By Andrew R. Duckworth
Recently, Sony made the poor decision of getting what would have been PlayStation exclusivists to turn their back on Sony entirely. And, let’s be brutally honest here: actions have consequences. When you declare to gamers that they do not own games that they’ve paid for, when you declare to gamers that they will soon have no choice at all but to go digital, it is entirely on the fault of the company, not the consumers who have had a great deal of trust in a company that absolutely has changed the industry in what they have been able to accomplish. There is no doubt that the PS5 delivered to consumers an excellent console. But, recently, Sony decided to completely obliterate such merit by breaking trust between company and consumer.
Recently, I wrote a small piece about trust and the nature of trust and how many feel betrayed nowadays for a plethora of reasons. Sony’s recent actions and statements are practically a case study in the matter. In case you are unfamiliar, Sony recently stated that they plan to no longer manufacture physical games beginning in 2028. For the gamer, physical games have long been synonymous with ownership. If you have the physical game, you have it. It is why I, and many like me, continue to purchase physical media—it is reliable and you know you have it. If it gets erased from digital infrastructure, you have the backup. It is yours. Well… as Sony is reminding everyone, that is not ENTIRELY true… at least not when it comes to gaming. From every piece of content I have been able to read over the topic, and the list is rather enormous, instead, many games, though not all, come on a physical disc, but are still bound by certain agreements that you must adhere to in order to play the game, and there is no guarantee that just because you have the physical copy that it will always be available. I should point out that this is not for every game as was recently demonstrated by a popular content creator whose name unfortunately escapes me (this will be updated to reflect the creator’s name if there is time). And it seems as though Sony is one of only a few companies that hold such hard stance agreements. There are other companies that have similar agreements in place.
However, such a revelation has led gamers into an outcry, a justifiable outcry at that. If we do not own the games that we are paying large sums of money for, then what is the point? For a new console, you could be out $300-$700 depending on which console you purchase, and newer games often cost $70 whether you’re paying for the physical copy or the digital. 70 dollars, particularly today, doesn’t seem like a lot of money. After all, there are plenty of people who spend more at the fuel pump. But, given the rising cost of seemingly everything, 70 dollars is way more than a meal on the table. Not only this, but there is speculation that the cost of games may rise even more than the $70 rate most new games currently cost. So, I would say first that if the cost of a new game is competing with necessities, one might do well to get their priorities in order. However, this does not eliminate the understanding that if one pays $70 for physical media, that physical media should belong to the consumer who purchased it.
Gaming isn’t the only industry that has caused quite a bit of speculation. Recently, I’m hard pressed to find a store that carries physical media apart from books (I suppose that might be next on the chopping block) and occasionally music. I still see physical media at Walmart and a few other places, but it is becoming rarer. What does that mean? It means that, at some point, you won’t be able to find physical media and, if that is the case, you will have little choice than to either go digital OR turn your back on certain modes of media entirely. The trends don’t really lie. Places are limiting what you can purchase for two reasons: either they aren’t selling OR companies are limiting physical so you, the consumer, are left with little choice but to buy into the all digital future. The all digital future will allow for companies to axe the cost of physical manufacturing and maintain profit. And, if a company can take away digital access after a purchase has been made, that company still has your money. Many have rightly so declared this a predatory practice. After all, it stands to reason that if you’ve paid for something and no longer have access to the thing you paid for, a refund would be in order… not according to many companies, including, seemingly, Sony.
This is precisely why I have decided no longer to purchase anything from Sony, not just the gaming side, but the other companies associated with Sony. That might seem at face value to be somewhat of an unreasonable stance. After all, how can you put onto Sony Pictures, the film end, what the gaming end has decided? However, I find this a fair way to hold Sony as a whole accountable. If we can’t trust what the gaming end is doing, how do we have assurances that the film end will not do something similar?
However, I feel that question should be a much broader question in a world where things are quickly going digital. Many years ago, the idea of a media subscription service concerning films, videos, and series would have seemed, while practical for a company and reasonable concerning cost, unusual. Then Netflix, a company that originally began as a film rental company. Then HBO, no longer just a channel, has their own application. Then Hulu, then Disney, then a plethora of other companies, some of which you’ve probably never heard. And then gaming companies. Of course, before video services, I remember all of the book services you could access with your own personal reader. Today, music subscriptions are WAY more popular than physical media. And people bought in! No more physical. Just subscribe and you have access! Instant access to a wide library! With both Apple Music and Spotify, you can have access to music and podcasts you would never normally hear. That’s a plus! So, where is the problem?
The problem doesn’t arise with these applications in and of themselves. After all, as just stated, they can introduce you to content you never knew existed. Problems, however, often arise with the policies the companies take. Whether it be things like price raises or agreements that would put users in jeopardy for the dumbest of reasons, they certainly present a problem to the consumer. Want access to the content? Follow these often convoluted and unreasonable rules. Most pass by the user agreements just by either skimming or passing them up entirely and simply clicking “agree.” If someone really wants to access the content, who has time to read through a novel-length string of words that many haven’t even dedicated to their vocabulary due to not needing them?
To say that this is the only problem passes by the problem originally raised in the previous writing. What happens when the content vanishes? We’ve seen this with subscription services already. Often times, services cycle through content. What happens when you want to see a classic and nostalgic Christmas film in the middle of September? There’s a chance you won’t be able to access it until November. So, you’ll have to rely on physical media… until you can’t… and in that lies the problem.
When physical media is taken away, then you MUST rely on subscription services. And, when you MUST rely on the subscription services, then you’re playing THEIR game… pun intended, I suppose. They get the money with minimal cost to them, and you rely on… well… what they give you. As previously discussed, often times the cost of digital purchase is much the same as the physical purchase… which makes little to no sense for the consumer. It makes all of the sense in the world for the companies selling the product (or, more accurately as previously discussed, LEASING the product). They stand to make a lot of money on a product that does not have to undergo further manufacturing. It’s digital. There are other costs associated with digital, but they don’t come close to the cost of manufacturing discs, manufacturing boxes, etc. And that is why they are on the chopping block. There has been some discussion regarding the resources to produce these products, but such arguments I find to be a bit ridiculous at best.
But, here is the point I want to leave you with and the point I think is most important: this isn’t limited to media. Everything seems to be going digital, a brave new digital world. That should, at the least, send a chill down your spine in the worst way. Currently, there is a backlash concerning data centers, concerning surveillance and the implementation of a surveillance state. In the United States, our privacy is apparently up for debate, something that just a few years ago would have seemed laughable. No one is laughing anymore because the reality of it has hit them too late. But, if we’re being honest with ourselves, we really only have ourselves to blame. This was only the next logical step in digital. Digital is quick; it is convenient. And now, with the implementation of AI, why rely on police departments, which take manpower and time, when we can rely on something practically instantaneous? We put ourselves in this trap. We want things quick. We want them now. In a lot of ways, society has turned into the toddler at the toy store. No, I would not like that toy at Christmas, I would like it NOW. It is what we have turned into. And, gradually, it is causing us to lose our humanity. That is a different point for a different post. We have been on a path towards digital everything for a long time, and we sort of demanded it for convenience sake. America has long loved convenience, but we are seeing only now where this love of convenience eventually takes us. Because just like the consumer likes convenience, so do major companies, so do governments, so do a lot of entities that have the power to lord over us if they so choose. So, when it comes to the choice of providing employment or cutting out cost, the choice is clear. When it comes to the choice of utilizing manpower and time or relying on something instantaneous, the choice is clear. And while I think what is currently going on in society is a problem, I can at least understand where it is all coming from: our love of convenience, our love of quick and easy.
I find that when I leave my phone behind for a little while, I find peace of mind that I didn’t realize there was anymore. Yet, when I start thinking about it, I realize that I’m no longer “connected” to the world, ironically enough, because of our own implementation of digital. News is digital, talking is digital, everything.
So, getting back to the discussion on trust and how it all relates, we allowed the establishment of trust when such an establishment probably shouldn’t have existed. They sold us an easily breakable promise that we purchased wholesale. And when the promises are broken, who do we really blame? We should absolutely place blame on predatory companies, but we must also understand that we were instrumental in the process. We aren’t blameless.
I have no solutions but to do what makes sense for me. Others should do what makes sense for them. There is some promise, as Microsoft has recently ensured that if you have a physical copy of a game, there is a method in which to obtain a digital copy making it easier to have a game wherever you go without need for the physical copy. It seems to have attracted a lot of those who would have once been Sony purists. Yet, I’m still not completely satisfied. What people like me want is a complete and blanket guarantee that physical media will ALWAYS be an option.
I can spend entire posts talking about the negatives of the digital future and what it will one day mean, sooner rather than later, how we are allowing generations to have their minds degraded by slop and instant gratification. To do so here would add onto an already long post. I suppose one day, we will wake up in a world where everything is digital. When that day comes, I wonder if people will still have the sense to ask questions. I wonder if people will long for old days when a walk in nature was still possible, or when people still spoke to each other, or when people still offered warm greetings to one another. I wonder if people will wonder where their most basic rights went to or why they have to pay enormous amounts of money for things they can’t own. I wonder.
Poetry and Essays of Andrew Ryan Duckworth 