Which would you prefer your PS3 Game Collection: Digital vs. Physical?

[BLUEGRASS]

Physical.

As others have stated, you can sell a physical copy of a game when you are done with it, but you cannot do anything with a digital download of a game once you have completed the game (except delete it or let it sit on your HD and eat up space).

[phranctoast]

I still buy CD's. Buy them, rip them put them on my phone. I like the have a physical copy.

I would like the option to install on the HDD, Similar to the 360's option but where you don't need the disc in there all the time.

[miller_time22]

No question, physical. I like doing whatever I want with something I spend my hard earned money on (trade, keep, sell).

[hellmonkey]

I like my media the same as I like my women, physical, not digital. Sure the digital version of both works, but when you want to touch, share, or throw it across the room cause your mad at it, its not gonna happen. Physical for life!

[partridge]

I have a pet theory that PS Vita may be giving us a view of the future of gaming and media storage: proprietary SD cards. It won't be long before they can affordably store 64Gb of data, plenty for HD movies and next gen games.

Once inserted it will be near instant access to the game (or film) with minimal loading and as with the Vita there could be some storage assigned for updates, save games, etc OR possibly it could allow you to install the game completely to your hard drive and the SD card will tag itself so you can't run that game on another console until you delete the data from your console, thus untagging the SD card.

So, still a box (but smaller), still physical media, but an SD card, not a disc. One that could potentially store 128Gb on it in the not too distant future. All your updates for a game, map packs, etc, could all be stored on the game card rather than your console.

Hmmm

[hellmonkey]

I think that is a very real possibility. Another huge advantage to flash media is almost instant search times. Theres no moving a lazer back n forth looking for the file. The cheaper ones might not have the greatest read/write speeds, but the searching is still almost instant.

[DonRSD]

physical

• if i no longer want a game i trade it in/sell it for cash
• i can bring my physical game to another ps3 or to a friends house
• downloading takes forever

[owa]

Originally Posted by Groo The Perverted

Well I was thinking in the "perfect world" situation where that's not an issue, just what would you prefer, to have all your games on disc or all your games on the PS3?

I voted physical.

As others have said, in my perfect world, I would be able to completely install the game from the physical media and not need the disc in the drive to play it.

[Groo The Perverted]

Seems to be a fairly close vote here. We'll give it another few days to see if the smoke clears here.

[RebelJeeper]

Originally Posted by Groo The Perverted

Seems to be a fairly close vote here. We'll give it another few days to see if the smoke clears here.

No question, physical. And I'm pretty sure GameStop and the other companies that make a killing on selling used games prefer physical media as well...just a thought

[Chiyo_chichi]

I would love a digital future if DRM didn't exist, and we had some way to back-up our purchases without it leading to piracy.

HDDs are in the TBs now, I think its embarrassing consoles are behind that much. MS especially, $130 for 250gb, give me a break!

I do love my digital games, Steam is a wonderful service. If companies can get to functioning that efficiently though, thats the question. Plus the wonderful additions - no more DREs (no more need for a disc drive period? Drastically cutting down console costs), quicker loads.

[sonicboom]

If they had sales like Steam, digital easily.

[Omegaice]

Originally Posted by Bageara

Physical

I trade all my games in after I complete them so its a no brainer for me

I'm the same way. Once I finish a game I get rid of it. The only games I have retained for long periods of time are Rock Band 1-3, Mortal Kombat & Fallout:New Vegas. All others go straight back for trade-in credits @ ScamStop.

[Xerios]

Originally Posted by groo the perverted

seems to be a fairly close vote here. We'll give it another few days to see if the smoke clears here.

lol!

[Psx0005]

Physical. Because digital/online has too many variables that I can't control (outages, ISP caps, HDD space, etc.).

[jamclaur]

Originally Posted by Groo The Perverted

I think there can be some arguments made for each one, with each having it's own pros and cons.

Myself, I prefer to have the PS3 games in digital format on the PS3. Having physical copies are all well and good, I just think that it's beneficial to have digital copies, not just because of the wear on the optical drive, but also I think it's simply more convenient.

Plus there's no chance your discs get damaged and unplayable, and if your PS3 crashes or you have to get a new one, your games are stored on the servers.

Sadly monetarily it's just not feasible, with many games that are available for 10-15 bucks in physical copy, are 20-30 dollars on the PSN, with some newer games listed at 60 bucks for a digital copy).

now the only SERIOUS con I see (which is admittedly a huge one) if one day the Sony servers get hacked or go down or permanently shut down or whatever, then those games are lost for good.

What the odds of that happening, I don't know.

Though I have no problem with you downloading EVERYTHING you want from the PSN store. I actually encourage it!

[Shin-Ra]

Originally Posted by partridge

I have a pet theory that PS Vita may be giving us a view of the future of gaming and media storage: proprietary SD cards. It won't be long before they can affordably store 64Gb of data, plenty for HD movies and next gen games.

Once inserted it will be near instant access to the game (or film) with minimal loading and as with the Vita there could be some storage assigned for updates, save games, etc OR possibly it could allow you to install the game completely to your hard drive and the SD card will tag itself so you can't run that game on another console until you delete the data from your console, thus untagging the SD card.

So, still a box (but smaller), still physical media, but an SD card, not a disc. One that could potentially store 128Gb on it in the not too distant future. All your updates for a game, map packs, etc, could all be stored on the game card rather than your console.

Hmmm

Optical discs are dirt cheap, flash cards may be getting more affordable for decent capacities but it's nowhere near dirt cheap, especially for cards with good transfer rates. The extra expense is only a good compromise for portable machines.

Originally Posted by Psx0005

Physical. Because digital/online has too many variables that I can't control (outages, ISP caps, HDD space, etc.).

For me it's primarily the lack of guarantee any of these services will still be around in 10 years or so, or provide all the same content for re-download. Perfect example with Xbox Live for the original Xbox shutting down.

I've never had a faulty optical/drive or hard disc but I certainly trust optical more. As long as I keep my media safe, which I've never had any trouble doing, my collection's safe

[mrnatehead]

There are times when I enjoy the convenience of digital format, but like everyone else, I like that have something physical in front of me. It's the same thing with a book, yes it takes up some physical space, but I get to do what I want with it.

[AikonEnt]

As Olivia Newton John once said ' Let's get physical'

[Dirk504]

Physical.... especially after PSN got hacked.