Hey everyone! I wanted to get your thoughts on something my friend and I have been arguing about: the shift from physical game copies to digital ones and services like Game Pass. My friend believes that with digital games, you don’t truly own anything since the companies can take them away whenever they want. He also thinks subscribing to Game Pass supports this ‘not owning’ model, while he prefers physical copies as a way to ensure he can play without restrictions.
On the flip side, I feel that regardless of whether a game is digital, physical, or on Game Pass, you’re really just buying a license to use it, which can be revoked at any time. I also pointed out that theoretically, companies can even prevent you from playing a physical disc with things like hardware bans. So, should we even worry about losing our games, whether they’re digital or physical? I’d appreciate your insights on whether it matters how we buy games, and how safe our physical copies are from being taken away!
3 Answers
In today’s landscape, it’s tough to say you truly own anything unless it’s a physical copy that’s not tied to a server. Even then, you can lose a disc or it can get scratched. Digital purchases can disappear if the service decides to remove them. Some physical games also require online connectivity, kind of undermining the whole point of owning the disc.
So, I think a balance of both is what consumers are essentially left with. It’s wise to have physical copies whenever possible for games that you adore, but I also use digital for convenience with titles I play more casually.
For me, physical will always be the way to go as long as I can get it. Even if they become obsolete, I value the collection aspect.
I think the people who say you don’t own digital copies at all are overselling fear. No major platform has just yanked games like that—yet. But yeah, subscriptions like Game Pass can definitely change how we view ownership in gaming. I get the comparisons to Netflix, but I still think there will always be a market for owning games, whether physically or digitally purchased outright.
It’s like this: when you buy a game with a subscription, you know what you’re signing up for. It’s renting, not owning. But as long as you enjoy what you’re playing and see the value in it, why not?
Exactly! Plus, if you’re really into it, renting can be a way to try games before committing to a purchase. It’s just about finding what works for you.
Right? And with some digital platforms like GOG, you can still feel a bit of ownership because they allow offline play.
Honestly, I think the medium matters less these days. For example, if you buy a physical disk, it usually still requires you to download most of the game online. Plus, companies can cut off access to both physical and digital games. I’ve transitioned almost entirely to digital because it’s just more convenient, but I do understand the fear of losing access to games.
Sure, with a physical copy, you might be able to play offline, but there are plenty of cases, like ‘The Crew’, that show how you might still lose access regardless of having a disc. It really seems like both options are just a way to license your right to play a game.
Just a heads up—if you’re looking to back up your games, GOG is a cool option since it allows downloading offline installers, so even if something goes wrong, you can still play your game.
Agreed! Plus, a physical copy won’t save you from server shutdowns, which is something many forget. Take ‘The Crew’ for example; having the disc didn’t help anyone once they pulled the plug!
True, the experience can differ from digital to physical. I like having the option to resale or lend my physical games, which you just can’t do with digital.
That’s a solid point. Just remember that even with physical copies, if they rely on online servers, you might end up in a jam when those close.