Do you prefer direct downloading games, or hard copies?

[Jason]

With the rise of faster broadband and better servers, downloading games direct to your harddrive through methods such as Direct2Drive and Steam is becoming a popular method of distributing games.

Whilst some users love the ease of access and simplicity of direct downloading, others express doubts about what will happen if the operators close down or suffer server failure, and prefer a 'hard' copy of their game on CD or other media.

How do you feel about it? Are you a 'case, CD and instructions' type, or are you fully embracing the direct download revolution?

[Konrad]

Im in General a digital guy, more specifically - Steam.

Yes, I am a fanboy. I'm deathly afraid of the monopoly they're creating, the unfair pricing (which doesn't concern me yet - but soon) and the large profit margin they're making.

Nevertheless, I adore the convenience so much I'm willing to look past all of those.

D2D however, is not my thing.


I do prefer having a Boxed version of the games I truly care about. Fallout 3 for example was a must-have boxed for me.

[Jason]

Interesting you bring up the Steam 'monopoly' - that's the second time I've heard that one banded about. Personally, I can't see it happening - or at least, can't see it happening to the point where it adversely affects the consumer.
As you say, the primary advantage of Steam is the convenience - you can have a game installed and ready to go on your harddrive in just over an hour with a fast connection, and even my crappy 1.5mb connection can download a 5GB game overnight with no real issues.
The price is a little on the high side occasionally, but I assume I'm like a lot of gamers and have no brand loyalty at all - I'll go with whoever's cheapest a week before launch. If Steam hike the prices too high, they're going to lose custom, so it's not in their best interest to do that. £30 five times is better than £50 twice.

Plus, although D2D doesn't seem to have got it right just yet, you know for sure that sooner or later someone will get the formula right and create a worthwhile rival for Steam - the idea's just too damn good for only one company to have a serious crack at it and acquire a healthy share of the market.

[Iggy]

I can actually go either way on this. I don't like the potential monopoly situation either, and I kind of like having a DVD in my hands. Steam, when it is working correctly, seems to be OK.

But I look at all the achievement complaints from gamers, which seem to be Steam issues, and I wonder if they can't do something different with the way it works.

Every time I turn around, it seems the Steam servers are down for maintenance. I would think some kind of redundancy would be in order that would help that situation.

[MyNameDidntFit]

My shelf looks prettier with boxes on it. So games that I really like, I buy. Same as albums.

But Steam is quite sexy... they just need to sort out their offline mode because it sucks pure arse at the moment.

[BannanoPeel]

I like hard copies. For one thing there is the Resale value. Can't sell downloaded games. Also I get to look at the pretty cases.

[Impulse]

Hard copies, unless it's small things like APS for the Ipod Touch.

[Landy]

Generally, i prefer Steam. Less need to carry around on discs and the games gets updated automatically. Only 'downside' with Steam is that if you ever wanted to sell your games, you have to sell your entire account. Valve also do not allow users to sell their game accounts.

[dimples]

I want a case and a disc. But sometimes I am forced to get DLC as a download. That kind of sucks, but girls gotta do what a girls gotta do

[Kozahk]

Hard copies because Australian Internet still has download caps that steam has a tendency to murder.

[happysister]

eh...i guess when it comes to PC games, i'd rather just download them.

[Betty]

I love having a physical entity of the game - other than just a download. Its something about owning a box and being able to add it to a collection.
However, my love is dwindling due to the lack of contents of said boxes. Game manuals are obsolete and I frankly could give a damn about the advertisements for new games that come inside.

[fantanoice]

I prefer having the hard copy, but I usually go for whatever is the cheapest option which is usually digital.

[CemeteryGates]

I love having a physical entity of the game - other than just a download. Its something about owning a box and being able to add it to a collection.
However, my love is dwindling due to the lack of contents of said boxes. Game manuals are obsolete and I frankly could give a damn about the advertisements for new games that come inside.

ˆThis!

[Mula]

I can go either way. I used to only want hard copies just so I could have it in a pile with a bunch of my other video games, but now it is just easier to direct download something. DLC is becoming more and more popular so I tend to buy as many hard copies as I do with digital copies.

[LoloPinky]

Definitely a hard copy. I love getting a new box, and a shiny manual; though this seems to be dying, which saddens me a lot. I wish they'd still sell games in those huge boxes that you have to lift open. Am I the only one?
]:

[Misfit]

Hard copies for sure. There's nothing like opening a sealed game you've been waiting years for! Also, I love the smell of new instruction booklets. Just sayin'.

[happysister]

i think the thing i like more than having a hard copy of a game is having game cartridges. everything is on CD/DVD these days. i mean, granted, you can prolly fit more information on those, but there is just something about cartridges that makes it feel more real to me. maybe it's the fact that they came in all different shapes and sizes, which made collecting them more fun. i mean they even had some special cartridges made, like the golden Zelda NES one. you would feel so proud displaying that on a shelf, and all your friends would be like, "whoa..." and as Betty mentioned, game manuals were also awesome back in the day. reading the manuals on the drive back home to get a head start of knowing how to play a game was one of the highlights of buying a new game for me. man, i miss the good old days.

[Kozahk]

I still read manuals, a lot of my games are Japanese and they tend to still put in a shit load of effort into their manuals. The one for Macross is roughly 37 pages long with a million different colour schemes that explains literally every single aspect of the game; from character bios and their special abilities to every aspect of space combat to other pamphlets within the manual as in universe propaganda for the Frontier forces.

[happysister]

yeah, well, most of my games have crap manuals. i think Brawl is the only one i can think of that has a pretty decent manual.

[CemeteryGates]

i think the thing i like more than having a hard copy of a game is having game cartridges. everything is on CD/DVD these days. i mean, granted, you can prolly fit more information on those, but there is just something about cartridges that makes it feel more real to me. maybe it's the fact that they came in all different shapes and sizes, which made collecting them more fun. i mean they even had some special cartridges made, like the golden Zelda NES one. you would feel so proud displaying that on a shelf, and all your friends would be like, "whoa..." and as Betty mentioned, game manuals were also awesome back in the day. reading the manuals on the drive back home to get a head start of knowing how to play a game was one of the highlights of buying a new game for me. man, i miss the good old days.


Not to mention the complete lack of annoying loading times.
I could play 10 different games in a day and feel normal. Today, I limit myself to 2 or maybe 3 on console per day, just because it's so goddamn annoying to lose several minutes of gameplay between games, consoles interface, matches, menus, etc...


EDIT: Of course, I don't mind it when it comes to my PC. The only game that takes more than 5 seconds to load is Shogun 2.

[Archangel]

^ 'course, comparing load times now to load times on cartridges is a completely null comparison. On the one hand you have a total of less than 50mb to load for the entire game, versus several gb for one level

As for the topic at hand, (and I seem to be mostly alone here), I like digital copies. On the one hand, I have a box taking up room, collecting dust, and requiring me to find it every time I want to bust out the game, then wait the painstakingly long time required to install it. On the other hand, I have a semi-pretty box.
With softcopies, I download it, I have it, I can play it, it's done. And in the end, what you're buying is a game, not some shiny packaging with a game attached. I want the game, and I want to be able to play it whenever I want to play it; it's far easier and safer for all parties involved to do that digitally.

If buying it physically gets me some awesome little goody like a replica chainsword, though, I could be swayed...

[MyNameDidntFit]

You're saying to don't install/download your digital games? And that that doesn't take as long as--if not longer than--installing a hardcopy?

*shrug*

Really, the way I see as best is the way that's becoming more and more popular across Steam (and now Origin, too) and that's buying a hardcopy and being able to use the CD key to gain access to a softcopy (or two softcopies if it's an EA game on Steam and Origin). That way when a game comes with a shiny box/manual/collectible/whatever you can get it and still have every advantage of softcopies--and when you don't want a game's shitty 1-page leaflet and drab plastic box you just get the softcopy.

[CemeteryGates]

^Agreed.


^ 'course, comparing load times now to load times on cartridges is a completely null comparison. On the one hand you have a total of less than 50mb to load for the entire game, versus several gb for one level.


True, but you can compare loading times from N64 and the first PlayStation, and there just isn't any comparison. ;)