Digital distribution SUCKS! Amirite?

#61Hicks233Posted 10/2/2012 6:29:32 PM
As an option it can be good for customers in terms of convenience and good for developers and publishers to remove physical production costs.

As the only way to buy a game though its crap.

As a tagged on excuse for drm (origin/steam) it's awful. Pee's all over the customer and oddly many people just lap it up.

Best digital store for pc games that I've seen is gog. No drm, no restrictions and it *gets* how to be good to the customer. If digital distribution followed gog's example I could certainly support it.

If it means removing a customers choice to physical releases *as an option where it's viable* though - then yes digital distribution blows.

It's no surprise that it would be more of a walled in garden on a console. Still sucks balls though.
---
http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=9458
Sheep are propper dumb, they run away when you go to stroke em
#62Rama_IIIPosted 10/2/2012 6:31:26 PM
Anyone against digital distribution is a teenager and/or console-only gamer.
---
The Garden Of Rama
Arthur C. Clarke is the one true God.
#63Megaman OmegaPosted 10/2/2012 6:31:39 PM
The PSPgo went to hell for exactly this reason. The device tries to discourage retail, yet relies on retail to actually sell the system. Retailers weren't pleased.
---
Kid Icarus: Uprising is a remake - DemonDog666
Only trolls and people who don't trust me ask for sources - DemonDog666
#64DesperateMonkeyPosted 10/2/2012 6:31:43 PM
strongo9 posted...
PC digital distribution? Awesome.

Console and handheld digital distribution? Not so awesome.


Tell me whats the big difference? I find games on XBLA far more straight forward to download and play than Steam, which often is only the FIRST DRM you have to deal with, has to install for a long time, has a ton of issues with playing offline, doesn't let you play if its in the middle of downloading a patch (so no you can't cancel and just keep playing) and so on.

If it wasn't for the prices and selection, I would much prefer XBLA.
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#65DarkZV2BetaPosted 10/2/2012 6:42:57 PM
DesperateMonkey posted...
Tell me whats the big difference? I find games on XBLA far more straight forward to download and play than Steam, which often is only the FIRST DRM you have to deal with, has to install for a long time, has a ton of issues with playing offline, doesn't let you play if its in the middle of downloading a patch (so no you can't cancel and just keep playing) and so on.

If it wasn't for the prices and selection, I would much prefer XBLA.


Steam games come preinstalled and only need to install redist packages for libraries they use. If you're up to date/already have those packages, shouldn't be a problem.
Playing offline has pretty much been completely fixed in the last few patches, from my experience. And yes, I have been pushed offline without warning. I'm using a rather short and not so secure ethernet cable in my PC because it's the only way both it and my classic Xbox can connect to the router.
You can opt not to auto-patch games if you want. Also, it's rather misleading to put it that way, since it lets you play all you want while it's downloading a patch for another game. There have also been changes to the steamapps folder that suggest that patches are going to be downloaded and then installed after, allowing the user to keep playing during a patch download.

Really, there are lots of issues with steam(slow, sometimes unstable, organization options suck, skin compatibility is a mess, ect), but the selection you picked is silly.
---
Also, lolz@SATA drives. You see, they make these things called "heat," which kills consoles.
-darkjedilink
#66Virus66Posted 10/2/2012 6:50:59 PM(edited)
I support the digital front for smaller games. However, full games are just a huge burden, especially considering console HDD space and download speeds. I bought a 500gb HDD for the PS3 but man, after about 2 years it was completely full. A 10gb download onto a console can take a long time for those without the best of the best internet available. fast enough speeds of internet is still not available to most areas outside of metro regions so many people will be excluded from these services. There should, and IMO always will, be a place for retail games. People enjoy collecting goods, and the opportunity to resell or lend your goods is always an issue. And servers will not always be available to re-download games. What will happen 2 generations from now when you want to access your digital copy of a game only to find that Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo no longer has it up? Account corruption is a big problem I've encountered that has lost me a lot of content on my 360. There are a lot of issues that can pop up and unless they get completely ironed out, digital only cannot proceed
#67NerdimusPrimePosted 10/2/2012 6:45:26 PM
I think having digital distribution as an option is great but there are many problems to it being the sole distribution point. Without an option for physical distribution you effectively say " no high-speed internet= no gaming". Without the competing physical format there is no incentive for gaming companies to offer a lower price point, even if it's saving them money. As long as we are still gaming with consoles there will be an option for disc-based gaming.
---
Tua mater gerit caligas.
#68singhellotakuPosted 10/2/2012 7:26:20 PM
In general I agree, but at the same time I can't think of the last time I played an actual wii or psp game, without the ps1 games on the psn store and the virtual console I would have got rid of my wii, 3ds, and psp years ago.
#69DesperateMonkeyPosted 10/2/2012 7:28:49 PM
DarkZV2Beta posted...
DesperateMonkey posted...
Tell me whats the big difference? I find games on XBLA far more straight forward to download and play than Steam, which often is only the FIRST DRM you have to deal with, has to install for a long time, has a ton of issues with playing offline, doesn't let you play if its in the middle of downloading a patch (so no you can't cancel and just keep playing) and so on.

If it wasn't for the prices and selection, I would much prefer XBLA.


Steam games come preinstalled and only need to install redist packages for libraries they use. If you're up to date/already have those packages, shouldn't be a problem.
Playing offline has pretty much been completely fixed in the last few patches, from my experience. And yes, I have been pushed offline without warning. I'm using a rather short and not so secure ethernet cable in my PC because it's the only way both it and my classic Xbox can connect to the router.
You can opt not to auto-patch games if you want. Also, it's rather misleading to put it that way, since it lets you play all you want while it's downloading a patch for another game. There have also been changes to the steamapps folder that suggest that patches are going to be downloaded and then installed after, allowing the user to keep playing during a patch download.

Really, there are lots of issues with steam(slow, sometimes unstable, organization options suck, skin compatibility is a mess, ect), but the selection you picked is silly.


Except the things I mentioned are actual problems that I run into all the time. Your problems I don't run into at all. I have steam on my SSD and it is fast. Stability might be the only issue here as it sometimes stops responding or hangs at the logging in screen. Basically you are complaining mostly about peanuts while I am complaining about actual problems that have repeatedly stopped me from playing games (especially on extended holidays in remote areas that have no internet).
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#70iammaxhailmePosted 10/2/2012 7:38:20 PM
DD > discs
---
Best weapon combo in tf2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oUWPbS4450&feature=channel_video_title
http://www.last.fm/user/iammax