4 ms·

I love Xbox game pass streaming, for many of the reasons I like streaming music, tv, and movies. It’s cheap to try things- I can fire up a new game without wai

I love Xbox game pass streaming, for many of the reasons I like streaming music, tv, and movies. It’s cheap to try things- I can fire up a new game without waiting to download 40+ GB. If the play engages me I’ll keep playing, if not I’ll move on. I’m not a very good with high speed games anyways, so the increased latency isn’t generally noticeable in the games I play.

jonhohle 3y ago
The issue isn’t about trying out games, it’s about having access to those games in 5, 10, 20 years or later. There is a growing list of digital only titles that are no longer available to new players and may be unavailable to people who “bought” them. I have a bricked Wii with digital games that are tied to the physical console, not any account. There is no way to recover them. Steam has done a remarkable job staying open for 20 years (My copy of Half Life 2 is right where I left it). Sony has done a reasonable job. I don’t know about Microsoft. Nintendo has failed several times, but may have finally figured it out with the Switch. I know I can buy discs and cartridges from any previous era and as long as I have a system (or emulator), I can play them, lend them, or sell them. Digital versions allow me to play, but for how long. I can’t lend or sell them. If I get the urge to play Resogun in 2033 and don’t have it downloaded, am I going to be able to? I do think there may be a generational component to it as well. I’ve always thought Gen X is more tied to the idea of “owning” a copy (music, movies, games), while younger generations are more comfortable with digital only releases, or even subscription catalogues that change over time as the primary means of entertainment.
- bbarn 3y ago
  The majority of new games can't work offline, and having a physical disc is now so rare that companies are selling game boxes and deluxe editions that contain no software at all - not even a download code, since you need to buy it with an account anyway.
  - arcanemachiner 3y ago
    What exactly are they selling if there's no game inside?
    - goosedragons 3y ago
      A lot of collector's editions aren't including the game anymore. It's just knickknacks. Statue, stickers, steel book to put the disc if you bought that version. That kind of thing. The standard physical editions still include a disc or cartridge and occasionally just a code.
    - Tsiklon 3y ago
      Generally the disk in the box has to have something on it that runs (It may not even be the game). This is due to the lead time involved in pressing and validating the gold master that becomes the game disk. This allows the developers to continue working on their launch day ‘patch’. With the development cycle and Sony and Microsoft’s distribution setup as it is now, physical copies effectively act as a token to play the game only. Using Cyberpunk 2077 as an example a recent patch to the game mandated a nearly full redownload of the whole game on PS5 and Xbox Series - ~60+GB. On PC it was ~5G.
    - Arrath 3y ago
      A little bootstrap installer and license key that lets you download the whole-ass game, generally.
  - autoexec 3y ago
    > The majority of new games can't work offline source?
- goosedragons 3y ago
  Microsoft has done a decent job. Digital purchases made on 360 that are compatible with Xbox One/Series consoles have transferred over and you often get the PC and Xbox version of a title for buying a game in the Windows Store (and get the PC version if it is available in the Windows Store if you buy on Xbox).
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  In theory I'm interested. In reality, 99% of games I care about will be remastered/ported or even remade 20 years later. $60 in the grand scheme of 20 years isn't even an afterthought. I'm fine enough with piracy being the nuclear option if we run into situations like with F-Zero or Legends of Dragoon or whatnot. But there are official options for almost every other game I would be interested in re-visiting. I still like owning a disc the same way I like owning a physical book, but I'd be lying if I said I ever popped in a disc for any 10+ year old game. It's more of a sentimental gesture to display on my shelf than a means of preservation.
Jochim 3y ago
Game streaming is a great option to have but it incentivises the same behaviour we've seen from companies that move to a SAAS model: Charge a monthly fee and remove the option to own the product. Not actually owning the games is a problem. Nvidia's service, GeForce Now, originally allowed you to play any game you had purchased on Steam, under the theory that you were using your license to play it. Their library was decimated when that was challenged legally. Most of the services don't offer the same modding options as you would have on PC either. If I were to pick between the two, I'd rather we move towards having more control over the things we purchase than less.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  too bad the choice isnt ours and we've long seen how other audiences in other media have chosen. People simply don't care about those things as a majority
  - Jochim 3y ago
    I hesitate to blame the audience when vendors are all too keen to force the transition themselves. See Adobe, Microsoft, and Atlassian's discontinuing/restriction of on premises licenses for their products. People often seem to have a general sense of helplessness when it comes to large businesses, why get upset about it when there's nothing you can do? I don't see anything unless people find the motivation to make it a political issue. A personal anecdote that I think exemplifies the problem: I was once double invoiced for custom charges by FedEx. The phone number on the invoice lead to a phone tree where every option simply hung up. Depending on where I looked there were three different email addresses, and an online form; only one provided an automated response and my first three emails were ignored entirely. Their customer support line was unable to connect to that department. At one point I was given an individual's work email and received no response either. Despite this, I continued to receive past due, and final notice letters from them. It took months and hours of my time to resolve a problem they created, had I not persisted, I would have had to deal with collections and credit agencies. Why should we allow companies behave this way without repercussions?

jonhohle 3y ago

The issue isn’t about trying out games, it’s about having access to those games in 5, 10, 20 years or later. There is a growing list of digital only titles that are no longer available to new players and may be unavailable to people who “bought” them. I have a bricked Wii with digital games that are tied to the physical console, not any account. There is no way to recover them. Steam has done a remarkable job staying open for 20 years (My copy of Half Life 2 is right where I left it). Sony has done a reasonable job. I don’t know about Microsoft. Nintendo has failed several times, but may have finally figured it out with the Switch. I know I can buy discs and cartridges from any previous era and as long as I have a system (or emulator), I can play them, lend them, or sell them. Digital versions allow me to play, but for how long. I can’t lend or sell them. If I get the urge to play Resogun in 2033 and don’t have it downloaded, am I going to be able to? I do think there may be a generational component to it as well. I’ve always thought Gen X is more tied to the idea of “owning” a copy (music, movies, games), while younger generations are more comfortable with digital only releases, or even subscription catalogues that change over time as the primary means of entertainment.

bbarn 3y ago
The majority of new games can't work offline, and having a physical disc is now so rare that companies are selling game boxes and deluxe editions that contain no software at all - not even a download code, since you need to buy it with an account anyway.
- arcanemachiner 3y ago
  What exactly are they selling if there's no game inside?
  - goosedragons 3y ago
    A lot of collector's editions aren't including the game anymore. It's just knickknacks. Statue, stickers, steel book to put the disc if you bought that version. That kind of thing. The standard physical editions still include a disc or cartridge and occasionally just a code.
  - Tsiklon 3y ago
    Generally the disk in the box has to have something on it that runs (It may not even be the game). This is due to the lead time involved in pressing and validating the gold master that becomes the game disk. This allows the developers to continue working on their launch day ‘patch’. With the development cycle and Sony and Microsoft’s distribution setup as it is now, physical copies effectively act as a token to play the game only. Using Cyberpunk 2077 as an example a recent patch to the game mandated a nearly full redownload of the whole game on PS5 and Xbox Series - ~60+GB. On PC it was ~5G.
  - Arrath 3y ago
    A little bootstrap installer and license key that lets you download the whole-ass game, generally.
- autoexec 3y ago
  > The majority of new games can't work offline source?
goosedragons 3y ago
Microsoft has done a decent job. Digital purchases made on 360 that are compatible with Xbox One/Series consoles have transferred over and you often get the PC and Xbox version of a title for buying a game in the Windows Store (and get the PC version if it is available in the Windows Store if you buy on Xbox).
johnnyanmac 3y ago
In theory I'm interested. In reality, 99% of games I care about will be remastered/ported or even remade 20 years later. $60 in the grand scheme of 20 years isn't even an afterthought. I'm fine enough with piracy being the nuclear option if we run into situations like with F-Zero or Legends of Dragoon or whatnot. But there are official options for almost every other game I would be interested in re-visiting. I still like owning a disc the same way I like owning a physical book, but I'd be lying if I said I ever popped in a disc for any 10+ year old game. It's more of a sentimental gesture to display on my shelf than a means of preservation.

Jochim 3y ago

Game streaming is a great option to have but it incentivises the same behaviour we've seen from companies that move to a SAAS model: Charge a monthly fee and remove the option to own the product. Not actually owning the games is a problem. Nvidia's service, GeForce Now, originally allowed you to play any game you had purchased on Steam, under the theory that you were using your license to play it. Their library was decimated when that was challenged legally. Most of the services don't offer the same modding options as you would have on PC either. If I were to pick between the two, I'd rather we move towards having more control over the things we purchase than less.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
too bad the choice isnt ours and we've long seen how other audiences in other media have chosen. People simply don't care about those things as a majority
- Jochim 3y ago
  I hesitate to blame the audience when vendors are all too keen to force the transition themselves. See Adobe, Microsoft, and Atlassian's discontinuing/restriction of on premises licenses for their products. People often seem to have a general sense of helplessness when it comes to large businesses, why get upset about it when there's nothing you can do? I don't see anything unless people find the motivation to make it a political issue. A personal anecdote that I think exemplifies the problem: I was once double invoiced for custom charges by FedEx. The phone number on the invoice lead to a phone tree where every option simply hung up. Depending on where I looked there were three different email addresses, and an online form; only one provided an automated response and my first three emails were ignored entirely. Their customer support line was unable to connect to that department. At one point I was given an individual's work email and received no response either. Despite this, I continued to receive past due, and final notice letters from them. It took months and hours of my time to resolve a problem they created, had I not persisted, I would have had to deal with collections and credit agencies. Why should we allow companies behave this way without repercussions?