It's not an ideal analogy though.
I like being able to carry every book I ever owned on a single easy to carry device, but, I prefer to actually read a real book. I tool like the feel the smell.
Games though, digital games, not board games, do not require the same environment. The current debacle MS is facing over DRM, is really a non issue in some ways. I will NOT be allowing one in my home because of the intrusive nature of the hardware. Frankly the DRM is not the deal killer, the idea I have to pay 500 bucks so I can be spied on is.
I watch all my media via Netflix now. I no longer have any need of owning the media on a disk. I have a large library of movies, all of them currently stored in binders or a rather massive volume high number capacity suitcase looking 1000 disk storage solution. And I never really look at them any more. I turn on Netflix, find something to watch and go with it. And it is just too easy.
Now, if you could just turn on a game console, log on to a service, play ANY game that was there, well, owning a disc copy would mean nothing at all. Used games would go the same route movie rentals went here in town. There is no video rental here any more. None, none at all. Blockbuster was no longer needed.
Yes, some people have no broadband. Lets examine why they have no broadband. Poor, ok, if you are poor, is it not a fair response, shouldn't you be more worried about paying your bills and less time crying about not being able to play a game? Location. Hey, MS is not telling you where to live eh. It's not the fault of MS you live in the middle of nowhere. If I were able to 'go to the cottage' I think playing my games will dwindle in importance. I'd be going fishing, for real, not playing an online fishing game. I think some of the complaints are often people complaining for the sake of doing it.
I AM poor, but, the fridge is full, the rent is paid. I don't own a car, no where to go though and I can't afford a car. A car would suck the life out of my wallet. And there would be no broadband in my life, in fact, I would not be able to buy the games either. I go without a car, and I have broadband. It's called prioritizing.
I personally would like to be able to pay 5 bucks a month, to a service called Slitherine games, and play ANY game you have, and if I played Panzer Corps all the time, and nothing else, well the person that made the game, would sure know which games I liked the most. If I played all of them little bits all of the time, well I was still a steady revenue stream all the same. Maybe it would need to be 10 bucks a month to be financially viable to do this. I spend 8 on Netflix, and would not leave them if they upped it 5 bucks. But I regularly hear people scream and yell the second it is suggested they might need to do so. I don't get it. I have LOOOOOVED not paying 65 bucks a month to cable. I considered it a great day when I convinced the wife she could have the 65 bucks a month to spend elsewhere, if she gave up her obsession with The Young and the Restless and Cops.
I think people that follow the notion of a game is somehow better, if they bought the official copy, are a bit dim between the ears.
I have no real interest in people crying over requiring broadband. Hey if you can't get decent service, maybe you need a better provider. I am not with Bell Canada, because they suck. My service is a small operation, and yet they out do the major corporations all the same. It can be done.
I like that all of my Slitherine group games are sold as no strings attached installers, but, in truth, that is mainly as the alternative, is annoying requirements to install otherwise. I must say, I would rather not need to install the game at all, ever, and merely need to turn on the machine, log on, and play the game.
That may well be the future of gaming, and it might not be here in a year or 2 years, but, it happened to video rentals, so it is not possible to say it just can't happen. There COULD be a day when a used game is a thing of the past and game retail is not done from a game store. Hey, if I want to buy copies of movies, I have to sit online and buy them from Amazon, as stores selling them are almost gone too.
It would sure impact nicely, not needing to fret over patches to games, to permit them to install on our many convoluted arrangements of hardware and OS environments, if they were not required to be installed in the first place eh. I can't think of a game developer losing out, if they were not required to securely sell physical copies of the game installer, if the game was just a service fee based arrangement.
Now if Slitherine Group were to do what MS has done, and made it so all your new games needed to be run on a defacto surveillance machine able to spy on my life all day long, you can be assured, you would not be enjoying getting any money from me

It would not matter how great the games were
