourn the loss of physical games as they are such a big part of console experience
Off topic, XKCD should put the original publication date on the page. This one references specific years, and I could tell it's from 2009 after thinking about it, but doesn't hit the same way.
Except it really is. I don't see how businesses don't understand how this sort of anti-customer predatory behavior, MBA stuff, is directly driving reduced sales. The PS5, for instance, has only managed 96 million sales. For contrast the PS2 managed 160 million sales to a smaller market with much fiercer competition.
And I'm one of those tens of millions opting out. The PS2 felt like a great consumer-focused value. Modern consoles feel like opting in to get kicked in the balls and squeezed for every single penny they can get out of you.
The reason modern consoles aren't selling 300million+ units is because of myopia. And the worst part is that it's a vicious cycle. They see their sales shrinking so the penny pinchers and MBAs get even nastier squeezing the ever-shrinking userbase even more resulting in less sales meaning they need to squeeze those that remain even harder and so on.
At seemingly no point is anybody asking 'Hey why do our sales keep falling even though the potential market's way larger and the competition is pretty meh?' I guess that doesn't look as good on a powerpoint slide as trying to kill the used game market and pretending it will have no knock-on effects.
Gamers are notorious for accepting whatever abuse game companies and studios want to inflict, and then keep buying and buying. All the horrible anti-consumer technologies and business practices from DRM to games that are released unfinished, to kernel-level anti-cheats and rootkits, all are routinely done with video games because the industry knows gamers are fanatics and will put up with anything.
If gamers want to stop this, they need to stop rewarding these companies with their money.
99% of gamers who are mad about physical disk distribution going away will still buy the digitally distributed games.
The whole point is that they aren't accepting it. In terms of sales PS2 > PS4 > PS5. That alone is already a big issue but it becomes just comically bad when you consider that the world population is about 33% larger than during the PS2 era, gaming has become completely normalized, and that the competition in modern times is mediocre.
No, but they're also monetizing a bunch of extra ways that they weren't in the past. In the PS2 era, Sony made money from the cut of physical games and accessories and maybe the console itself if it was purchased far enough into the console lifespan. These days they have online subs, cuts of DLC and microtransactions plus all the other stuff they had previously. And they get bigger cuts for DLC, microtransactions and digital games since they are the (only) retailer.
IIRC, the PS2 was sold at a loss, most of the profits came from accessories like controllers and memory cards. I worked at circuit city at the time which is why I remember this. The employee discount (at cost, essentially) did not exist for the console. I was irritated so I did some digging and that was what I had found.
The answer to that has to come with some asterisks. Sony's statements on this issue are driven by accounting that defines generations solely by date (so PS4 profits after the PS5 launches count as PS5 gen profits) and are not inflation adjusted. There's also currency issues in play that further distort the picture. The yen just in the past 5 years has tumbled like 50% which is awesome for exports as that just bumps up your profits so long as your costs are more regional, but can be quite misleading. If you say profits jumped a bunch, you'd think you're doing something great - not just reporting currency fluctuations by proxy.
Beyond that, I think the real question is would they be earning more by selling 300million+ units to a growing userbase with a positive relationship than they are selling 100 million units to a shrinking userbase who they have an increasingly adversarial relationship with? And I think it's hard to see the answer to that question being no. But that again requires taking a step back to see the forest through all those trees.
Like here, ending physical disc production is obviously going to give them a short-term boon in profit as they kill off the used game market. But longer term? It's certainly going to further erode their playerbase. The short-term profit boost will be measurable next quarter, whereas the longer-term consequences will appear in the order of years. So you get a short-term boost and then longer term are left wondering where all your players went to. Then they invariably concoct nonsensical explanations that always look for any reason outside of their own actions to explain the decline. Like at one time the fable is that people were giving up consoles for mobile.
I feel this in my bones and it's a great way to frame it. My last Playstation console was a PS2 and I've also opted out of recent generations. Historically, for me, one of the benefits of a console was that you could just pop the game in, and it would always work, simply and easily.
DRM, online checks, DLC that should have been part of the base game, digital-only games, etc have ruined all that, and if that's going to be the trend everywhere I'll just stick to a PC and Steam where I have a library of games built up over the decades.
I have a Switch and feel that Nintendo provided a decent experience on their recent systems, but with the advent of "game keys" or whatever they call it on the Switch 2, they've flipped to being even worse than the digital-only systems. At least Sony isn't (yet?) trying to sell you a license on a disc to try to fool you into thinking you own a physical copy.
Sure, unless the game is no longer available for download, in which case the key card is a worthless piece of plastic to anyone who hasn’t downloaded it previously. And you still have to contend with all the other downsides of downloadable games including managing the free space on your device.
At this point I don’t trust any console manufacturer to pinky promise that downloads will always be available, so I will not buy anything but a proper physical copy.
People have convinced themselves that game key cards are terrible, when they're the exact same thing as the old style of cartridges, with the only difference that you don't have the 1.0 on it.
People are convinced that game key cards will stop working at some point, when it's the reverse that will happen; your card will be fine, but won't work on a Switch 2, only a future console.
Nintendo will close access to their stores to old consoles way before they break access with their cards.
> People have convinced themselves that game key cards are terrible, when they're the exact same thing as the old style of cartridges, with the only difference that you don't have the 1.0 on it.
I guess this statement is correct, but my point is that the most important thing to me is that I have the game on the cartridge.
Does the switch's "Match Version with Local Users" feature on the software update menu work for this, or is an internet connection strictly required the first time you insert a key card?
That's only for updates. The initial install must come from the eShop. That's not different for game key cards. When you first put a card in, you need to download the game from eShop. No exceptions.
Because they have almost definitely already factored in the loss from people boycotting vs the gain due to killing the resale market into their analysis. They are fully aware that some people are going to refuse to buy digital only
The unfortunate truth is that physical sales have been ever declining so the writing was on the wall
Edit: And you can't really compare the PS2 and PS5 in terms of competition. PS5 isn't just competing against other consoles, it's also competing against netflix, youtube, tiktok, any endless scrolling platform. There were much fewer options for entertainment in 2001 than there are now
- The published profit margins from Sony are misleading. They take maximal advantage of inflation, currency shifts, and generational overlap to create a picture of profitability that is well above whatever the 'real' figure might be.
- You're comparing the present to the past, instead of an alternative present. Given the very large increases in market size and reduction in competition I think there's little doubt a consumer friendly Sony could have easily doubled their sales, if not substantially more.
- The downward slope of anti-consumerism is not sustainable. You end up in a situation where you have to keep charging more and more for a product where demand keeps going lower and lower. Especially as we reach an era of declining fertility, there's only so many fools.
- Why would you even want to do this? Even if, and I think that's a huge if, Sony ended up more profitable than good behavior would have yielded, it's going to be by the thinnest of margins. And they've put themselves in a situation where they're now in an increasingly adversarial relationship with their own users. See companies like EA or Activision on the software side doing the same thing. I think there's some je ne sais pas to be had for leaders of a beloved companies, as opposed to leaders of yet another corporate bottom feeder.
The next console is going to cost at least 1000 dollars, right? There's simply no way to sell hardware at 300 million units now. So I think their strategy is to abandon the mass market and sell to price unconscious consumers who will also pay more for games.
But what's the point of even releasing the next console? The current console generation has barely gotten started, and developers have barely taken advantage of the new hardware.
Maybe they need to look at releasing a cheaper console and making more quality games instead of constantly pushing so hard on graphics. Graphics help sales to an extent, but it's clearly not the whole story, given the popularity of the Wii or Switch. I think the people in charge no longer understand gaming, and are really struggling to produce games that will draw in large crowds again.
> So I think their strategy is to abandon the mass market and sell to price unconscious consumers who will also pay more for games.
Kinda seems like it. I'm curious to see what happens with that, because even people who so far have been willing to pay more will stop being customers if they can't produce an experience that's worth paying for. Maybe I'm in the minority, but the first-party PlayStation games all feel very samey to me.
For the ps6, they were already done with design and they'd need to let that go to waste to not put it out. I doubt it'll have many exclusives though - it's probably a ps5 pro pro thing.
But I'm also not sure they can sell a cheaper console. PS5 prices just rose and they'll rise again next year - so that level is already going to cost 800 dollars to consumers. You can't really sell hardware to anyone until ram prices come down it seems.
They could release a ps4 level console but I'm not sure it would be that cheap to source parts for... There are rumors of a handheld so that might be cheaper.
Basically console gaming is about to get impractical and they'll try and find a path to stay alive. That's my read.
We do this with movie night now. It can be 15 bucks to rent an HD movie - not even a new release! Frequently it’s cheaper to buy a copy and give it to a thrift store afterwards.
I’m considering trying one of the mail order rental companies again.
I own a Nintendo Switch, and I've noticed that in the Nintendo store, old games regularly go on sale for in the ballpark of 80% off. Does that happen in the PS store?
Yes stupid for shareholders and until the EU comes in and saves the day again this will continue.
There's something to be said for creating a near monopoly and also having the ability to digitally revoke someones right to use something they purchased legally, which we'll see more of.
It's not just games. For several years the cheapest way to buy a legit U.S. Office 365 sub is to order a physical box from Amazon on Black Friday. Inside the box is nothing but a scratch-off card with the online license key. It's literally cheaper to get printed color packaging overnight delivered to my door than to sign up on the webpage.
I already own Dark Souls 3 but were I to purchase it again I’d still pick PlayStation over eBay. Even at this price point. I get I’m not the average consumer but I have money and discs are annoying.
> To illustrate why this is stupid, I will furnish two links to purchase Dark Souls 3 (PS4, 2016)
> Ebay, to buy: $11 + shipping[0]
> PS Store, to rent: $60[1]
Yeah, Sony is stupid to be leaving money on the table like that. Lucky for us, we live in a market system that we can trust to optimize for maximum consumer benefit (like Sony is doing here). It's our revealed choice that we want to pay more for old games.
Although it's just anecdata, after spending $600 on the console, I certainly was dismayed to find 10-year old games only being sold at their original prices. Surely they should at least track inflation?
Perhaps Sony could add an optional tipping screen before digital checkout for the good customers.
> Although it's just anecdata, after spending $600 on the console, I certainly was dismayed to find 10-year old games only being sold at their original prices. Surely they should at least track inflation?
Honestly, Sony should just retroactively bill consumers for inflation. Since $60 in 2016 is worth almost $89 today, they should charge all the people who bought the game back then a $29 price adjustment. It's the the only fair thing to do for.
If consumers don't like that option, an alternative can be a perpetual $5/year subscription that additional provides in-game stickers.
> Yeah, Sony is stupid to be leaving money on the table like that
Are they though? Console sales have been dropping. It's only money left on the table if people are also purchasing consoles & games in the same quantities. How many people are just not buying these games because they are digital only?
TBH though, I think the ship has sailed a long time ago. Many games with physical media aren't really playable without downloadable updates anyway. Another reason the modern gaming experience has gotten worse.
Ebay, to buy: $11 + shipping[0]
PS Store, to rent: $60[1]
[0] https://www.ebay.com/itm/298370753624
[1] https://www.playstation.com/en-us/games/dark-souls-iii/