Discs don’t matter. The whole “bring back discs” thing is pointless. They’re gone. Period.
Rights matter. If we had the same rights with digital purchases we had with old physical games the disc thing would be a much much smaller issue. Would many care outside true collectors?
Don’t confuse the two. If you do, and you complain loudly enough, you’ll get the monkey’s paw version of discs. All the downsides of both, no upside at all.
Discs do matter in one way. I don't think I have ever seen a digital "purchase" of any significance which I could resell or gift at a later time. Some "in game" things are resellable, but only within the game's ecosystem. All digital games, music, movies, ebooks, audio books, etc are not (AFAIK).
So if I get tired of my DVD movie collection, I could sell it or give it to my kids. If I ever decide I'm too old for the retro game cartridges I have, they could go to future grandkids. But my GOG games or Bandcamp music is stuck with me forever (legally speaking). Nobody would know if I "gave" them to my kids, but there certainly is no way to resell them.
Now this is still a rights issue, but physical media makes this easy (outside of keys/DRM as you point out) You always have the right to hand on a physical object.
Discs matter because centralized digital distribution is what is eroding your rights. The medium's the message.
It's the malleability and ephemerality of digital content that has enabled not just restricting people's rights, but destroying the authenticity of media by arbitrarily replacing its content. The reason Amazon could delete 1984 from your Kindle, is its digital nature. Nobody, except you, can delete a book from your shelf or change its content.
It's not about the digitalness, it's about the hardware that enforces the rights management. You can stick every Super Nintendo game ever made on to a not-very-large SD card. It's completely digital. No one anywhere can control what you do with them. It's honestly more "yours" in that form than the corresponding rather enormous pile of cartridges.
Turning things into big piles of numbers isn't what takes them from you. It's the hardware and ecosystem that limits what you can do with the numbers. The reason Amazon could delete that book isn't that the numbers were particularly deletable somehow, it's that people were using systems that let someone else control them.
> For years now, the testers at DoesItPlay have been documenting this trend, testing thousands of physical game releases to see which ones live up to the promise of full “plug and play” functionality without an Internet connection. Thus far, a full 27 percent of the physical releases they’ve tested require some sort of download to fix game-breaking bugs or obtain core game content that is not stored on the physical release itself. That ratio balloons to 34 percent for tested PS5 games and 50 percent for those on the Xbox Series X.
The point is you have no rights digital or physical. That’s the problem.
Disc are not magic totems. There is nothing promising you the disc you will work in 10 years, 10 months, 10 days. Nothing ensuring that you can resell it for >$0. They could trivially make the disc hold a one-time redemption for the game.
If you buy a physical used copy of Anthem can you play it? Nope. They could do that with single player games.
What’s the resale value of, effectively, a coaster? Can you lend it to a friend? Your current rights are about the coaster. Not the software.
You happen to have abilities with physical discs because of tradition. You’re not guaranteed those. Digital makes that obvious.
Get a Mig Flash, rip your games, support the emulator communities, etc.
It's so easy for DRM'd games to become lost forever as the rights transfer around, and the hosting or support costs stop being worth it for publishers.
Not a great article, but a very real phenomenon. I recently picked up a banned Nintendo Switch Lite for cheap -- meaning it can't download games or updates off Nintendo's servers, but it can still play cartridge games. And while most games function, there are more often than not critical fixes or significant content updates missing. The console exists in a strange sort of limbo where everything is playable but not in its best form.
The problem with Sony killing physical games (and the wider culture of digital purchases) is, unfortunately, a long-term one. Nobody will be seriously affected right now, as long as Sony's update servers are up and both digital and physical are supported. But 10, 20 years from now, both from a game preservation standpoint and from a consumer protection standpoint, this will be disastrous, when many games will still be charging outrageous prices (without the soft check of reselling/trading) or even no longer exist.
What games? One thing I do appreciate about the Switch is that most first party games come complete on cartridge. I bought Splatoon Raiders the other day on the way to the train station for a long ride; I popped it in and started playing, never had any internet. It occurred to me later that I probably couldn't have done this for a third party title.
There's a spreadsheet [0] tracking Switch games where you can see which ones have 'complete' versions on carts. It's roughly 1/4 for both first party and third party titles, though first party games are more likely to have cartridges released in a later run with updates included, while third party games are more likely to just have no updates.
(Splatoon Raiders was released a week ago so I don't think that's a good example to use for games without updates. Even it has an update already, albeit a non-critical one)
This made me think of how we have to manually block certain devices (usually smart TVs) so they don’t “phone home” and show us ads and so forth. I see your switch being banned as a sort of mixed blessing. It’s liberating in a way. I wonder if there’s some way to use a proxy to self host the software patches. We had something similar on the PS3 homebrew scene.
I've looked into it, and there doesn't seem to be any existing solution. You can transfer updates from one Switch to another, though, so if you have two Switches that opens up some options.
The PS3 is a relic from an era where consoles being connected to the internet was still a relatively new concept, and security was a lot more lax. Newer consoles like the Switch are far more locked down, everything is signed/encrypted/verified/etc so any tinkering of that sort is impossible without a kernel code execution exploit.
The only option for a banned Switch Lite is installing a modchip (there are people who will do it for you for a fee, well worth it imo).
Got bitten by the deceptive nature of Nintendo "game key trash". Purchased a game online without reading carefully the description. Sent it back and bought a SteamDeck.
I can't recall if the seller even put the correct visuals: game key trash have a banner telling that they are plastic waste and you should instead give all the money to nintendo by using eshop.
Nintendo is the worst. Another example: Wii virtual console purchases don't carry over. They're selling people the exact same Mario ROMs dozens of times in a display of absolute rent seeking. Playstation recently got caught remotely deleting people's "purchased" movies too.
I too bought a Steam Deck and haven't looked back. It's still a normal computer even if Steam itself goes to shit, but all signs point to it steadfastly refusing to do that. Here's to hoping Gaben never dies.
The Switch has one particular feature that doesn't get enough talk: basically any game update can be sent to another Switch peer-to-peer. I'm pretty sure it even works with Game Key Cards, since they're just a rebrand of an annoyance that the Switch 1 had since launch.
You could, at least hypothetically, put every physical cartridge in a Switch or Switch 2 and download all the updates to those games, and just have an offline mirror of Nintendo's entire update CDN. More likely someone should make a homebrew app that archives update data by using this weird peer-to-peer update protocol, but I have no idea what encryption would need to be broken to make that work. But it would be a legitimate boon to game preservation to have something where someone with a bone-stock Switch and a game can just download the update they need and be done with it.
The point the article is making is that people assume that a game having physical media means its fully functional - but that's often not the case. Most games made recently rely on access to centralized servers to make the game playable in a concrete way. Emulation will help - but unlike previous generations having physical media won't be enough.
yeah the backlash against sony is focusing on the wrong detail, disks don't mean ownership and digital doesn't mean you can't own it
the disks themselves are largely a relic already, not enough storage for some games... and I don't recall a game I've played recently that didn't require a download on first play
it would be nice to have some regulation that at least requires games to have some sort of labelling that indicates a minimum length of support for online functionality requirements
Discs don’t matter. The whole “bring back discs” thing is pointless. They’re gone. Period.
Rights matter. If we had the same rights with digital purchases we had with old physical games the disc thing would be a much much smaller issue. Would many care outside true collectors?
Don’t confuse the two. If you do, and you complain loudly enough, you’ll get the monkey’s paw version of discs. All the downsides of both, no upside at all.
Discs do matter in one way. I don't think I have ever seen a digital "purchase" of any significance which I could resell or gift at a later time. Some "in game" things are resellable, but only within the game's ecosystem. All digital games, music, movies, ebooks, audio books, etc are not (AFAIK).
So if I get tired of my DVD movie collection, I could sell it or give it to my kids. If I ever decide I'm too old for the retro game cartridges I have, they could go to future grandkids. But my GOG games or Bandcamp music is stuck with me forever (legally speaking). Nobody would know if I "gave" them to my kids, but there certainly is no way to resell them.
Now this is still a rights issue, but physical media makes this easy (outside of keys/DRM as you point out) You always have the right to hand on a physical object.
Discs matter because centralized digital distribution is what is eroding your rights. The medium's the message.
It's the malleability and ephemerality of digital content that has enabled not just restricting people's rights, but destroying the authenticity of media by arbitrarily replacing its content. The reason Amazon could delete 1984 from your Kindle, is its digital nature. Nobody, except you, can delete a book from your shelf or change its content.
It's not about the digitalness, it's about the hardware that enforces the rights management. You can stick every Super Nintendo game ever made on to a not-very-large SD card. It's completely digital. No one anywhere can control what you do with them. It's honestly more "yours" in that form than the corresponding rather enormous pile of cartridges.
Turning things into big piles of numbers isn't what takes them from you. It's the hardware and ecosystem that limits what you can do with the numbers. The reason Amazon could delete that book isn't that the numbers were particularly deletable somehow, it's that people were using systems that let someone else control them.
Have you read the article?
> For years now, the testers at DoesItPlay have been documenting this trend, testing thousands of physical game releases to see which ones live up to the promise of full “plug and play” functionality without an Internet connection. Thus far, a full 27 percent of the physical releases they’ve tested require some sort of download to fix game-breaking bugs or obtain core game content that is not stored on the physical release itself. That ratio balloons to 34 percent for tested PS5 games and 50 percent for those on the Xbox Series X.
No. Thats the whole point.
The point is you have no rights digital or physical. That’s the problem.
Disc are not magic totems. There is nothing promising you the disc you will work in 10 years, 10 months, 10 days. Nothing ensuring that you can resell it for >$0. They could trivially make the disc hold a one-time redemption for the game.
If you buy a physical used copy of Anthem can you play it? Nope. They could do that with single player games.
What’s the resale value of, effectively, a coaster? Can you lend it to a friend? Your current rights are about the coaster. Not the software.
You happen to have abilities with physical discs because of tradition. You’re not guaranteed those. Digital makes that obvious.
This is a rights issue.
Get a Mig Flash, rip your games, support the emulator communities, etc.
It's so easy for DRM'd games to become lost forever as the rights transfer around, and the hosting or support costs stop being worth it for publishers.
Not a great article, but a very real phenomenon. I recently picked up a banned Nintendo Switch Lite for cheap -- meaning it can't download games or updates off Nintendo's servers, but it can still play cartridge games. And while most games function, there are more often than not critical fixes or significant content updates missing. The console exists in a strange sort of limbo where everything is playable but not in its best form.
The problem with Sony killing physical games (and the wider culture of digital purchases) is, unfortunately, a long-term one. Nobody will be seriously affected right now, as long as Sony's update servers are up and both digital and physical are supported. But 10, 20 years from now, both from a game preservation standpoint and from a consumer protection standpoint, this will be disastrous, when many games will still be charging outrageous prices (without the soft check of reselling/trading) or even no longer exist.
What games? One thing I do appreciate about the Switch is that most first party games come complete on cartridge. I bought Splatoon Raiders the other day on the way to the train station for a long ride; I popped it in and started playing, never had any internet. It occurred to me later that I probably couldn't have done this for a third party title.
There's a spreadsheet [0] tracking Switch games where you can see which ones have 'complete' versions on carts. It's roughly 1/4 for both first party and third party titles, though first party games are more likely to have cartridges released in a later run with updates included, while third party games are more likely to just have no updates.
(Splatoon Raiders was released a week ago so I don't think that's a good example to use for games without updates. Even it has an update already, albeit a non-critical one)
[0] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1CEABCBrPv1tWf89h...
How did it get banned? Presumably it has a modchip inside which means that getting updates from alternative sources is still viable.
This made me think of how we have to manually block certain devices (usually smart TVs) so they don’t “phone home” and show us ads and so forth. I see your switch being banned as a sort of mixed blessing. It’s liberating in a way. I wonder if there’s some way to use a proxy to self host the software patches. We had something similar on the PS3 homebrew scene.
I've looked into it, and there doesn't seem to be any existing solution. You can transfer updates from one Switch to another, though, so if you have two Switches that opens up some options.
The PS3 is a relic from an era where consoles being connected to the internet was still a relatively new concept, and security was a lot more lax. Newer consoles like the Switch are far more locked down, everything is signed/encrypted/verified/etc so any tinkering of that sort is impossible without a kernel code execution exploit.
The only option for a banned Switch Lite is installing a modchip (there are people who will do it for you for a fee, well worth it imo).
Got bitten by the deceptive nature of Nintendo "game key trash". Purchased a game online without reading carefully the description. Sent it back and bought a SteamDeck. I can't recall if the seller even put the correct visuals: game key trash have a banner telling that they are plastic waste and you should instead give all the money to nintendo by using eshop.
Nintendo is the worst. Another example: Wii virtual console purchases don't carry over. They're selling people the exact same Mario ROMs dozens of times in a display of absolute rent seeking. Playstation recently got caught remotely deleting people's "purchased" movies too.
I too bought a Steam Deck and haven't looked back. It's still a normal computer even if Steam itself goes to shit, but all signs point to it steadfastly refusing to do that. Here's to hoping Gaben never dies.
The Switch has one particular feature that doesn't get enough talk: basically any game update can be sent to another Switch peer-to-peer. I'm pretty sure it even works with Game Key Cards, since they're just a rebrand of an annoyance that the Switch 1 had since launch.
You could, at least hypothetically, put every physical cartridge in a Switch or Switch 2 and download all the updates to those games, and just have an offline mirror of Nintendo's entire update CDN. More likely someone should make a homebrew app that archives update data by using this weird peer-to-peer update protocol, but I have no idea what encryption would need to be broken to make that work. But it would be a legitimate boon to game preservation to have something where someone with a bone-stock Switch and a game can just download the update they need and be done with it.
I like to think this'll be around forever
https://discworld.starturtle.net/lpc/
They have only 27 entries for a PC... Like PCMR does not care? The platform where cracks always were most important?
On PC you can pirate the full version even if the disc doesn't work.
interesting article about doesitplay community and their observations, but it seems like a lost battle since majority of gamers simply do not care
Gamers know that piracy and emulation will rescue lost games.
The point the article is making is that people assume that a game having physical media means its fully functional - but that's often not the case. Most games made recently rely on access to centralized servers to make the game playable in a concrete way. Emulation will help - but unlike previous generations having physical media won't be enough.
Yeah, if we want physical media we have to buy what is produced.
yeah the backlash against sony is focusing on the wrong detail, disks don't mean ownership and digital doesn't mean you can't own it
the disks themselves are largely a relic already, not enough storage for some games... and I don't recall a game I've played recently that didn't require a download on first play
it would be nice to have some regulation that at least requires games to have some sort of labelling that indicates a minimum length of support for online functionality requirements