>physical costs less than the code Is this okay to you?
I bought Factorio and Minecraft for less than $15 and got 1000s of hours out of each. They have never been physically printed.
it's weird, digital has no/minimal distribution costs and no ownership, why would it cost more? why would I ever buy digital if I have a choice?
the $5 gamestop bin was so ass that I never saw a single person ever pick anything from it
>>743833473The point is that you won't have a choice soon.
ughh, something, something, server costs?
>>743833473>why would it cost morebecause you won't do shit about it and the big corporation can get away with it, no really you can't refund it and your bitching won't change the price magically, most people will ALWAYS pick the shittier but more convenient option because we are just lazy (not in a sense of low productivity but we are just very good at conserving energy and will likely choose the path of least resistance)
>>743833394>Minecraft>never been physically printedPhysical versions of Minecraft have been for all the Xbox, Playstation, and Nintendo consoles since the Xbox 360 days. The game is on 22 different platforms, and probably a bunch of those have physical versions.
>>743833156of course this is why they want to kill physical so they can charge you full price even years after release
>>743833689buying a game from psn isn't even any easier than buying the same game physically from amazon so I don't get the laziness thing
>>743833726When it went physical, the price went up. Hmmmm....
i have never seen someone buy a POSA card with a specific game on it. i'm sure they're piss cheap to print but does anyone buy them?
>>743833156Economics 101: Supply and Demand does not exist in a digital storefront.If supply of a physical game is high, and demand low, they have to put it on sale to get rid of old stock. If supply is low and demand is high, then games become more expensive.But with digital you can just produce as many products as you want, whenever you want, and if they don't sell, doesn't matter, you're not spending much to keep it on the servers. You can keep the price at $70 indefinitely.
>>743833492I bought the original Odin Sphere(PS2) and Bleach Dark Souls(DS) from the $20 and under display at gamestop in the mid-2000's. Those were amazing games.
>>743833473retailers have an incentive to get rid of old physical stock and are willing to put deep discounts on them.with codes, that incentive goes away, as they can simply throw away old game codes that didn't sell with very little loss.
>>743833762>add credit card>add game to cart>purchase and checkout>all done entirely from your consoleyes the difference is marginal, but as I said people will always choose the shittier but even slightly more convenient option if they can
>>743834394That makes literally no sense whatsoever. Do you think retailers get digital codes for free or something?
>>743833473I have been asking this questions since the ps3 era where psn games were priced 70 instead of 60, they have always been 10 bucks more for seemingly no reason.
>>743833473These retailers can't just discount digital codes, they all run through an activation system owned and run by the publisher. Digital costs more because there is no competition, BL4 being $15 physically is exactly why they want to stop producing discs, because your ONLY option to play that game is buying it digitally. The only people defending this are bootlickers and shitposters.
>>743833473>, why would it cost more?Umm, lets no enter into antisemitic ideas
>>743833156Of course. Physical ownership chads deserve the better treatment
>>743833492I got Kotor 1 from it
>>743833394Because it's what's called a "captured market" meaning they can charge whatever the fuck they want because there would be no other option.
>>743837170Here every time a new game releases, they always have a 10€ discount on the physical cartridge or disc, meanwhile it's always full price on digital stores, you'd literally have to be braindead to not opt in for a physical copy of any game.I even got the mario 3d collection with a 10€ discount on release, when people were literally fighting to even get a copy a month after launch.
>>743836981>Do you think retailers get digital codes for free or something?Essentially yes. They're just like gift cards; they have a very low production cost VS game discs, and they're not a financial liability until sold.>Unsold gift cards are low-cost inventory (often under a couple dollars to produce, with intentional overproduction of 40-60%), creating minimal financial loss for stores—mainly just missed opportunity—since no cash or liability is involved until sold, after which breakage (unredeemed balances) and extra customer spending drive profits.>In contrast, unsold physical game discs carry higher risks and costs (~$6.50–$15+ per unit for manufacturing, packaging, and distribution), tying up capital with potential losses from discounting, returns, obsolescence, and thin margins (studios net far less than on digital sales), making them far less forgiving than the low-risk gift card model amid the industry's shift to digital.That being said, I'm not defending the shift to game codes. I would prefer a physical copy.
>>743840665Retard. And now do code in a box
eat the bugs
>>743841665>Code-in-box games (physical packaging with a download code, as Rockstar plans for GTA 6) sit in between: cheaper to produce than full discs (mainly box, insert, and code card, with low material costs and no disc pressing/shipping), easier to manage as unsold inventory than discs, but still occupy retail shelf space like physical products. Once sold, they function like digital (immediate revenue recognition for the digital portion, limited resale/used value, no physical media), offering retailers some traditional margins while reducing manufacturing risk and waste for publishers—making them a lower-risk hybrid than full discs but without gift cards’ breakage upside.I don't know why you're getting irate over this lol.
>>743840665This artist draws scat
>>743841674I will literally make them extinct fuck the ecosystem if necessary
>>743842094It makes no sense to say that digital is the future and cheaper, yet still sell games with a code in a box where retail gets the same 30% cut as before, only without the disc. It all means they want to get rid of ownership
>>743842580Game codes in a box are a short-term compromise as publishers transition to being completely digital. Obviously, it's better to just go completely digital from the start (from a publisher's perspective), but the backlash from doing that would be even bigger than what we're seeing right now.
>>743842947>but the backlashBruh, nobody cares about a game "code in a box." They will NEVER give up shelf space because it's way too valuable. It's all about ownership because third-party publishers have been selling code in a box games for more than 10 years now.
Guys! This just in, only 7 playstation games have sold more than 100,000 physical copies in the US this year. It's okay, physical can die now.
they hate physical because I can buy their game when it comes out and re-sell it once I finish playing it and make at least 75% of my money back, and they make no money on the second sale. They want to completely eliminate this so you're forced to only buy digital games on a storefront.
