Yesterday I don't think I made my message entirely clear. The header of yesterday's article, which was appropriately titled "Let's Talk - 'Going All Digital'" was meant to reflect exactly that. The point I was trying to make at the core of it all is that not all digital practices are bad, but that the ones in which you pay full price just to have the rights to play the games, or use the online services are. Not only that, but I also stick by the possible scenario in which gaming companies could go under in the near future. The fact that modern-day consoles are wholly geared towards online usage greatly limits their offline functionality, and in doing so presents a huge problem should a gaming company lose interest in providing their online services. Consoles these days, in comparison to retro consoles often times will not fully function without the support of the applied online network. Whether it be Sony's PSN, Microsoft's Xbox LIVE, or Nintendo's whatever you will be hard pressed to re-download, and use past purchased digital content, or games in general once the online services are void. In retro days with retro consoles we did not have this issue, because those consoles were grounded, and fully functional in the offline scenario.
I honestly feel that the digital practices being put into place are unjust, and unfair to the consumer. If the digital games were significantly less in price than the physical counterparts then that would be a different story. Unfortunately you'll find companies charging full price for digital games, music, and movies that are limited by an "End User License Agreement". Owning the right to use a digital product is not the same as actually owning it. Plain, and simple. In the end with physical, or digital copies in place the whole "Have & Have Not" issue is still very valid. We only have the rights to play the game, and use the online services. The newest gaming consoles have already had their players agree to an "End User License Agreement" in order for them to be able to play on the consoles, and enjoy the online gaming that it offers. All you now own as a result is the right to use a sophisticated piece of technology that you payed hundreds of dollars for as well as that piece of technology itself. Without the online gaming services, or the ability to play the games that the console offers that expensive gaming console/piece of technology is nothing but a brick. That's the facts. The same goes for tablets, smartphones, PCs, and Macs.
On the exact opposite end of the spectrum retro consoles are still very much viable, and very much playable to this day. You literally own those retro games. You own the ability to play on those retro gaming consoles. Not even Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo can take your retro gaming away. You wanna know why? It's because retro gaming is a mostly offline experience. It does not carry binding legal agreements, online limitations, and hardware/software that will become void once the gaming companies go under. Think about that for a sec. Going "All Digital", and going fully online is the worst thing that could ever, and did ever happen to gaming. It makes the consumer a slave to digital technology, and online offerings. In order to enjoy the entertainment options at hand you either agree to the binding legal agreements, and pony up the dough for the services, or do without. That is what the world of entertainment has become. Whether it be gaming, movies, music, or streaming content it's all the same.
Once again I'll stop the rant there. Feel free to comment, or whatever. I hope this time you fully understand what it is I was trying to say in regards to "Going All Digital". Unlike the rest of the entertainment industry I'm looking out for you, my friends.
Your Last Samurai,
Brad Carver (OtakuDante)