How Viable is the Push Towards All Digital?

All Digital? Or No? Is it Safe?

 With the advent of the PS4 and Xbox One on the horizon, we see a discussion brewing over the fabric of the gaming world. The make-up of which is in flux. There is a stronger push from those within the games industry for an all-digital gaming experience. I can see the benefits. Indeed, easier access to your entire library of games, no matter where you are--that is, if you have an internet connection. Then there is the clamoring of the crowd of sheep, who easily-- without quantification and solid proof-- buy the notions that all publishers and online market places--Sony and Microsoft--will enact policies that would be becoming of the highly vaunted Valve corp.. I think there is a fundamental desire for the latest advances in technology. This desire may, at times, prove to be a major flaw. Only allowing the most longing of us to establish a cue of interest that is heavily weighted and steered by the foggy intentions and motivations of the companies that helm our games. The idea that Sony and Microsoft would, for little reason other than digital meaning a release from physical media and its trappings, shower the consumer in Steam/GOG styled sales and offers is absurd. These companies only need you to buy-in. They have no vested interest in your well-being. And, as such there is no way to determine whether or not the so called "necessary"push to all digital, will bring with it the very necessary benefits that it must provide to be fully justified.

Take a look at one of the two market places....what do you see?

I know for sure, at least on the PSN store, that I see six and seven year old games-- even the thought of four or five or, heck, even three year old games--still at their full retail price. I mean, aren't the games on the PSN store all digital? Or did I miss something? Then as a Forbes article, written by Jason Evangelho, points out, the PS4 will not accept your PS3 digital content. That is, again, will NOT. The PS4 will not allow the transfer of your PSN content--that's the "all-digital" games on the store, mind you-- to your new PlayStation 4. So, let me get this straight the benefit of all-digital is its convenience, its efficiency, its almost unlimited capacity, and its inability to travel with me cross-system? So, unlike Steam, you can't simply have a library of games spanning a wide number of years. It is not possible to take all that convenience with you to the next advance in the platform, this is unlike the robust set of compatibility available to the PC cadre and its Steam affiliates. Well, I think the publishers need to be a bit more honest. They do not plan to wholeheartedly give sales, unless they are forced to by some other entity that challenges or undercuts them. They aren't interested in the "convenience" that it provides you, rather they are interested in the convenience that it provides them. You see, my take is that with full control over their own private markets, well, they can dictate pricing like nobodies business. They can write-off GameStop completely (we all know this probably will not occur, not anytime soon, anyways. As much as publishers and developers harp on about used sales, in the end I do believe there is a very tight mutual relationship with GameStop. When the benefits stop emanating, then someones getting tossed out of bed.), in theory, and overcharge--depending on your point of view-- for what amounts to a shot of air and a head full of dreams. The "all-digital" they keep prattling on about, is a set of chains and an ankle bracelet for good measure. Don't get me wrong, no one knows the whole story. I don't know what policies Microsoft or Sony or whom ever is distributing our games in the future, will take on. But, I'm not so willing to "buy-in"to whatever vulgar snake-oils they are selling. 

Overall

In all, I'd tell the industry to sell us on the environmental benefits of an all digital approach. "It's coming, whether you like it or not", mentality, is not one that I share nor subscribe to. I think the audience can determine, to some degree, their compatibility  and current malleability to change. We don't have to jump out of our seats at every proclamation of "the next big"thing. You know, for all the analysts and experts out there, who find it appealing to look down upon the average laymen,  implying that they are ignorant and in  need of guidance towards the next step to enlightenment, we need to realize that these people are agenda driven. They have no fundamental attachment to your future or being well-off. They disrespect us, by disregarding our rights to question their so-called "expert" assessments, but ,most of all, by disregarding the fact that we can formulate a single critical thought  about where we are going and/or where we came from. This disregard, I believe, is a fundamental issue with the disconnect between the consumers and companies such as Microsoft and/or the analysts they employ. The benefits of digital are all well and good, but if it takes away the ability to have some choice in the matter--for example, who to buy from, the prices at which you pay, and the options to trade or sale ones purchase of licensed-ownership-- I don't know if it is ready to be implemented, yet. The thought of having to repurchase games that are already purchased and attached to ones account does, in fact, seem a bit "insane", per the Forbes article.




Checkout the Forbes article.



Thanks for reading. Thoughts, questions, comments, etc., let me know. More to come, so stay tuned.