• Arcane2077@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    “It’s worth noting the Resident Evil and Monster Hunter maker counts Game-Key card sales as digital.”

    We chose to make physical releases unavailable on the most popular platforms, and, completely coincidentally, found they make up a minority of sales.

    • mursejoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Also the RE series is widely popular on Steam. We play almost everything Capcom makes and it’s always on PC.

    • raze2012@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      Now that’s weird. Is a ps5 disc digital because you need to download the data day one anyway? I don’t think the packing and manufacturing companies would agree with this

      • pory@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Game key cards (and discs for update-reliant or online-focused games) are in a weird place. The main reasons people claim to care about physical games are “preservation” and “used games” and those don’t actually overlap.

        From the preservation standpoint, GCKs and discs that don’t have the whole game are both pretty shit. There’s an argument that buggy broken v1.0 is better than nothing and that’s objectively true, but neither of these things provide actual software preservation in the face of (for example) storefront closure or account banning. GCKs and all discs are useless for preservation of online games, of course: what are you doing with that Highguard or Concord disc? A further argument is that even a complete game burned to a disc that relies on DRM isn’t truly preserved as it won’t outlive the death of the DRM boxes themselves, when every Nintendo 3DS dies you’re not going to be able to play that pristine physical copy of Pokémon Moon. Used physical games themselves are also a physical product that can decay or be damaged or lost - you can’t say that a game with a million extant discs being traded around between various people is a “preserved game”.

        A completely different appeal for physical games is simply the ability to resell. Your gaming budget goes a longer way if instead of spending $60 three times to play three games, you’re spending $45 three times and also selling the games for $30 after you’re done with them. You could play ten first-party single player Nintendo games legally on the Switch for $0 if you always bought used and sold the used copies for the same price you bought them for. Game-Key cards and discs for incomplete/online-only games do facilitate this perfectly, though GCKs lose all value when the CDN of the storefront closes and discs only lose most value in this situation.

        • raze2012@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Yeah, there’s 3 different lenses here. Preservation, ownership, and piracy.

          It’s a bit of a hot take, but I don’t value “preservation” in the way most gamers do. I prefer it instead of not, but my lens here is as simple as “piracy will always be the true preservation mechanism”. The ability to back up your games is legal and technically that game lying on my computer is “preservation”. But preservation without distribution is gatekeeping in a way. Distribution is what ensures true preservation, but we cross into piracy.

          What I do value is ownership and as you said, Game Key Cards give you all the benefits of ownership at the cost of preservation. It can theoretically be useless one day, and when that happens I see it as free game to pirate. But technically I believe even online Wii games you own can still be downloaded, despite not being able to buy on the store anymore. So we’ll see how long that lasts.

          • pory@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Piracy is the most consistent and solid form of preservation, definitely. Well technically piracy is a subset of “DRM-free software” which is the true holy grail (all the advantages of piracy, with total legality and legitimacy!). To preserve software, it must be able to be copied instead of tied interminably to something perishable like a disc or single hard drive. Or, for that matter, a single online account that might suffer anything from a banning to deletion for inactivity to just “lost password and forgot the email and can’t get access anymore” to “the company that operates the servers the account uses no longer exists”. And piracy needs to be happening during the release windows of the software, not “be respectful and wait 5 years” - the only reason retro console libraries are as well-kept as they are is because people were dumping games to play for free back in the day.

            Those Wii redownloads are tied to specific console IDs, and those console NANDs are just as vulnerable to damage or deletion or loss as normal physical media is. They’re even worse than account-based DRM’d media since account-based media at least tolerates hardware damage or loss (but not account bans or service EOL). Thankfully, every digital purchase on Nintendo platforms other than Switch 2 is fully preserved and made available. This would be impossible if Nintendo’s anti-piracy measures had ever worked for an entire console generation. Switch 2 games, on the other hand, are currently “loseable”. You might be reasonably sure that Nintendo will never delist DK Bananza until (insert threshold where you think it’d be acceptable here) but game preservationists also care about game versions. And it’s always possible that Nintendo finally managed to nail it and piracy for Switch 2 won’t happen ever (or for a sufficient definition of “ever”).