That's too bad. No disc equals no buy. Own or die.
Gaming is one of the cheapest hobbies one can have. A $70 AAA game costs less than one mediocre dinner out. And I don’t even personally buy any games at that full price, I try to buy games that cost less than a Starbucks run.
In my entire nearly 20 years gaming on Steam I’ve only spent something like $4,000 on PC gaming software. Steam tells me this in an account report. That’s less than the average American spends on their car in just one year - for a depreciating asset that is eventually worthless.
The percentage of games that have been “revoked” has been minimal. I am aware of some delisted games like a particular multiplayer-only tech demo-ish title that I enjoyed (Shattered Horizon).
My old Nintendo eShop games on previous consoles can’t be redownloaded but they can still be backed up and played and I’ve always received ample advanced notice.
To me, “own or die” is quite dramatic and would be overbearing on my hobby. I recognize that all these experiences are temporary. I can’t go back in time and play Skyrim like it’s the first time I played it. That experience has depreciated. If I go back and play a game like Red Steel it will be pointless because the game is better at representing a point in time in video game development rather than a game that is worth playing in 2024.
Don’t be surprised if the next consoles ditch discs entirely, but my advice to any gamer is to not let that line in the sand stop them from enjoying what they enjoy. Because this hobby is cheaper than basically anything else you can do in real life that is far more ephemeral.
Either in USA the cost of life is very strange, or you are making up numbers.
At 70$ per person in expensive western europe it would be a VERY VERY FANCY restaurant.
Also eating isn't a hobby.
You can buy a decent guitar for 500€ and use it for the next 50 years. Which can't be done with games you don't own since they disappear.
I went somewhere (slightly) fancy and it was slightly over $100 for 2 people with drinks. I live in an expensive area though (around Boston)
I think in cost per hour games are a great value if that 70$ game holds your attention for 20+ hours. I suspect 500 Euro gets a pretty great guitar.
I guess you spend money where it’s important too you.
I don't normally eat by myself and would be paying for my wife to join me, and therefore it's the cost of two meals.
To me a fancy/good/special meal out is something that only a culinary school-trained chef with access to the restaurant supply chain can actually pull off.
I’m also thinking you didn’t include tax and 20% tip. “With drinks” implies at least two drinks per person? Or are we rationing, one per customer here? Do you tell your date they can’t order another glass of wine or can’t touch the cocktail menu, American light lagers only?
$50 a person with two drinks including tax and tip is like an evening at a chain restaurant like Texas Roadhouse or the Cheesecake Factory. Maybe not even that, you might even have to step down to Olive Garden.
Eating isn’t a hobby but eating out with service sure is.
No matter, this is all pedantry on your part. I already showed you that my ~$250/year gaming budget is relatively modest, and that’s coming from someone who doesn’t ever stop myself from buying a game I’m interested in.
If you have a single Netflix no-ads Ultra HD account you’re spending about the same cost on content you don’t get to keep the moment you shut the subscription off.
Hell, Amazon Prime charges $140 a year for basically nothing and 200 million people eat that shit up for breakfast.
And that's where you lose me. I have games from my childhood I still play. Some of those games are worth many times more than what I paid for them back then.
Video games are art, not a consumable you can charge by the hour for.
I think they are talking about modern games that do not have an endless shelf life like older ones can. With always-on DRM (like the game mentioned in the article), or games tied to an online service (where servers inevitably shut down like GameSpy or Destiny), or older games purchased on a market that closes (like WiiU shop or M$ book shop recently), you effectively lose access to the game forever.
Of course there are exceptions like Battlefront 2 where patches update ancient games or emulators that allow playing older games, but this isn't the norm for PC games.
What I am saying is that, in practice, my digital game library hasn’t worked that way. Even the most egregious shutdowns (ahem…Nintendo) have left me with a way to save my purchases.
And even if I’m screwed over, I’ll still not feeling very screwed over versus the amount I paid and the enjoyment I got. Or even if I’m really screwed there’s probably a trivially easy workaround like emulation.
Now I consider physical games to be a non-paying tenant in my limited real estate.
You seem to imply here that "disk=buy", but that's not even remotely true anymore. I don't know anything about this game, but it seems like this is yet another one that doesn't work offline [1]. So having the disk still doesn't mean you own it.
There are still games where disk=own of course, but using that as your metric of ownership would be incorrect.
1: https://old.reddit.com/r/granturismo/comments/110chtg/can_i_...
If they can’t ban players and bots they won’t survive.
IMO the paranoid focus way too much on DRM.
Xbox people have said quite openly that the releasing everything on PC is their game preservation strategy a few times.