How Long Before Apps Overtake Physical Video Game Content Sales?

jamie writes "Horace Dediu crunches some numbers and comes to a startling conclusion: 'If you look at the red line above and its slope, it would indicate that, given time, the App store will overtake the entire physical media gaming industry. The time when that happens will depend a lot on the growth or decline of the physical game media business, but another four years seems a safe bet.' This follows on the heels of some earlier analysis of apps per iOS device and what that steady upward growth means."

Comments

Oblig

[somersault]

Yuh-huh

Re:Oblig

[somersault]

WTF. I just RTFA and it's comparing music sales to apps, not game sales. And these apps are not all just games either, so it seems a pointless comparison to make even if you can get it right. I probably wouldn't pay for a game on my phone, but I would perhaps pay for something like a navigation app if I didn't already have a good one built in.

Re:Oblig

[buro9]

You know the moon is moving away from Earth at a verifiable few centimetres a year? Well if you extrapolate backwards it's obvious that the dinosaurs are extinct because the moon hit them on the head... doosh! That'd make you extinct pretty fast.

Cold hard science here guys... it's undeniable.

Re:Oblig

[JWSmythe]

    You're right. All they're showing is trending towards people buying more apps through iTunes than music. I didn't read the whole thing (I lost interest shortly after the graph), but it doesn't seem to include factors such as changes in the market. Has there been a trend of increasing numbers of applications, or making previously expensive applications cheaper? Maybe it's a trend that there are more iTunes devices out there. Or possibly that while the customer base continues to grow, the customers have all the music that they're looking for, and start purchasing more apps. In the last case, the red line would indicate longer term customers, and the blue line newer customers. I'm sure the question that Apple is asking is, what is the next line going to be? Despite what people tend to believe, those growth lines cannot always go up. Eventually they'll taper off. I had the same argument years ago with several people discussing the housing market. "It'll keep growing" they said, and I asked the simple question "what's supporting it?" As they learned more recently, absolutely nothing, and poof, their houses dropped in value.

Re:Oblig

[yamfry]

"Did you know that disco record sales were up 400% for the year ending 1976? If these trends continues... AAY!"

Re:Oblig

[commodore64_love]

Yes I think online app games will eventually overtake physical DVD/bluray sales.
I also think it sucks.
You can't trade-in your used app for cash. You do save ~$3 for gasoline or postage, but that doesn't make-up for the overall loss of not being able to sell your game for ~$20 on the ebay.

Re:Oblig

[commodore64_love]

AAY? Are you the Fonz? ;-)

Re:Oblig

[dwightk]

clicking on the link and looking at the picture is not ReadingTFA

Re:Oblig

[dwightk]

maybe read the whole thing before speculating?

Re:Oblig

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you write such a detailed response if you didn't get past the first paragraph? The comparison to the games market is later in the article.

And @somersault, did you really RTFA?

Re:Oblig

[somersault]

Okay, I had a further look, and the figures are still all over the place and comparing apples to oranges. Physical video game sales are obviously going to dwindle into nothingness. For another thing if you're not just counting game apps, you should be comparing app sales to the whole of the software industry, and there's no way in hell that mobile apps are going to overtake that. We pay over £20,000 a year just for a two processor license for one application, then another £12,000 or so for 5 floating 3D CAD licenses. Until phones can be used for serious design work, mobile app sales are never going to overtake PC app sales. And while the mobile gaming industry is a profitable segment with room for growth, the Wii showed that there is still room for growth in the traditional home console market too. Likewise Zynga is making a killing on PC gaming with their Facebook shovelware (though technically you can probably play these games on mobile devices since Android 2.2 - I haven't tried any flash games on my droid).

Comparing iPhone/Droid games sales to physical and digital downloads would be a much more interesting article. Which is not saying very much.

Re:Oblig

[dwightk]

Now that's worth a 3 or 4 interesting much more than the original was a 5 informative

Re:Oblig

[Enderandrew]

You apparently didn't actually RTFA. You looked at the pretty picture and moved along. That chart shows music sales in iTunes, and App sales in iTunes. But the article said that physical game sales currently sit at $840 million a month, but are trending down 5%, where as app sales are steadily trending way up.

The suggestion was that as iTunes came to dominate all music sales, surely it will do the same for games.

The problem I have with the article is that I want to see overall game sales over a lengthy period. Is the 5% decrease this month, this year, or over 5 years?

Even then, I've got a couple problems with the article's assumption. They're directly comparing all app purchases (most of which are games, but not all of are) to physical media games. I think a better comparison might be iTunes GAMES REVENUE compared to that of console and PC games on the whole. Throw in Steam sales, PSN titles, X-Box Live titles, Wiiware, and physical media.

Now, how do those numbers look?

I think you might see that iOS games put a small dent into a gamers budget, but that didn't stop them from buying Left For Dead 2.

Re:Oblig

[somersault]

Nah, I looked at the graph and went into a apoplectic statistics fuelled rage at how dumb the caption was.

I did read more of it after I got some replies, and I still think it's dumb.

Re:Oblig

[Anonymous Coward]

Your fish are dead.

Re:Oblig

[Rich0]

Not to worry - according to the growth rate on the pot of E. Coli I have simmering in the other room the entire planet will be one big mass of bacteria by next Tuesday. That's a conservative estimate based on current growth rates.

Re:Oblig

[GrumpySteen]

Next week they're going to put together a chart showing sales of Apps versus retweets of Kanye West's comments on Twitter.

Then we'll know for sure.

Good ridance

[igreaterthanu]

I've had to purchase old games that I wanted to keep playing again just because the disc got scratched. That isn't going to happen with something like Steam.

The App Store model is wonderful. Apple (with it's various restrictions) just has a poor implementation of it.

Re:Good ridance

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because you suck at protecting your property doesn't mean the rest of us want to give up ownership. Being able to use product without having to re-get permission from the publisher every time is something I don't want to give up. Without it, a $50 product is worth about 50 cents or one go at an arcade machine....in 1993.

Re:Good ridance

[vux984]

That isn't going to happen with something like Steam.

Steam has its own set of problems. It needs to fix the issues it has with "families", and how they want to use games. I want to buy a game and let my 7 year old play it without giving him my steam account. When he eventually moves out, he should be able to take it with him. When I pass on... does it just go poof?

Suddenly, simply having to take good care of your CDs doesn't seen all that awful. They can be passed around to who you want, when you want, and they don't disappear on you.

Of course, defective games infested with disc-checks and nasty DRM and anti-copying technology have eroded away so much of the convenience of physical media that people like you actually prefer to be locked into steams model.

I was in the mood to play privateer yesterday... so I dug up the CD, imaged it, and put it away, and fired it up minutes later (in dosbox). Took all of 5 minutes. That's how it -should- be, even with new games.

Re:Good ridance

[naz404]

In that case you should try Good Old Games -> download all the games you bought DRM-free, back up the installer files, re-install anytime you want, re-download anytime you want.

http://gog.com

No need for an internet connection and authentication once you've downloaded the installer files, unlike Steam.

Re:Good ridance

[commodore64_love]

>>>because the disc got scratched.

I consider people who scratch discs to be lazy/careless. Ever since I bought my first CD player in 1989, I've never scratched a single disc. Not one. (And even the ones I bought used, they still worked despite the scratches.) Sure accidents happen - drop the disc; it breaks or gets scrathed; but if it happens to you habitually then I suspect You are the problem.

And you say "Steam" is the answer. Yeah steam and other online sites are great - until they go out of business and your ~$5,000 game collection stops working. I'll stick with the physical discs that I OWN forever, rather than just borrow. Ya know those Atari games I bought in the 70s? They still work. The Atari online game service? Not so much (it went bankrupt).

Re:Good ridance

[imakemusic]

Suddenly, simply having to take good care of your CDs doesn't seen all that awful. They can be passed around to who you want, when you want, and they don't disappear on you.

Funny, I'm not keen on passing my discs around as that's one reasons that they tend to disappear.

defective games infested with disc-checks and nasty DRM and anti-copying technology have eroded away so much of the convenience of physical media

Whilst I do like Steam it should be mentioned that there are some games on it that have their own DRM included on top of what Steam provides (e.g. GTAIV which involves using Steam, Rockstar Social, Microsoft Live and SecuROM). However, I don't see that as a criticism of Steam, I see it as foolishness on the part of the developers not taking advantage of what Steam offers...but maybe that's just me.

I was in the mood to play privateer yesterday... so I dug up the CD, imaged it, and put it away, and fired it up minutes later (in dosbox). Took all of 5 minutes. That's how it -should- be, even with new games.

I wanted to play Half Life 1 the other day... so I fired up Steam, downloaded it and fired it up minutes later. Took all of 5 minutes. That's how it is with games, even new games (provided your connection is fast enough).

Anyway, I don't see it as being "locked into Steams model". Both the Steam and physical media methods have pros and cons. I am still perfectly able to buy a game on CD and play that without touching Steam if I see fit, so it's not like I'm stuck with them. Sure, the games that I've bought through them are stuck on Steam but I knew that when I signed up for it, so who cares?

Re:Good ridance

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had to purchase old games that I wanted to keep playing again just because the disc got scratched. That isn't going to happen with something like Steam.

The App Store model is wonderful. Apple (with it's various restrictions) just has a poor implementation of it.

Too bad the article is actually talking about mobile apps vs. music and isn't even referring to games specifically.

And it's also talking about revenue generation only, it's not talking about quantity, quality, popularity, etc.

In other words, it's a big steaming pile of shit.

Re:Good ridance

[MikeDirnt69]

Steam work offline too.

Re:Good ridance

[jakobX]

It works but its a bit random. The problem with steam is that someone else controls access to things you bought. GOG on the other hand cannot prevent you playing what you bought. Even without DRM its still only a digital download and when it comes to price it cant really compete with torrents. It might be cause im getting a bit old, but im having trouble paying for data only. I need a physical object as well. Now get off my lawn you young whippersnapper.

Re:Good ridance

[icebraining]

As someone else said here on /., the real solution is creating one account per game on Steam.

Re:Good ridance

[bytesex]

My wife and kids and the CD player in the car are the problem. I love them over CDs though.

Re:Good ridance

[stewbacca]

DRM has nothing to do with the horrible physical media that is the CD/DVD. The disk itself will last a lifetime...its just those pesky scratches that make it unreadable that suck.

Re:Good ridance

[stewbacca]

I consider people who scratch discs to be lazy/careless.

I consider people who think such a horrible physical media was ever a good idea to be lazy/careless.

I may be lazy or careless, but I sure as hell don't have such low standards as people who actually claim they have NEVER scratched a cd.

Re:Good ridance

[stewbacca]

then I suspect You are the problem

Let me guess...you're a programmer?

Re:Good ridance

[Anonymous Coward]

I was in the mood to play privateer yesterday... so I dug up the CD, imaged it, and put it away, and fired it up minutes later (in dosbox). Took all of 5 minutes. That's how it -should- be, even with new games.

I wanted to play Half Life 1 the other day... so I fired up Steam, downloaded it and fired it up minutes later. Took all of 5 minutes. That's how it is with games, even new games (provided your connection is fast enough).

Whoosh. (Literally.)

His point wasn't that it took five minutes. It was that the CD was all that was required. Do you really think Steam is going to be there, in its present form, in 10 years? 20? 50?

Of course it will be, just like DIVX, the phones-home-and-plays-once disc format, not the codec. Just like multiple variations on DRM-encumbered services, all of which happened to be named Napster. Just like Real's audio store, and Microsoft's "PlaysForSure".

To play Privateer, all he had to do is put a plastic disc into a drive and run the code. (Or to transfer the .iso from CD to HDD to SSD to holographic memory device and load it into the emulator). He needed merely some bytes that were once on a disc he purchased. He needed permission from no one and nothing. The company that created that game could have long since crumbled to dust, and yet he could still play it.

To play HL1, you had to have actual connectivity to an external server - a server you do not own, whose contents you do not control, and whose policies you do not administer - and that server had to give you the code. No server? No game. Server doesn't like you? No game. Server doesn't like your game anymore? No game.

GOG does it right. Steam doesn't. A game should be like a book. If you own a book, you can read it, even if the publisher doesn't want you to read it anymore.

Re:Good ridance

[tepples]

Ya know those Atari games I bought in the 70s? They still work.

And most of my NES games still work after rubbing alcohol on the connector. All that tells me is that cartridges are more durable than discs, especially with single-digit-year-olds in the house.

Re:Good ridance

[Monkeedude1212]

Suddenly, simply having to take good care of your CDs doesn't seen all that awful. They can be passed around to who you want, when you want, and they don't disappear on you.

Of course, defective games infested with disc-checks and nasty DRM and anti-copying technology have eroded away so much of the convenience of physical media that people like you actually prefer to be locked into steams model.

Which is exactly what we are saying.

Physical media was good. There was a time where it had its place. Then the companies wanted to have their DRM and eat cake too. It's led to much frustration in the community. Once broadband penetration grew, digital downloads came to fruition. Now with less hassle than physical media, auto-installing, auto-updating, less $ and do it from home, things are good.

Even physical media games TODAY can't be passed around like they used to. Any MMO, or Battlefield games, or Spore, or a slew of Ubisoft games, or Starcraft 2, or more, require you to make an account with the publisher. That account is meant so that only 1 person can play their one copy of the game.

The way to get around the whole "Family sharing" thing is to have every family member have their own Steam account, and when you want a game for your 7 year old, you gift it to your 7 year old's account. He has access to it, you have access to his account (being his parent), and he has some material to learn how to share with brothers and sisters.

There is a reason why some of us prefer to be locked into steams model; it's far easier to set up than the physical media. If a game has been out for 1 year or more, sometimes its cheaper to buy 2 copies on Steam for you and a friend than it is to buy 1 used disc from Gamestop and try to image it for a friend. The times have changed, the CD Swapping, copying, one for everyone days have died. Insisting on physical media now where you can't share the game because you have to login to the publisher's site anyways is ridiculous. What do you gain by that?

Re:Good ridance

[vux984]

I wanted to play Half Life 1 the other day... so I fired up Steam, downloaded it and fired it up minutes later. Took all of 5 minutes. That's how it is with games, even new games (provided your connection is fast enough).

Sure, the games that I've bought through them are stuck on Steam but I knew that when I signed up for it, so who cares?

For me being stuck on steam isn't so much the issue, as being stuck to an account. I don't really care that a given game is stuck to steam's intaller/manager instead of a physical disk. I care that I have no approved way to lend a game I'm not playing to my brother. Apparently he has to buy his own copy.

Re:Good ridance

[vux984]

As someone else said here on /., the real solution is creating one account per game on Steam.

1) That is itself a violation of steams ToS. Of course, you can get away with it, but one shouldn't need to violate the rules to make something usable.

2) While that approach does give you some flexibility with managing your titles, it makes the community aspects of steam almost unusable. If I'm playing left4dead and my brother fires up left4dead2, I'd like to connect with him... so if we have one account per game, I need to 'friend' every one of my brothers games, and vice versa. That rapidly leads to ridiculousness if you have a bunch of friends all taking this approach.

Re:Good ridance

[vux984]

The way to get around the whole "Family sharing" thing is to have every family member have their own Steam account, and when you want a game for your 7 year old, you gift it to your 7 year old's account.

Your missing the point. I bought it for my -kids-. Plural.

He has access to it, you have access to his account (being his parent), and he has some material to learn how to share with brothers and sisters.

Except that Steam forbids him from sharing it with his brothers and sisters. Of course we can do so anyway and "get away with it". (What a great lesson to be teaching...) And I find it offensive that this is even against the rules in the first place.

Insisting on physical media now where you can't share the game because you have to login to the publisher's site anyways is ridiculous. What do you gain by that?

That's something of a strawman. I'm insisting on solutions where you do own and can transfer the game. Old-school physical media had that. GoG.com and drm free indie games have that. Even Wii console games still have that. New-school defective media systems with DRM and publisher accounts tied to the game for PC do not. And Steam does NOT.

The point is that Steam is worse than what we used to have. It might well be better than what some "physical media" has become, but its still a step in the WRONG direction.

Re:Good ridance

[soupforare]

I'm not sure we'll ever get something like it on the PC, but the PS3 lets you do the game sharing thing for online purchases. I don't have one, but my friends are all shared to each other and will even go in on the larger purchases together.

Re:Good ridance

[Monkeedude1212]

The point is that Steam is worse than what we used to have. It might well be better than what some "physical media" has become, but its still a step in the WRONG direction.

Oh absolutely, but I also think what physical media today is worse than what we used to have. You make a good point about consoles, which typicall don't have draconian DRM methods. In terms of PC gaming though, there are very few titles that don't have some form of annoying DRM that I find are worth the extra $10-20 just so that I can go to a store, stick it on a shelf, and hopefully give it away some day.

If you don't like Steams method than you shouldn't have any issues sharing it around the family on the moral principles of the matter, and should they take any action against you, you would probably have a solid enough case to fight it. Valve would step down from bad press.

I would like to live in an ideal world where I only had to buy one copy of Total Annihilation and all my friends could join me on a LAN, but those days are over. I'd much rather be spending 20 dollars for a game for me and a friend on a Christmas Sale than I would be spending 80 dollars so we both have a physical copy.

If you wait for the Good deals to come around, Steam is essentially the same price as Renting games from a local blockbuster, and thats the kind of mentality you need when using it.

Re:Good ridance

[imakemusic]

"Literally" whoosh? How, exactly? Slashdot comments come with sound effects these days? Someone printed out the comment, folded it into a paper aeroplane and flew it past my ears?

I saw his point and I was responding to it. Despite the fact that all he needed was the CD it doesn't appear to be any easier for him. Sure, he didn't have any trouble being "approved" or anything like that but then neither did I. There are, as I said above, pros and cons with both systems. I am not saying that Steam is perfect but you seem to have decided that it is no good for anyone and I respectfully disagree.

In my example above I would have installed Half Life from a CD but - due to the brilliant freedom of being able to lend it to a friend - I no longer have my CD because some bugger never gave it back to me. So, I've bought two versions of the game because of this freedom that you are touting as a selling point (actually 3, I had two CDs).

Now you may argue that this is my fault - I shouldn't have lost my disk, I should have backed it up or whatever. Well, maybe. Either way, because of Steam, I still have a copy of the game.

You make the oft-repeated point about having to connect to a server to download the game. My response to that is: No shit. It's a download service - that's how it works. But it balances out:

Can you buy a new game on CD at midnight on a Sunday when all the shops are shut? No? I can on Steam.

Can you get a new game and play it quicker than it takes you to go to the shop and back and without even having to even leave your seat? No? I can on Steam.

No server? No game.

Unless I'd already downloaded it and backed it up, which you can do with Steam.

Server doesn't like you.

I've not had this problem. Admittedly there are people that have. I would be very, very interested to see a comparison of the percentage of Steam users who have had trouble accessing games that they have bought against the number of consumers of physical media who have been unable to play for one reason or another (scratch/broken /missing disks etc). As it is I have no idea what the figures are but no-one I know has had any problems.

Server doesn't like your game anymore? No game.

I have heard a lot of people say this but as far as I am aware this has never happened to a game on Steam. Valve have said that they will (though aren't legally bound to) release patches for any games bought through Steam should the service ever be shut down. They are also the most generally nice, most customer-focused tech company I know of so I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Tl;dr - If you want ultimate control over your games then buy them on CD, crack the DRM and back them up.

However if, like me, you like to have a remote backup of all your games, no CDs to have to worry about, downloadable AAA games, often for a ridiculously generous discount then you can stick to Steam. Or do both. Whatever, I don't care. I like Steam, therefore I use it.

Re:Good ridance

[imakemusic]

Sure, being able to do that would be nice but then no-one would buy new games, they'd just share them between friends.

I think it's a compromise that had to be made.

Sure they could have done that just to be nice. I'm sure it would have garnered them some support from the community but when all's said and done Valve are a business and need to make money..and lets face it they've got enough support from the community as it is. I'm happy to give them a fair price for the games they sell because they give me a service which I like and I'm happy to be the sole user of those games.

If my brother wants to play one then he is welcome to come to my house and try it out. If he wants his own copy then he can go buy one, the scrounging little cheapskate. He'd only mess up my saved games, anyway. Ok, I don't really mean that - I see your point. I just think that some concessions had to be made and they seem to have worked - Steam is very popular.

[Disclaimer: People will probably think I'm working Valve the amount of time I spend on here defending them... I should point out that I'm not affiliated with Valve in any way but I have been using Steam since it was first released and have never had a problem with it.]

Re:Good ridance

[commodore64_love]

Okay well..... the PS1 games I bought in the 90s still work too. You think any downloaded games would still work ~15 years later? Doubt it.

The other comments about dropping CDs in cars is irrelevant to the topic about gaming on the home PS2.
Also note CDs in cars last a lot longer than records in cars did (all scratched to hell).
CDs were an improvement.
And CDs/DVDs can be converted back to cash when you're done with them. Can't do that with a fucking download.

Re:Good ridance

[vux984]

If you don't like Steams method than you shouldn't have any issues sharing it around the family on the moral principles of the matter

Moral principles dictate taht if you don't like a contract don't enter into it. There is no moral principle of "if you find the contract unacceptable but think you won't get busted, sign it anyway and then do what you want..."

I would like to live in an ideal world where I only had to buy one copy of Total Annihilation and all my friends could join me on a LAN, but those days are over.

See, I don't. I never had a problem with the idea that you'd need x copies to play. (Although I appreciated games that specifically allowed multi-player installs from a single key, etc.)

I just expect to be able to give my brother Portal, now that I'm long finished with it. Especially seeing as I bought it in a box at the store.

If you wait for the Good deals to come around, Steam is essentially the same price as Renting games from a local blockbuster, and thats the kind of mentality you need when using it.

Yes, that's precisely how I do look at it. I picked up a number of steam titles over the holiday sale because they were priced fairly for a "non-transferrable subscription".

Re:Good ridance

[vux984]

Sure, being able to do that would be nice but then no-one would buy new games, they'd just share them between friends.

And yet the entire games industry went from non-existant to a multi-billion dollar industry while people were able to do just that.

iTunes is doing just fine too.

Being able to share between friends is not a problem.

Re:Good ridance

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to buy a game and let my 7 year old play it without giving him my steam account. When he eventually moves out, he should be able to take it with him.

WTF kind of games would your 7 year old want to take with him a decade later? I Spy? Lego Harry Potter?

Presumably if you get a decade's worth of enjoyment out of a video game, you could afford to purchase it again ten years later, especially since it would likely be free / near free.

Re:Good ridance

[grumbel]

Discs don't scratch themselves. You have to be pretty careless to scratch a disc to a point where the disc can no longer be read.

Re:Good ridance

[igreaterthanu]

I consider people who scratch discs to be lazy/careless. Ever since I bought my first CD player in 1989, I've never scratched a single disc. Not one.

I always take very good care of my discs but the problem is that some people share their discs with little kids who then go ahead and scratch them.

Re:Good ridance

[stewbacca]

Try explaining that to any one of my three children.

I have several cds that don't appear to be scratched, but for whatever reason (age?) just aren't readable by any of my 3 computers at home. All of them are games...ones that without a cd crack you have to put the cd in to play, which puts them at a much higer risk of becoming damaged.

The simple fact that a game cd normally has to be handled every time you want to play it puts it at an unacceptably high risk of damage beyond use, in my humble anecdotal experiences (PC games and unfortunately now, PS3 games as well).

Re:Good ridance

[jyx]

No, but they do rot by themselves. I've got a shelf full of DVDS I bough back in 2005 that are now unreadable. Totally scratch free, but all the golden 'dye' or what ever that shit is has been OHM NOM NOMED into oblivion by my local tropical weather and bacteria.

Ive got no CD's from the 80's left working, they look like a worm farm when you hold them up to the light.

So no, physical media is not the knees of bees either.

Re:Good ridance

[gmhowell]

You are assuming that commodore 64 love actually has any friends with whom he could share media.

Re:Good ridance

[Anonymous Coward]

Disc games have their own hurdles. I've got a copy of the Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion that I can't play because the manual has disappeared and I don't have a CD key. Ditto for my copy of Battlefield 2. And, as you said, there's DRM; the install limits and online activation are getting particularly onerous.

All in all, I think that digital and physical distribution have reached a level where one is no better than the other. It's all down to personal preference.

The answer - not for decades

[tomhudson]

The facts from their own chart: 10 billion in physical game sales vs 200 million in app sales. Even if it increases by 200 million a year, it will take a long time to catch up.

Also, last years decline in physical sales was due to the Great Recession, and has already been reversed.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[igreaterthanu]

Think more exponential.

Steam recently was selling BioShock for US$5. The local store here was selling it for approximately US$50. How many people are going to keep paying these ridiculous prices at a physical store? Not me.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[mvar]

The only way for the physical stores to keep up to the competition of Steam and the likes of it, is with "special"/"collector's" editions of those games...Which, now that i think of it, you can buy from amazon for the same price including shipping...well, never mind, they're doomed.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Anonymous Coward]

Well my local store sold the game for 3€ last year. And games are usually quite expensive here in Finland. This is an exception, however. I guess they just took too large a print.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[pushing-robot]

No, 10.1 billion per year in game sales versus 200 million per month in app sales. Also, TFA says that app sales may have already reached 300 million per month in the past few months, which shows how rapidly online sales are catching up with with physical games' 840 million per month.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Mascot]

I assume due to the publishing deals, games are generally more expensive on Steam than in stores where I live. With the exception of the Steam sales, of course.

Result is that if I want a new game, I buy in a store and save 30-40% off the Steam price in many cases. The remainder of my games I buy when Steam does their 50-70% sales.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Xugumad]

Amazon.co.uk has it for £6.89, or about $10 (although for some reason I can't paste the URL, so you'll have to trust me). On top of which, I don't have to tie up my Internet connection for several hours downloading it, and the Steam sale was a limited time special. If I want to buy a game at launch, I can expect to pay £5-10 more for the digital copy (really, we don't know what's with that), compared to having a physical copy shipped to me in time for release day.

The point being that digital sales aren't always clearly better.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[hairyfeet]

Or they can sell games at "impulse buy" prices to get folks through the door and then hope they can also sell them something more expensive, like I've seen my local Gamestop do a time or two. That is one of the things I like about Good Old Games, pretty much everything on the site is at impulse buy purchases, but hell wandering around retail you never know what you'll find.

Just this weekend I popped into Fred's with my GF to pick up some compressed air I perused through their disc stack while she was looking at housewares and found Mercenaries II for $6. Since I had seen Yahtzee's review which stated while braindead it was still mindless fun I figured what the hell. I gave it to my nephew who is having quite a blast hijacking tanks and blowing up buildings.

So while I have no doubt eventually online will beat retail for PC (especially thanks to all the stores only carrying console games for the most part) as long as there are cheap games to be had folks will still shop at B&M. With consoles I don't see retail going away until the game companies finish fucking everyone with first use killing keys tied to consoles, which frankly will be suicidally dumb. Most folks I know with consoles trade the games they are bored with for discounts on new titles and thus buy more new games, but frankly it wouldn't be the first time greed destroyed a market.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Anonymous Coward]

Counterpoint - I bought Fallout: New Vegas on release day from Amazon. It came to £23 and some pence, if I remember rightly (it was certainly under the £24.99 I was expecting). Amazon currently sell F:NV for £12.98.

Steam is still selling F:NV on PC for £29.99, "reduced" from the £34.99 RRP that no-one with an ounce of sense would pay.

Don't get me wrong - I have a Steam account for Orange Box, and F:NV (and as such will have one for any other game that uses Steam for copy protection), but due to their high prices I can't see myself ever buying anything from them.

I tend to check out Steam before making a purchase, but unless you get very lucky with their promotions the prices aren't that competitive.

Now GOG.com, on the other hand, I've bought a fair few games from.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Anonymous Coward]

The facts from their own chart: 10 billion in physical game sales vs 200 million in app sales.

Let me stop you right there.

I followed both links and looked at all their graphs. They are all comparing online purchases of applications to online purchases of music.
Nowhere do any of the graphs or charts display information related to physical sales or gaming specifically.

Now, feel free to continue whatever pointless rant you were on.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[fasta]

The facts from their own chart: 10 billion in physical game sales vs 200 million in app sales. Even if it increases by 200 million a year, it will take a long time to catch up.

Not $200 million/year, $200 million per month. Compared to 840 million/month ($10 billion/year) for the physical game market.

Of course, people with non iOS game hardware will keep buying games, and the App store will expand the market. But it seems to be a new force.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Nemyst]

Then again, a single physical sale is worth like ten app store sales. Furthermore, app store games tend to be much more simple and therefore have a shorter usable lifespan. While it's true you might purchase five games on your iWhatever, you'll often go through them in a matter of hours and then it's just repetition - think arcade games.

You don't get to see things like Bioshock or Starcraft 2 on the app store.

Now if we compared things with Steam, it might be different, but this isn't the case being made here.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if it increases by 200 million a year, it will take a long time to catch up.

yes, because everything will increase linearly into the future. Way to extrapolate based on two data points.

As Ray Kurtzweil would tell you, these things grow exponentially rather than linearly. The only question is if mobile games exponential growth will eclipse disc media before the singularity happens.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[tomhudson]

Before the car, people predicted that cities of millions would be impossible because we'd be 6 feet deep in horse manure. Exponential growth is always reined in long-term.

Things can also decline exponentially. We're not knee-deep in horse manure, game cartridges, 8-track tapes or 5-1/4" floppies any more. Standard-def TV? You can't give away a good 27" tv any more, same as 19" crt monitors.

How about those Hummer sales?

Or house prices?

With only 2 data points (you're the one who points this out) , you simply cannot make any claim that it will continue exponentially. We don't know what will come along over the next 10 years and make all today's assumptions equally obsolete.

Re:The answer - not for decades

[Zangief]

The 10 billion figure is yearly.

The 200 million figure is monthly.

They are still far apart, but not by as much as you imply.

I hope not any time soon

[Freaky Spook]

I enjoy the competition that many different retailers bring to the market, and also being able to buy second hand.

The convergence of all media to digital stores where you have no rights at all scares the hell out of me because of the lack of regulation governments put on digital sales to protect consumers.

The thought of a world where games/movies/music/books/news being controlled by Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/Google doesn't seem like a very nice place.

Math looks solid

[Dr. Hellno]

Just eyeballing their figures, 4 years sounds plausible. Let's theorize:

Are sales of physical media still a good approximation of the health of the traditional games industry?
How do steam and the console services compare to the itunes app store in terms of income?
Will itunes application sales continue on this trajectory, or level off as the ipad and iphone reach saturation?
Are there really many valuable ideas still to be expressed in app form?
Will iphone-game consumers ever migrate significantly to traditional gaming platforms?

So many questions! So few answers.

Sooner than you think

[Anonymous Coward]

Buy a physical copy of an iPhone game. Go ahead. Go to your local game store and buy an iPhone game.

Oh, wait, you can't, because you can only buy them through the Apple App Store. (App Store cards don't count, you still have to download the game and don't get a copy on physical media.)

Guess what? Sony wants in on that action for the PSP2.

The answer is going to be "when the people selling games stop offering them any other way."

We've still got a few console generations to go, the Nintendo 3DS still uses physical media but allows downloaded games too. I'm incredibly unclear on how the PSP2 is supposed to work, I think the failure of the PSPgo (download only) means it'll still support physical media, but make no mistake: the era of getting games on physical media is coming to an end. Honestly, by the end of the decade, I expect all games will be download-only.

Re:Sooner than you think

[Fallus Shempus]

'cept Ids Rage is is going to be 2-3 dual layer DVDs big, so I think I'll by a physical copy thanks.

I also still replay a lot of old games and my kids are catching up on my back catalogue, I want a game for life, not for the life of the company authorising my use.

Re:Sooner than you think

[icebraining]

Download only is not the worst it can happen - at least it can be cracked. The worst is streaming only (a la OnLive).

Re:Sooner than you think

[Narishma]

The PSP2 will still have physical media, unless they want it to tank in the territory where it will probably be the most successful (Japan).

Re:Sooner than you think

[minasoko]

I want a game for life, not for the life of the company authorising my use.

This will be made a moot point by the forced obsolescence practiced since forever by the industry. They want, and have always wanted to exact precise control over the entire channel end-to-end.

It's a wet dream for these businesses to be able to almost completely guarantee that no consumer can buy or sell games second-hand. It's only because they had no other viable method of distribution that you've been permitted to take home a physical product up till now.
Those in charge of these businesses absolutely want you to only be able to play old games by their gracious say-so and through their marvellous Virtual Portal®. At a price, of course and only as long as they deem it profitable. It's software as a service and it's horrid.

Even PCs are not immune from this. It is not easy to play DirectX games from the 90s on current platforms and it's not going to get any easier with all the dialing home and DRM employed in modern games.
They are closing a loop-hole and they can't wait.

So physical music is dead?

[m50d]

That article's written as if digital downloads have already killed physical music sales. But my local HMV's alive and well. So how true is its "we all know how that one played out"?

Re:So physical music is dead?

[Khyber]

Hollywood Music Video tends to carry more obscure stuff, and thus remain in business because their stuff is less likely to be widely pirated like a big business film.

Very much the model of the Black Lodge video in Memphis, and they carry the obscure of the obscure.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[clickclickdrone]

HMV posted another disasterous quarter and are closing 60 stores in the UK. Sales aren't that great.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[kyz]

Physical music sales don't know they're already dead.

Check out this graph of music sales by format, 1973-2008. You can clearly see that each format grew, peaked, then was pushed to death by some new format. Cassettes killed vinyl. CDs killed cassettes. Digital downloads, provided they don't suddenly drop (and there's no indication that they will) are going to utterly kill CDs in the next few years. Since 1999, music publishers have made less and less money from CD sales.

Sure, you'll still be able to buy CDs - even in reasonably sized shops like HMV. There are any number of vintage vinyl shops trading today. But it's not where most of the money in selling music will be; the billions. That will be digital downloads.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[Dr. Hellno]

Most of the other formats were killed by something that was better, though. Downloads don't revolutionize music consumption in the way the cassette did, and they actually reduce sound quality unlike the CD (they don't have to, but itunes downloads do). On the other hand, they are cheaper. Maybe that's enough? I Still don't think it's a forgone conclusion. History clearly favors obsolescence, but it's hard to say if the CD fits the pattern.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[!eopard]

Donwloads are more convenient as they take up so little space when compared to physical media such as CD's, plus they are easily integrated into something else you were already carrying - your mobile phone.

Sure quality may be a bit lower, but how can you tell when listening to music through cheap earbuds?

Re:So physical music is dead?

[kyz]

Downloads don't revolutionize music consumption in the way the cassette did

Are you kidding?

Cassettes allowed portable playback - great. But digital downloads just made impulse buying possible. You can buy anywhere, anytime. It's not convenient to buy from a physical music store unless you're already in one.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[mangu]

Very interesting graph, thanks. Do you happen to have a link to the raw data for this?

One important point there, until the 1990s sales were growing year by year, then they suddenly dropped. Total sales from new formats is nowhere close to what CDs brought in their peak.

It seems like the RIAA is right in that downloads are hurting their income badly. I like that. I cannot see an ethical justification for all those billions going into the music industry like that, without any benefit to the public or to the artists.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[delinear]

Not only that, but it's sales of DVDs and games that are keeping the store going - sales of music have dropped off a cliff (as evidenced by the fact that in most HMV stores you'll have one or two shelves of the latest chart music front of store, the rest is buried right away in the back corner or on a different floor while the rest of the shop front is given over to DVD/BluRay). Meanwhile Zavvi and Woolies, the biggest physical music competitors, already died out in the high street.

Re:So physical music is dead?

[delinear]

I've definitely found myself doing this more often, even as a longtime stalwart of owning the physical media. Previously I'd hear a song I liked, search the lyrics, find the name, read some reviews and unless I could find a really good deal on the album online, I'd wait and look for it cheap in the local music stores. Now within seconds of hearing the song I can have bought it for less than a quid (without having to buy the rest of the filler from the album if I don't want it) and be listening to it. It's just so damn convenient, I'd buy even more if it was cheaper (a quid seems like nothing so I'll impulse buy, but seven or eight pounds for an album makes me still think I'd be better off looking for bargains on the physical media, a price mark of maybe £3-4 would probably get me buying a lot more albums).

Line fitting much?

[hardtofindanick]

If you get rid of the outliers red line's slope is much less steeper. We clearly need more data.

Re:Line fitting much?

[Moridin42]

They're also comparing apps from an app store to games on disc, as if those two markets were directly competing. I got news for the author; they're not.

Second.. they're also basing their estimate of when apps will overtake game sales on the assumption that physical game sales are shrinking, because last year was down 5%. Although they conveniently don't mention that for roughly the same period, both song and app sales revenues also had declines. See those nice well-below-the-pretty-line data points in the graph?

Spectacular scholarship on display in the article, I must say.

Re:Line fitting much?

[mangu]

However, if you do consider the sep-10 outlier, the red curve looks more like an exponential function than a line. OMG, song incomes have already been surpassed by app sales!

Re:Line fitting much?

[tepples]

They're also comparing apps from an app store to games on disc, as if those two markets were directly competing.

Apple has been marketing the iPod touch as a handheld video game system, a competitor to the DS and PSP. So at least Apple thinks they're competing.

If you count all downloads as apps

[Khyber]

Since they are all applications of a computer architecture, you could argue they already have, with advent of Steam and other online stores selling software.

And what's more stupid

[Sycraft-fu]

Is if you want to actually analyze game sales, the question isn't iPad shit, it is on computers. The reason is on PCs you now have a choice between retail/mail order and download for almost all games. Services like Impulse, Steam, and Direct2Drive sell pretty much every title online. Their regular prices are usually competitive with stores, and their sale prices are almost always better. So is a person wishes to, they can buy games online. It is a direct 1:1 comparison since we are talking the same games, the same platform.

THAT would be the thing to research. This just sounds like yet another tech journalist (using both terms loosely) who is infatuated with his iToys and thus wants to write an article about how they are T3H FUTURE OF EVERYTHING!!!11. Real research would have been to talk to game publishers and find out how their sales of physical vs download compare, and how that has been changing.

There's little data on it publicly, but Stardock, who runs Impulse and has published Sins of a Solar Empire, Elemental and Galactic Civilizations, says it is about 4:1 physical to online sales.

It is clear that the online market is large and growing. I personally buy nearly all my games on Impulse and Steam these days just out of convenience. However what I do has no bearing on what society does at large. Without hard data, it is foolish to say everything is going that way fast. It probably is in the long run, but who knows how long?

For that matter until game consoles start selling their games that way there is going to be a large physical games market there. Currently only some things, mostly smaller more indy type titles or older games, are sold for download on consoles. All the current titles are disc only. Given that consoles are a big segment of the gaming market (as are handhelds, which are also physical sales) until that changes you aren't going to see a move to "no physical media).

I think we'll see the day when physical media is more or less totally dead, but I could see it being 30-40 years before it happens.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course you have to factor in that games consoles are the main seller of games which are still very much physical, PSP Go tried to go on-line games only and look where that went. Traditional game stores refused to sell them (not that there was really much demand).
I'm sure that if Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo brought out an on-line game store only traditional game stores would again possibly refuse to sell it.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

there's also a basic mistake using NPD data which is regional data

Re:And what's more stupid

[Monchanger]

Very informative- thanks for that.

And beside online purchases there is also the emergence of games which are not purchased (Flash games), use micro-transactions (Facebook, LOTRO) and subscription based games (WoW) which derive their main revenue post-box sale. Ignoring these and why they are very popular while speculating on trends is short-sighted.

Something I find so strange is retail sales of game cards, which are not only far less cost-effective than online sales, but are also generally purchased by/for kids for whom that's not technically challenging.

Re:And what's more stupid

[mjwx]

Is if you want to actually analyze game sales, the question isn't iPad shit, it is on computers.

Agree about the Ipad. Yes copies of flash games are passable but the proper games (or attempts at proper games) like FPS's are utter shite. Android will be the same. You will probably be able to get away with a fighter like Mortal Kombat or an easy driving sim/racing game like Mario kart but then you hit a hard limit of what you can not do with touch controls and no tactile feedback.

The reason is on PCs you now have a choice between retail/mail order and download for almost all games.

Yep, in OZ, local retailers are crying to the govt at every opportunity because I can order the same game from somewhere like Play-Asia.com for half the price delivered to my door. EB games wants A$90-100 per new PC release, Play Asia has it for US$40-50 + shipping. A boxed copy even beats Steams A$70 (but in Steam's defence, that price point is pushed by the publishers, not Steam).

There's little data on it publicly, but Stardock, who runs Impulse and has published Sins of a Solar Empire, Elemental and Galactic Civilizations, says it is about 4:1 physical to online sales.

I read the same thing, that was when Sins of a Solar Empire was released I wouldn't be surprised if it was 3:1 by now. Also remember that mail order copies still count as a boxed copy (the same as from a retail store). Where digital distribution is really making it's mark are in older games. If I've got $5 and time to kill, I'll check the latest specials on Steam, Impulse or GOG and I never keep that $5 these days.

Also "Last Years Gamers" are loving it, these are the people who wait a while before buying new games so they can stay behind the bleeding edge on computer hardware. They get six month old games for A$20-40

Re:And what's more stupid

[Lumpy]

Call me when the profit from ipad game sales even TOUCH the profits from the call of duty series.

And how you cant play call of duty on the ipad without sucking hard. the Ipad and iphone interface is utter crap for FPS games.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll use an ipad for gaming as soon as they turn angry birds into a 3d FPS.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Sechr Nibw]

The advantages of a game (time) card:
You don't need a credit card to keep a subscription active, once the time on the card is up, it's up, no accidental fees.
You can give it as a gift to someone else.
Typically they are priced at the one-month-at-a-time MMO price ($15/mo for WoW, $30 for 2 months on a game card). If the store has a sale, you can get it cheaper than the six-month-at-a-time price ($13/mo @ 6 months). I recall seeing sales that let you pick up two 60 day WoW cards for about $40-$45, which would put it at about $10-$11 a month.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Sycraft-fu]

The publishers love the "last year's gamers" thing too. They can hit a market of people that won't pay full price, but are still willing to drop money. This was harder to do in retail since shelf space is expensive. Thus stores only carry titles that are performing. Generally once a title drops under $40 they axe it, except for some special budget titles. Digital stores allow for them to reach those customers. Titles can be kept forever, down to any price point.

It also takes cash away from the used game market to them. This is in part because you can't redistribute downloaded games but more because it is just easier and often just as cheap to get the older stuff online. So if you are shopping for those older titles you talk about, well your choices are used or online often, and if teh online version is just as cheap, then there you go. Buyer is happy, publisher is happy, everyone but Gamestop is happy.

Re:And what's more stupid

[iainl]

'Technically challenging' no. 'Practically challenging', where the challenge is buying the virtual currency without being old enough to own a credit card, is another matter. It's a lot simpler and safer for the average parent to hand over pocket money, which may or may not be spent on an iTunes voucher, a XBox/PSN/Wii Points card, or whatever.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

From this shocking graph you can see the poster recently invested in Apple.

Re:And what's more stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

Games are still distributed on physical media for only three reasons:

1) Downloads are still awkward to give as a gift. Gift-givers want some physical token to represent the disk.

2) People want backups, a sense of control, and a sense of ownership. There is too much uncertainty in the question "what happens when the download service shuts down?"

3) Not every gaming device has a reliable or convenient network connection.

Number 1 is easy to solve: sell the game box without media: just a manual and a download code.
Number 3 will just solve itself over time.

Number 2 is the only long-term reason for physical media to stick around. It's tough to instill trust in consumers that their game will survive even if the publisher goes bankrupt. That's a tough puzzle, because as soon as a company advertises, "we put X, Y, and Z in place to protect our consumers even if we go bankrupt!", their stockholders will go bonkers. For the same reason that banks don't really compete too heavily on advertising their security...they don't want their customers thinking about it...digital download publishers don't want consumers thinking about the long-term.

As the schism between App Stores and large monolithic game purchases...that will just erode over time. Some Apps will get larger, more complicated, and better supported. Some major games will be sold only in small bite-sized chunks. These trends are already happening, and the two currently separated worlds will just merge into one continuum.

Re:And what's more stupid

[noidentity]

What do you do when you're tired of a game you bought online? Can you sell it?

Re:And what's more stupid

[Dr Max]

Not only that can you imagine trying to download cod4mw2 on a mobile internet plan. Sure when data cost what it should (couple of dollars per GB) and 10 times as fast, then the app store might take over the physical gamming sector (overtake isn't the right word because it will be a migration not an out growing).

Say it with me...

[awestruk]

Thou shalt not extrapolate based on a recent change. Source: xkcd.com/605/ Really, why does slashdot even publish this garbage? Are their content managers outsourced to China?

But...

[awestruk]

I like the physical media. Who doesn't like the trophy shelf of the vids a gamer has conquered?...chicks dig it : )

Re:But...

[jakobX]

I would mod you up if i could. I also prefer physical media. Sure nowadays its pretty much only an empty dvd box, but atleast it feels like you bought something. Digital doesnt give me that feeling. I might as well torrent it.

Man i wish the old cardboard boxes and big manuals were still standard.

Come on... Steve is feeling bad these days.

[denzacar]

Cut them some slack.
Apple needs to boost its shares value somehow.

Prepare to read how iPhones clean the air, reduce global warming and feed the hungry in next couple of days.

Re:Come on... Steve is feeling bad these days.

[Dunbal]

Apple needs to boost its shares value somehow.

      LOL. I'd like to see the faces of people who bought Apple stock recently "because it's bigger than Microsoft and has the second biggest market cap!". In the pre-market it's already down almost 5%.

      Where is your God now, Apple fans? Oh yeah right, in the hospital...

Re:Come on... Steve is feeling bad these days.

[Anonymous Coward]

This just in..... iPhones help you increase the size of your p**** :)

Re:Come on... Steve is feeling bad these days.

[geminidomino]

But apparently they don't help you use wildcards correctly. :)

Re:Oblig Additional

[Scott Kevill]

http://xkcd.com/662/

Steam

[sunderland56]

What do you consider Steam? It isn't physical media, and it isn't the Apple app store either.

Steam probably sells a sizeable percentage of all video games right now, and is steadily increasing it's market share.

Re:Steam

[dwightk]

Yeah, I'd guess if you added steam's sales to the slope, non-physical games sales would overcome physical games sales even quicker.

Re:Oblig Additional

[commodore64_love]

That cartoon reminds me of an ad I saw on TV.
  - It was for ATT mobile devices to watch movies/hear music while on the go, and showed a family sitting in a living room, watching their Pads or phones, and nobody was talking to anyone else. Yeah that's an exciting future. Sign me up!

Buttons

[MasaMuneCyrus]

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The video game industry is not in danger until all these phones with games start getting dedicated buttons for those games. Touch screens and motion controls do not now, nor will they ever replace buttons.

Re:Buttons

[Anonymous Coward]

Buttons are so old tech. I suggest you stick with your stone axe.

Re:Buttons

[jedidiah]

That sounds great until you're fighting a deathmatch with dinosaurs using stone axes.

How about story mod points?

[Zenin]

Seriously, comment mod points are..umm...pointless, when the stories themselves should be modded -1.

How does this half-assed amateur blog nonsense make it to the front page of /. anyway? Is it really that slow of a news day for tech? Sheesh...

Apples to overtake oranges.

[Anonymous Coward]

News at 11.

Anecdotally

[ledow]

Well, I've stopped buying games that come in boxes. Several years ago, in fact. There are several factors: Availability, Price, Convenience, Backup/Returns being impossible or worthless anyway, and Impulse-buying. I don't really use App-stores at all (I have no Apple devices) - the nearest I get is Steam but is that really an "App-store"? I think possibly the WiiStore might count but the same holds for that as for Steam. Anything PC that I buy tends to come from digital sources, though, because I need to be able to move it between machines and have it follow me for several years (all my Steam games have followed me perfectly since 2003, so they have a much better reputation already than 99% of the app-stores, eBooks, music-stores, etc. out there).

1) Availability: Most of the games I've bought, I do *not* see on shelves in stores. That's if I bother to go into a store at all. Can you buy Altitude in a shop? No? Why not? World of Goo is available for the Wii but I've never seen it in amongst the Wii games at any shop I've ever been in. Because physical media production and distribution is expensive, and because shops decide what to sell (which means high-margin products mainly), and because the "PC" section of any games shop is shrinking by the day. Can I get GTA (the original version) or Quake? No. As soon as a game is a year old, it disappears and only re-appears in supermarket "bargain basement" stands costing almost as much as it did new.

2) Price: Most download games can be had much cheaper. Whether they are brand new or years old, they are usually cheaper online as a download. I don't need the boxes, the manuals, the flyers, etc. If I *really* do, I can just print them off from a PDF - the money I save by not having the maps printed by the games publisher is much more than the cost of printing out only the maps that I *DO* actually need. I throw the boxes out because, after decades of keeping them all, I've realised that I *NEVER* use them and only need the occasional manual for copy-protection. They also damage much more easily than an original install disk (and copy) placed in a proper disk storage case and kept safe. My entire software archive since my first CD-drive (and several dozen floppies) can fit into a box under my desk - approximately the same size as 10-15 games if I were to keep the boxes. The only thing I need to buy is a storage medium in a container - a DVD or CD case fits that description, or a USB key, but a lot of games only come in A4-sized thick boxes.

3) I have to go to a shop. Find a physical box of the exact type I require. Make sure it exactly corresponds with the game I want and is for the right platform. Take it to the counter. Have some guy put his sticky fingers on a disk that they ripped out earlier in case people stole it. Carry it home. Unpack it (so the packaging has a journey of about an hour). Throw the crap away. File the manual somewhere (or more likely just throw it). Take the CD and *carefully* make a copy (if I can) or install it. Then put that CD into some sort of case for long-term storage so it won't get damaged (and which doesn't take up the whole room). Or I just could click the link on something like the Steam / GOG.com store and have it installed within ten minutes while I'm using the computer for something else. When I'm done with it, I delete it. If I want it back, I double-click it (or at worst download it again). If I want to back it up, I copy a folder/file it into my normal backup paths. If I want to move it to another machine, I just double-click it from the other machine.

4) Backup/Returns: A lot of games can't be backed up from the CD / DVD. If I do, they often require hideous hacks that can affect the game and/or online accounts. With digital downloads (as counter-intuitive as it is to anyone who worries about DRM), I can back them up and restore them on other machines quite easily. If there's a problem with a game I've bought, it's usually only a) physical disk is broken or b) software is brok

Duh

[Anonymous Coward]

I would have thought that Apps already had overtaken. I've not bought any physical media games in .... over a decade? Download, legally. Most vendors have been selling their software online for a loooong time.

but i'm on satellite internet...

[Anonymous Coward]

...with a pitiful transfer cap you insensitive clods!

Not Gonna Happen

[MogNuts]

I don't know about this one. Yes, for little mini games, indies, smartphone games, etc it will. And yes for the PC. But no for the console. It just has a different demographic. People who buy consoles typically want a plug and play experience. They WANT to go to a store that day and as soon as they get home, literally just pop it in and play it (not that Steam isn't as good, but they need the "going to the store experience").

Two, the sizes of the games. Here in the U.S., many times we're unfortunate to have caps. 250 GB mind u seems the norm, but that fills up quick with downloading 8 GB games, 4 GB movies, streaming 4 GB movies. It may work for a shitty little game on iOS that's only 50 MB, but not for a 10 GB AAA game.

Lastly, I hope that we always have physical disks because we need the used secondary market. Otherwise, no matter how I love the service, we'll have a rehash of Steam or XBL. Games that are 4 years old selling for $30, when they should be $5-10. And new games only out 2-3 months, which the retail box is only $30, will still be $60.

Theres new kid in the block

[iinlane]

Apple faces fierce competition from Steam. Valve has almost unbelievable sales. Last Christmas they sold indie packs with 93% discount - to put it into perspective: they took a pack of 5 indie games and made 50% discount and then again 50% and again 50% and finally 44% discount. I wish I could buy a house with such a discount.

A telling point that seems to have been missed...

[Gybrwe666]

is the fact that we are beginning to accept the term "app" as a distinctly different category/delivery method of software, rather than whatever poor comparisons/facts of the original story. We are now getting to the point where Steam/ITunes/et cetera et al. have become a distinct category of media, even though each one is an "app" in the original sense of the word.

Seems to me that this trend is essentially inevitable, whether it's the game industry or any other category of computer software. Simply put, not having to create, manufacture, and distribute physical media is cheaper, faster, and easier for everyone, and as the percentage of people with acceptable "broadband" speeds (which is pretty low, because it's very likely you'd put up with a 6 hour download of a big game in the background) increases, the drive to move away from physical media benefits everyone.

So, move along, no real story here, just some journalist looking to get paid by the word to repeat the obvious.

tomhudson the wannabe computer expert, lol!

[Anonymous Coward]

tomhudson is the wannabe expert on computing. We are so impressed (not). tomhudson, face it: You're a nobody in the science of computing. tomhudson, You're merely nothing more than a trained chimp that uses the tools others make for him and you try to pass it off like you actually know something worthwhile? Please.

Sounds familiar...

[Anonymous Coward]

Did anyone happen to see Steve Job's signature on that article?

tomhudson we'd like you to answer a question

[Anonymous Coward]

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1952834&cid=34915292 , and answer the question there at the url where it was asked of you, tomhudson. I get the feeling that tomhudson is talking out of his ass again as is his usual, on things he has no experience or clue in (such as actually having a CSC or CIS degree to his name), and yet he's talking as if he actually has taken and passed the entire gamut of coursework for a degree in the computer sciences? Let's see if he actually has said degree(s) and let him answer the question that was asked of him in the url above!

Price difference

[Haedrian]

An app costs 1-5 euros or so on average. There are some very good 'app' games which cost less than 3 euros. A video game costs 60 euros when its just come out.

I'm sure many people don't mind going for a day without their coffee and getting an app, then the amount of people who would pay 60 euros - which is quite a bit. Especially if you consider students and teenagers to be large markets. Many of them don't have money to burn.

Its the spending threshold.

So that's about it.

Re:Price difference

[jedidiah]

You also wonder how many of those "apps" will be classics in their own right. A lot of ipad games are simply classics that have been adapted to the PhoneOS platform and perhaps watered down a bit.

Will any of these things be something you want to pick up 10 or 30 years from now and play again?

Will they even be available if you wanted to?

Oblig Simpsons

[Anonymous Coward]

Disco Stu: "Did you know that disco record sales were up 400% for the year ending 1976? If these trends continue....Aaay!"

Good if you don't have any friends

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, then it would be a good solution.
But for those of us that want to keep up with friends through steam, asking them to add X amount of accounts to their friend list is unreasonable.

Re:Good if you don't have any friends

[tepples]

But for those of us that want to keep up with friends through steam, asking them to add X amount of accounts to their friend list is unreasonable.

Then why do the DS and Wii print money even with their friend codes per game?

Re:Good if you don't have any friends

[icebraining]

Oh, right. Most of the games I have on Steam are SP. I guess it doesn't scale for MP games.

Hmm

[Stooshie]

The conclusions in the article don't appear to relate, in any way, to the graph they are showing.

The graph shows song sales versus app sales. The article talks about app sales versus something they call "physical video game content sales". WFT is that when it's at home?!

That depends...

[Bensam123]

...on how much longer developers and publishers will keep putting out crap - soon or sooner.

Useless Comparison

[Anonymous Coward]

The article fails to take into account direct-download and other non-physical video game sales, which I'd guess make up more than half of video game sales these days. And comparing video games to iDevice apps is like comparing the sales figures of smartphones and computers. Two completely different categories.

Download a game on satellite?

[tepples]

How many people are going to keep paying these ridiculous prices at a physical store?

Anybody who lives in an area where the only choices for broadband Internet access are satellite and 3G. Both of these have caps not suited to downloading multi-gigabyte video games. For games on DVD-ROM, even a "Super Saver" shipment from Amazon will likely arrive faster than a download that has been throttled to 200 MB/day to fit under the cap.

Game Gripper

[tepples]

I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The video game industry is not in danger until all these phones with games start getting dedicated buttons for those games. Touch screens and motion controls do not now, nor will they ever replace buttons.

Any smartphone with a keyboard has dedicated buttons. If you have Flash Player on your computer, look up the Game Gripper, a piece of plastic that fits over your phone's keyboard and turns it into a gamepad.

Downloading 25 GB at 5 GB/mo

[tepples]

Price: Most download games can be had much cheaper.

Even when you figure in the overages for going over the 200 MB/day cap on satellite or MiFi Internet when trying to download a game that otherwise ships on BD-ROM or multi-DVD? Buying games on Amazon takes far less Internet bandwidth.

I have to go to a shop.

You can go to Amazon in your nightshirt.

And the console that comes with a built-in 3G connection (only to an app-store, obviously) as part of the purchase price will sell a million.

It's called a Samsung Intercept. Virgin Mobile USA has it for $250 plus $25/mo, but the games are far smaller in size than the typical 1.8 GB UMD or even 256 MB (2048 Mbit) DS Game Card; after buying the app, you typically have to go to Wi-Fi to download the data files.

I haven't inserted an install CD in my computer in years, except bootdisks.

And as long as bootdisks are around, desktop and full-size laptop PCs will come with optical drives, and netbooks will still be sold in bundles with DVD burners like the one I got from Dell.com.

Try downloading a BD-ROM on satellite

[tepples]

and as the percentage of people with acceptable "broadband" speeds (which is pretty low, because it's very likely you'd put up with a 6 hour download of a big game in the background) increases

It doesn't look like it'll increase to everyone any time soon. A dual-layer DVD-ROM game is going to take several days of 6 hour download on a typical satellite or 3G provider's cap of 200 MB/day. And by the time satellite gets faster and LTE Advanced is ubiquitous, new games will likely have become even bigger, possibly spanning multiple BD-ROMs.

Mail order

[tepples]

It's not convenient to buy from a physical music store unless you're already in one.

Then why did Amazon buy CDNOW?