GameStop: Game discs aren't going anywhere any time soon

[Ian]

According to GameStop, physical game discs aren't going anywhere any time soon.

The digital-business manager of GameStop , Shawn Freeman, says this because he believes that with new advancements in technologies such as 3D and what not, which will take more space, will continue to speed past the advancements in bandwidth and storage.

What do you think? Yes? No?

I think game discs will be here for awhile, for the time being, it is just more convenient to go into a store and buy the game, or order it, or whatever, than wait while downloading the game, after deciding which game(s) to delete off your hard drive. Of course, once you get a lot of games.

However, at the same time, not many people play a large variety of games at a time. Do they? I mean, you may have a few new or good games you play all the time, but the rest are old, expendable games. Am I right?

[TheMarker0]

Well, lets look at how bad MW2, and steam worked out. Mhm, mhm, mhm, it sucked, and the next COD isn't steam based if i remember due to low sales? Steam has to succeed if disks die. I agree, until steam sucks a lot less, and provides dedicated servers for each multiplayer games, disks are nexer leavin

[Ian]

That is kinda different. Just because it comes on a disc doesn't mean it will have a dedicated server.

But I don't quite know how Xbox LIVE works anyways.

[TheMarker0]

What is the biggest diskless retailer on the internet. I'm talking about PC not XBOX.

[Ian]

Okay then... your reply makes even less sense now

[TheMarker0]

I'm talking about PC games. You still need disks right? Steam is the biggest retailer of diskless games. If disklessness is ever going to pick up, they need to shape up.

[Ian]

I thought Steam didn't suck that much?

[TheMarker0]

No dedicated servers. Its all peer to peer.

[uh_Iforgot]

No dedicated servers. Its all peer to peer.

All games made by Valve (and nearly every game using Steam) uses dedicated servers; MW2 doesn't have dedicated servers because Activision is too stingy to pay for them. Even if MW2 didn't use Steam, it'd still have P2P servers.

Steam is win. Activision is fail.

Also, Bobby Kotick (Activision's CEO) is a d*****. Here's one of my favourite quotes from him:

The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games.

[xMop]

I disagree with this topic.

I haven't used a game disc in years (Not counting OLD games that only came on disk).

[soren121]

Well, lets look at how bad MW2, and steam worked out. Mhm, mhm, mhm, it sucked, and the next COD isn't steam based if i remember due to low sales? Steam has to succeed if disks die. I agree, until steam sucks a lot less, and provides dedicated servers for each multiplayer games, disks are nexer leavin

I don't think Valve can afford dedicated servers for each multiplayer game they sell. Microsoft and Sony can afford it, because they're huge sprawling corporations that eat money for breakfast. Valve is a small game developer that has about 225 employees.

[TheMarker0]

What i would've done was killed the servers for cod 4 and forced people to upgrade.

[Ian]

That wouldn't be very nice. I don't think people would be too happy about that.

[TheMarker0]

That wouldn't be very nice. I don't think people would be too happy about that.

No, but its better then releasing a game with people expecting much more.