| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (26)

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 6:53PM sand0789 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The big question is whether or not any of those savings will be passed on to me. If I am still paying $60 for a game only now I only get code, count me out. I'd gladly drive to the store for the disc, manual, and case.

If it is just an option, I'm fine with it.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 7:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Accidental word omission in first sentence!

I hate Steam with a passion, but I love Half-Life with the same amoun of passion. Since the two have become joined at the hip, it becomes sort of neutral to me.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 7:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with jakey here. I prefer to "own" things unless it's (Significantly) cheaper not to.

If the savings are just 3 bucks, then forget about it.


$45 bucks is the amount publishers (or developers) get from retailers for each $60 dollar game sale; they are jumping the middleman, but that's not all: They are saving the costs of discs, royalties, logistics, some departments, perhaps even jumping publishers AND some marketing, management and financial costs. So the final cost of the product once it's uploaded on a server should be somewhat less than it does right now. Considering it becomes cheaper, and relatively easier to access for impulse buys and such, demand should increase and revenues should too.

So, a game that right now costs $60 bucks should cost no more than $45 bucks online, and that's exaggerating. $30 dollars would be nice, but that's dreamin' too. $40 should be the sweet spot for new games, and very old games could end up costing, ideally, $1 or $2 bucks, but that's dreaming again; $5 dollars will probably be the cheapest you get.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 8:19PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Speaking of digital distribution, I just dloaded Myst Online (for the Mac, to boot) through GameTap for the low cost of ... 99 freakin' cents.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 8:27PM KingBroly said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Until a majority of people in all gaming countries have broadband/wireless download speeds of 200/150mbps this cannot come to pass. Simply because of game sizes.

I'm not going to spend a week to download a 50gb game to my system, and I'm confident I'm not alone. I want it as fast, or faster than me going to the store, getting and paying for a game, and coming home. Otherwise, it's not worth it.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 7:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
THe thought of having to DL 4-20GB worth of data is not that appealing. Especially on launch day.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 7:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nice post picture. :)

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 7:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think the idea sounds good on paper (heh, old tech), but in implimentation, it'll be a lot harder than the current model we use.

I share the same sentiment as most of you; I prefer to own things and I am very leery of waiting for a new game to download. When I downloaded Superman Returns on XBL, it took well over 2 hours than if I had driven to Blockbuster and rented it within 20 minutes, max. I think the infrastructure of downloading needs a massive overhaul if it is going to accomadate b/millions of downloads for gamers -- because even if you aren't getting the most recent game, you could be downloading something else and that sucks up bandwidth too.

Oh, and Superman Returns is still on my harddrive, over 2 months later... 7 gigs gone.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 7:41PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
hate hate hate digital distribution... its not like the whole world has internet nor will i always have internet with me... this is only viable in a world where there is everywhere on the world wifi with at least 1 Gb/s downstream and an assurance that the server you bought the game on will never ever in a million years go offline and is always available.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 8:04PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
*sweet Indiana Jones Reference Pic*

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 8:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Online distribution is great for people that, like me, live in the far off continent of South America and the like.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 8:19PM dibs oddjob said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They also forgot to mention another key negative aspect: resale value. I bought Twilight Princess on launch day, played it for 3 months, then sold it on eBay for a considerable amount of what I paid for it. This isn't easily done with digital distribution, if at all.

It may be the future, but not the near future, the infrastructure is not there to replace all gaming discs.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 9:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i will NEVER download a game when i can go to a store and buy it (even if it costs $5-10 more). im a VG collector and i dont want me collection do be a 3.5 inch harddrive. EVER. i like stuff not code.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 12:18AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
spelled "to" and "my" wrong LOL

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 9:22PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They already have it Dansk, it's called Bit Torrent. :D

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 10:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Everyone pointed to the success of the iTunes store, and how digital downloads have really come to replace the traditional brick & mortar sales of albums."

Except that approximately 95% of all album sales are still comprised of physical CD's.

It's just another example of hype trumping facts. The stuff you read on the internet (including the quote above) would lead you to think that iTunes must be making up the lion's share of music sales. The fact is they're in like 7th place among online retailers, and way, way behind B&M stores like Wal-Mart.

Does that mean iTunes won't continue to make headway and gain market share over time? No. But they've got a LONG way to go before they're more than a blip on the radar in the grand scheme of things. The hype going on there bears no relation whatsoever to the actual market.

Same is true of video game sales, and will be for a very long time. Consider that music makes for the *easiest* medium to distribute digitally, because of the small size of the files and ironically because all that internet piracy has conditioned people to just listening to digital files rather than necessarily *having* to buy a CD. Even so, digital downloads only make up a fraction of the total market. But games are big, and the collector market larger. Those are two big factors working against digital distribution of games.

Bottom line is it's going to be a while. There are plenty of us who have sworn to never buy *anything* as a digital download, because we like actually owning stuff and all the inherent benefits that entails.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 10:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If I can't own it, I don't want it. I also collect Video Games and I have no interest in downloaded dribble. Very few people I know even use the internet connection (They own a better system, its called a computer. Unlike game systems its possibilitys are endless) and as familys spread out into the wilds of my state there is no faster connection than really bad dial-up (try downloading 7 gigs at 12kps). I also know familys who won't let their kids have the access to the internet that these systems allow. And if I want an older game at a cheap price, hey there's a pawn shop that sells older games at $6.00 a pop. I got god of war for $6 one month after it was out.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 11:27PM erh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Bandwidth is not free. 4GB of bandwidth costs most web providers more than manufacturing a DVD. I just thought I'd point that out.

Posted: Mar 20th 2007 11:51PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Digital distribution will never replace buying hard goods. When online stores came about there was a big scare that people will never go out shopping to buy things any more. That turned out false because people LIKE to go out and buy things. I LIKE to go to bestbuy and buy a movie or game. People want to have a reason to leave their house, and a little reward to take home with them. It's silly human nature, but I love it.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 2:54AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Horse armor"??? It's called "barding" thank you very much... *rolls eyes*

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 5:28AM BurntMeatloaf said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Digital distribution is for "little" stuff only. I can't believe game developers were bitching about Microsoft's [now defunct] 50MB limit.

I also don't care what the UELA says -- I want to own a game, not just license the right to use it. If I can't back it up or somehow transfer my license to another console (current technology, or next gen), than Ima not too happy.

Photo is very appropriate. Good one.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 3:12PM nrcole said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
For the same reason I refuse to buy music online, I could never see myself buying games through e-distribution. There is something to be said for owning an actual physical copy of a game as opposed to files on a hard drive which you could lose in a crash. Plus as DRM has shown us, "owning" a song you've bought from a place like CONNECT or Rhapsody is nowhere near the same as "owning" the actual disk. Plus I don't trust publishers to lower prices reasonably if they were to put their entire libraries online.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 9:23AM solomonrex said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Am I the only one who loves steam? Used properly, it's the best way to go, downloading levels as you go along and offering a wide selection of old and obscure games (gametap is the leader here, of course). There's a reason you can still buy the original half-life and the original Starcraft: online revenue. Without the online aspect, the publishers have no incentive to continue to support and sell old games. But Steam makes it worthwhile to offer Half-Life at $10.

We need Steam to succeed, so that eventually we can buy Alpha Centauri easily, even 10 years after its release. It helps avoid piracy and encourages a long-tail retail effect. And no one else seems to be selling PC games lately.

Why are casual games so popular online? Accessibility: quick downloads, generous demo modes and broadly appealing simple gameplay. It's the PC version of Wii.

And for A-list games, the infrastructure of level-loading and shared code will eventually be in place so that Steam and similar services operate seamlessly with little download time. Then it will be really good.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 11:58AM acefondu said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hope this doesn't happen, my net connection sucks. It would take days to download a game. Not to mention doesn't BluRay discs hold 40+Gig? 1 PS3 game and you're done! Bad idea, bad idea.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 12:18PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i got a buddy who's bedroom looks like that shot at the end of "raiders", but instead of historical relics, the boxes are filled with toys and comic books.

Posted: Mar 21st 2007 2:17PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I downloaded the demo for Dreamfall, which was actually the entire game (with most content locked off). They charge $40 to unlock it. That's more expensive than Amazon or buying it in the store. Pretty ridiculous.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW