Not sure why people are mourning this as much because the game hasn't shipped on disc really for the past decade. 90% of games are patched on day one and those patches are needed to have the best experience. Imagine decades later having the OG Cyberpunk on disc and thinking that's a good idea to put in and play for nostalgia.
It is deeply anti consumer behavior to have the large companies control all pricing going forward. Many games, currently today, can be physically purchased at a severely lower cost than the PS store. Goodbye to that
Most of my console games from this gen have been digital. That said, almost all the physical ones I have were because the physical copy was cheaper. Losing the option sucks. If Sony and Microsoft operated their digital storefront like Steam I'd probably be much less bothered about losing the option.
If I want to, I can sell my controllers to someone. I can sell them my consoles to them as well. Can't sell my games though? Make it make sense. Digital marketplaces are convenient. But they shouldn't be the end all be all to buying games, especially with how they currently function. Discs are never going to be the main way to buy games again but the idea games haven't shipped on disc for the past decade just because of patches is flawed logic beyond belief. Plenty of games are perfectly playable installed straight from the disc. Not every game is Cyberpunk. That's not even getting into genre specific issues like racing games or flying games that get delisted from digital storefronts all the time because of licenses for real world vehicles or aircraft. Physical copies are good for gamers, period.
I totally understand; I’ve been around since the SNES and Genesis days. But we just don’t live in that era anymore and haven’t for well over a decade. Even setting something like Cyberpunk aside, plenty of games that launched in a decent state have since had massive 2.0-style updates that fundamentally improve or expand them. If you’re playing offline or on old hardware, you’re often locked to that original “base” version forever. Those PS2, Xbox, and GameCube days are long behind us, and even then we were already starting to see patches and updates. Not trying to argue here but anyone that thinks we haven't been moving to this for a long time isn't seeing the wood for the trees.
It sucks and is overall anti consumer but if 80% of games sold (making that number up I haven’t done the research) are digital then of course that’s the way things were going to go.
You're arguing two completely different things contradicting each other lol. While yes, a majority of games are patched on day 1 that doesn't make the game not playable, they're not MANDATORY patches as even without internet, without updating the game....there's still a 100% playable build on the disc. YMMV on how that build actually performs, but the truth remains that the game is shipped on a disc that you can play without updating. Someone living in a third world country or not hooked up to the Internet can play these disc games just fine. I know this will come as a shock to you but 80% of PS5 games are playable off the disc, without ever connecting to the Internet. DoesItPlay? - Home
I've had some time to think about this, and I actually have no idea what your point is, no offense. Josh provided a great worst-case example. If something happens to the server hosting the games, the games are gone. Sony has shown they are totally cool with removing people's movie purchases, who is to say they won't remove a game one day? The point is, physical copies for some are a comfort and a failsafe, just as any copy stored somewhere safe is important for preservation. It's a way to say without a doubt that you own something, so if the worst happens, you can still play the game. Will it not be the best quality without patches? Sure, but if the worst case scenario happens when you can't download a game, chances are good you can't download a patch either, so it really doesn't matter at that point. I agree that the only reason Sony is doing this is cost-cutting and control, and people have a right to be upset by that.
You say you totally understand but I don't think you do. Nothing you've stated here disproves any of the points made. The existence of patches or updates is not relevant. Generally speaking, most base versions of games are perfectly playable. Also, not a single person here has stated or thought that the game industry has not been moving to the digital space. Where do you get such an assumption? Because we say physical copies are good for gamers, which they are, somehow you think people here don't know what the gaming industry is like in 2026? We're all very aware we don't live in the PS2 days anymore.
Yeah, I’m not saying discs are worthless or that people shouldn’t be upset about Sony chasing more control and cost‑cutting. I’m just trying to make the point that even discs themselves haven’t guaranteed the actual game for a long time now. For years, the version that really matters, has lived on servers as patches and updates. If those go away, the disc is at best an old, sometimes broken slice of history. That’s a very different kind of ‘ownership’ from the SNES/PS2 era people are nostalgic for. My only point when I said this was that it feels like a recent loss, but it really isn’t. I don’t agree with it either, and I say that as someone who’s been collecting games for years.
It blew up for good reason. The gaming community and media fighting for consumer rights is a good thing. It's probably the least polarizing aspect of this medium as everyone tends to be in agreement that less options for gamers is probably not the best of ideas.
But why though? What point are you refuting or how does this change anything? You started this by saying you don't understand why people are upset. It sounds like you actually do, you're just being ultra-technical about it for some reason?
I do understand, and care given I've been collecting games for decades but my point is that this isn't something sudden like the media has been showcasing. It's still a mourn, and I fully agree, but the writing has been on the wall for a while now how ever we look at it.
I still don't understand what your point is. Is there too much coverage being given to it? What's a sufficient amount?
This is where I'm saying you're wrong. And that you didn't read the link or the stats for themselves. So I'll post here for you to see. Main steps of our testing process And when I say 80% of PS5 games don't require a mandatory day 1 patch, here's their definition: Now if you're trying to argue with games needing a patch to be in an optimal state to play, that's a different story. But the "actual" game is on the disc, playable already and you trying to say otherwise is factually wrong. Yes, physical has been tending downwards for years now but the fact is they're still selling in the millions. It's not some niche product selling just a couple hundred or thousands of discs, it's still in the millions. It's still alive. Yeah it'll eventually be gone, but there's zero reason to prematurely kill it.
Compulsion and Double Fine are going independent. Ninja Theory and Undead Labs are being sold. Arkane entering negotiations. ZeniMax is being flipped upside down to prioritize Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Doom etc