Skip to main content
Header image

Wave goodbye to physical games

Opinion by Philip Morton, published on Sunday 13th December 2009

Take a look at the games in your collection. How many of those will you never play again? Half? Three quarters? What eventually happens to all the games that sit on our shelves? We either bin them or sell them on to someone else who still wants to play them. If you don’t throw them in the trash, someone else eventually will. Maybe they might be lucky enough to end up in a collection or in storage where they’ll sit for years, but their fate is ultimately sealed. Most of all the videogames ever produced are probably in landfill right now, and it wasn’t just Atari that put them there.

screenshot

Before games arrive at your house, they have to get there. They begin their journey at the manufacturing plant, which is usually in the continent that they’re being sold. If you buy your games in the UK, for instance, they usually come with “Made in Europe” on the back of the box. This isn’t too bad, since they’re not coming all the way from Southeast Asia, but they still have to go to distribution depots, central retailer warehouses and to individual shops. Whether you buy online or go into a shop to buy it, your game still has to travel the distance, which usually works out to be hundreds or thousands of miles in total.

Your videogames have a comfortable ride though. Take a look at the standard DVD and Blu-ray cases that most games come in these days; they’re huge! Given the amount of space that a disc occupies, the size of the boxes that they are sold in is far too big. Imagine all the oil that could be saved from not producing the excess plastic that goes into making oversized videogame cases. Consider all of the manufacturing that went into the production of the each manual, all of which is totally unnecessary.

screenshot

Videogame packaging could be substantially reduced and the benefits of doing so are good for everyone. If games are smaller, you can fit more of them into trucks and on to planes. Fewer vehicles transporting our games means few emissions and lower shipping costs for manufacturers. This is something Apple has been doing over the last few years to great effect, so why can’t the games industry do the same?

There is one very obvious answer to these problems and it’s already here: digital downloads. When games only exist in the form of bits in memory, there is almost zero manufacturing and transportation costs. There’s nothing going into landfill and the only emissions are from the electricity that you were using anyway. Digital downloads reduce costs for videogame producers, make piracy prevention easier and cut out the second hand market, where publishers and developers see no returns. For the customer, games can be accessed almost instantly and never take up excess space in our homes.

screenshot

Of course, this is already happening. Steam has been a major success on the PC, as has the App Store on the iPhone and iPod Touch. Smaller games and updates can be downloaded on all three consoles and Sony’s PSP Go was released with no UMD drive. The move to digital downloads is a trend that’s been coming for a long time and having a similar effect on the music and film industries. So what’s the problem here?

The next generation. The vast majority of the games we buy are on the main three consoles and when their replacements arrive in two or three years, Internet speeds may not be quick enough to handle the size of games. At the moment, dual-layer discs can contain 8.5GB and 50GB on the Xbox 360 and PS3 respectively. While a 10Mbps connection could download an Xbox 360 game in around 2 hours, it could take up to 11 hours for a PS3 game if it used the full capacity. If next-generation games need to use close to the full capacity of a Blu-ray disc or even more, then most Internet connections would struggle to cope. It would be quicker to just go and buy a physical disc than to wait for the download.

screenshot

The videogames industry is already one of the most sustainable. Although the three main console manufacturers repeatedly score low in Greenpeace environmental surveys (especially Nintendo), these don’t take into account the fact that many consoles have a lifespan of 4-5 years. If they’re built well, then you only need to buy one per generation. This lifespan is in stark contrast to most consumer electronics such as computers, phones and music players, which are often replaced every couple of years.

More can be done though. Videogames are one of many products that have no need to physically exist. Replacing discs with digital downloads is beneficial for consumers, publishers, developers and manufacturers. It may seem like a trivial issue, but we’re soon going to be living in a world, if we aren’t already, where these issues really matter. The sooner that physical games can be consigned to the history books, the better.

Share this article

Comments

  • James

    wrote on Sunday 13th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I’ve been arguing for this for years, but whilst your concern is internet speeds, mine is piracy. Digital games still suffer from it - some developers for the iPhone/iPod Touch are registering 90% piracy rates. Their latest idea is to give the game away for free and then charge for updates from within the game. Perhaps if videogames went fully digital, then they could incorporate the idea already banded about with regards to eliminating demo’s by releasing the first 45 minutes free of charge, and then offering payment plans for extended play beyond that point.

    Either way, and as much as I love the second-hand market, games cost an absolute fortune to make and distribute, and the developers need the money. They miss out on hundreds of millions through pre-owned sales, and so by giving them more control over their products, the industry should grow and grow.

  • Joshua

    wrote on Sunday 13th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I’m an old school gamer, so I take (a wee bit too much, probably) pride in my game collection. If given the option to digitally download a title or pick a hard copy somewhere else (ebay, etc), I will always pick the second option.

    *shrug*

    You don’t want to see my closet though…(well, if you’re reading this site, maybe you do)

  • Benny

    wrote on Sunday 13th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Where’d you pluck the “Probably around 90% of all the videogames ever produced are in landfill right now” figure from?

  • Matt Wadleigh

    wrote on Sunday 13th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I don’t know where he got the number from, but I bet at least 50% of the games I’ve purchased over the years have landed there.

  • Raymond

    wrote on Monday 14th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Although I agree that digital media has numerous benefits, I still prefer physical games.
    I’ve been gaming since the 8-bit Nintendo days, and opening a new game then going through the manual has always been a joy to me. Another reason is that I like to collect games, my collection now numbering in the hundreds. I’d rather display my collection on my shelf than have all the games on a USB stick inside my desk. It’s the same way I would rather read a traditional book instead of a e-book.

  • Relayer71

    wrote on Monday 14th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Having the option to get a packaged game OR DL is the best solution. Some of us like to COLLECT games and appreciate things like manuals, box artwork and extras. Sure, I don’t play some older games but it’s nice to have them in my possession… they’re pieces of history, things I can share with my kids when they’re grown ups and their children.

    The right thing to do is revise the boxes themselves - I agree they don’t need to be as large as they are considering the media contained within, same with DVD boxes.

    Right now I’m buying physical copies of the games that matter to me and downloading games I’m not sure about or find great deals on.

    Sort of like with music downloading, sometimes it’s cheap and convenient, but if I come across an album (or game) that blows my mind (or I happen to like a lot), I WILL get a physical copy eventually. Just to “have” it.

  • James

    wrote on Monday 14th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I’ll tell you something else as well - if games go digital, then so should gamesaves; I’m fed up of having saves corrupt or being deleted, they should be saved to an online server, the same as GMail.

  • Wasp

    wrote on Monday 14th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Has anyone here actually ever thrown a game in the bin before? I never have. I never really thought of games as disposable as that, I’m sure most people either sell or keep their old games, don’t they?

    Although I did throw a load of PS1 and PS2 demo discs away. I really regret that now. I want to play Tombi again. :(

  • James

    wrote on Tuesday 15th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I’m sure Phil means companies throwing away old stock; notice how GAME’s entire stock of PSOne pre-owned titles disappeared overnight?

  • Glenn

    wrote on Tuesday 15th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Im all for digital distribution, however we are being lied to. A few things need to change for everyone to embrace it (still 10 years away for full penetration)

    #1. All games will need manuals built into the games.

    #2. Pricing needs to be lowered. Were hearing all the time it cost us for manuals, boxing, shipping that doesn’t exist with DD (bandwidth yes) So We need to see 49.99 games now 59.99

    #3. Also the problem is sales and pricing of older games. One of the reason people buy consoles is to play cheaper games. I mean they wait 2 years and buy the hardware at 200 or whatever than the games are 19.99 or 29.99 etc now With DD developers can keep the cost at 59.99 for a 5 year old game.

    4. This limited # of uses per machine crap has to go away. Limiting the number of downloads or # of machines a game can go on is epic fail. Ive already had issues with PSP’s not allowing games to play due to # of PSP registered etc..

    Tie it to 5 usernames not Consoles. I mean I have already had 4 PS3 since launch and one more means I cant download games I bought again.

    The more restrictions you put on us the harder it will be for you to mainstream DD…

  • Cormac Murray

    wrote on Tuesday 15th December 2009

    Gravatar

    11 hours to download a game? That’s not so bad compared to waiting 4 days for a game to be delivered from the net!

    I agree that limiting games to a machine is wrong, instead why not have it tied to a *gasp* user account, which will play on any console if that user is logged in? That model has worked on Steam for the last 9 years. Also have incentives to buy the downloads, such as discount weekends, as is also used on Steam.

  • Fraser

    wrote on Wednesday 16th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Though you’re right that a problem lies in the actual logistics of delivering digital content on a wide scale, I’ve never really had that problem. A lot of PC gamers would tell you, myself included, that the vast majority of their game purchases are digital. If something isn’t available on Steam, D2D, GOG or GamersGate, I probably won’t bother playing it.

    I used to be into the whole collection thing, but recently I’ve been trading in more of my console games when I’m done with them. They just take up space. If there was a way to condense all of my old cartridges, CDs, DVDs and GD-ROMs to one memory card apiece under some sort of unified profile, I’d do that.

    Obviously with downloads you can’t recoup some of your money later by selling on, but I’m not necessarily fussed about that given that a lot of games become way cheaper after a couple of months online or a Steam sale.

    It’s just more convenient, and though it probably ends up with me spending way more on games than I should, it lets you play a wide variety of stuff, including things that either aren’t or are no longer stocked in store. I see a game, it looks cool, I push the button, I play it. Good times. Fucking about with discs and stuff annoys me these days.

  • LG

    wrote on Thursday 17th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I’m weird in that I like owning what I buy. If I wanted to rent something, I’d go to the video store. With all the times that legitimate paying consumers have been screwed around by anti-piracy measures, there’s no chance I trust these companies to get digital downloads right over any length of time. What happens when they go under? We’ve all seen people unable to play what they paid for, and I am including single player games here, just because their authentication server gets hammered on day one. When they get bought out and the new parent company decides to retroactively change their position on that game you ‘own’, what can you really do about it? See 1984 on the Kindle for an example. I know it sounds like I have one heck of a tin foil hat on my I LIKE my game collection. I have never thrown any of it out and will always buy the physical copy so that I can play games any old time I want to, with or without an internet connection.

  • Stuart Edwards

    wrote on Thursday 17th December 2009

    Gravatar

    I used to really care about keeping a perfect collection, but to be honest if I can’t even throw a game in the bin or trade it in, then I’m not going to get very far when it comes to the major decisions in life. Obviously it would be great if everything retained its value, but digital distribution will eventually benefit the world in so many ways, once the govornment works out how to give us decent internet speeds universally.

    What I’d like to be able to do is sell the licence on to somebody else to, or e-loan out games. I don’t like the way prices are monopolised so much digitally, and that once you’ve bought it, you’re stuck with it.

  • Joshua

    wrote on Friday 18th December 2009

    Gravatar

    Now that I think about it, I take a very opposite stand when it comes to game packaging. When I was living in Japan, it was always a joy opening up new games, with their glossy color manuals and spiffy artwork.

    Nowadays in the U.S., many publishers just slap 4 black and white pages together, staple them, and then call it a manual. It’s one of the many things that always bothered me about EA; they’ve got more money than most, but can’t be bothered to add color to a manual?

    On the flip side of things, I don’t like all the preorder (or special edition) garbage publishers come out with. Cheap plastic toys and the like are just a waste of space in my opinion.

    Give me the game disc, a case, and a sexy color booklet and I’m golden.

  • Calvin Kemph

    wrote on Saturday 19th December 2009

    Gravatar

    There’s a part of my collection I’m very obsessive about, which consists mostly of old games. I’ve come to appreciate their value and boxes, and so on. In the same way that I’ll be resistant to buy a game without a manual, there’s no way I’m completely converting to this lame download-only idea. But I suppose my whole music collection has been digitized, so why not my games? Well, I still buy CDs, but I put them straight to digital form afterwards and back all that info up. It’s the best of both worlds. I figure it’ll go the same way with games, at some point. People will take both sides, no firm resolution will come, and we can enjoy a split percentage of gamers playing their way. That would be ideal.

  • DustinM

    wrote on Thursday 18th March 2010

    Gravatar

    i can see the logic behind this from an eco-concious person’s view, but as a long time gamer and collector of video games, i can say that i pray that games will not become download only. like many other gamers, i take pride in my collection and i want it to continue to grow over the years.

    i’m at a point right now on my 60gb xbox360 where i have 2gb of free space, and it’s been that way for a few years. so if i want to download another game, i will have to delete one. there, i just deleted some hard-earned money so i can spend more money on something else i can’t physically touch. i can’t resell that download to a friend, or trade it in at Gamestop. so my only option is to spend more money on a bigger hard drive AND buy more downloadable games. so i’m not only spending money on the games, now i’m buying overpriced storage devices to keep them on as well.

    i get it. for some people, downloads are just easier. you don’t have to get off of your fat ass to go to the mall and walk to Best Buy or Gamestop to buy a game, and you don’t have to order the game online and wait a few days for it to come in the mail. this is the age of here and now, and if we have to use our legs or wait a couple of days to get a game, it’s not worth owning.

    we should make everything download only, for crying out loud. save the planet!

    think about this. right now there are games out there worth loads of money because of their rarity. with downloads, that’s never going to be the case. nothing will ever be rare since the game only exists in a virtual environment. sure, this may be the point of view of mainly collectors, but there are a lot of us out there.

    printed artwork produced for game cases will be useless and unnecessary when the game is only downloadable. that’s okay, you can save a .jpeg file that you got from google images and use it as your wallpaper. there’s no need for the artist’s hard work to be printed and displayed in its intended form. we don’t care about the artwork anyway, we just want a game that we can’t hold or admire.

    okay, i’m starting to rant so i’ll end by saying that i honestly hope this industry doesn’t switch to download only. think about all of the factories that will shut down and the thousands of people that will be out of jobs. the impact of video game production on the planet is minimal at best.

    long live physical games.

Show the fourteen other comments

Add your own comment