Pat_trick

@ButteredCrumpet Much obliged! I do have a penchant for the occasional sesquipedalian flourish.

@Dman10 Maybe you can interpret things by yourself and I don't need to condescendingly explain things to you like a child.

I expect a modicum of interpretation from an adult human being.

It doesn't affect them, it only affects us.

@dodgykebaab And uses to make pointless useless comments that have already been made and replied to. Goodbye, see you never again.

AC Valhalla is the worst Assassin's Creed of the open-world era. It's the epitome of repetitive tasks, checklist design, and unnecessary bloat.

The future of the series is looking bright.

It's incredible the amount of people that don't seem to understand this.

"Soulslike" isn't a trend anymore, it's a genre descriptor, just like FPS, Metroidvania, roguelike, or character action. Saying a game is a Soulslike doesn't mean it's trying to be the next Dark Souls any more than calling something an FPS means it's trying to be the next Doom. It's simply describing the core gameplay mechanics. You can dislike the genre, but calling every Soulslike trend-chasing is misunderstanding what the term means today.

@dodgykebaab This was a month ago, Internet Explorer.

@Deadlyblack Thanks for the info! Your description definitely made me more interested in the game!

I thought the first was really clunky and slow, but I'll give this one a try. Any Mortal Shell veterans have a nuanced opinion about this beta?

@TheSingularity You're so brave to defend the multibillion corporation from those entitled people that want consumer rights to be protected.

You go there and show them who's right!

@XenonKnight Funny you say this, as you're the one doing the most whining on this thread by far.

"We hear you, but we don't care about you."

Long term this is not good.

Their profit has increased for now, but they have a reduced amount of customers and the number will drop even lower with PS6.

They'll have to make more money out of fewer people, which means increasing costs.

Unspectacular start for an unspectacular remake. Fitting.

@TDHorizon That's a fair point if we're talking specifically about launch prices and digital discounts. If publishers can sell digital codes through retailers and direct consumers to them, that could create some price competition with the PS Store.

My concern is that this still doesn't replace what physical discs offer. Digital codes can't be resold, bought used, lent to a friend, or traded in. So while they may help with pricing to some extent, they don't preserve the wider consumer benefits that come with physical media.

@TDHorizon Digital codes sold in stores aren't a replacement for discs. A disc is a transferable licence, you can resell it, lend it, buy it used and retailers can discount physical stock independently. A digital code is typically a one-time redemption tied to an account. Once redeemed, it's gone.

As for the EU, the Apple ruling was about allowing developers to direct users to alternative purchasing methods. It wasn't about guaranteeing long-term price competition or a second-hand market for digital games. Those are completely different issues.

That's why many people are concerned. It's not just about losing discs, it's about losing the consumer benefits that come with them.

@DennisReynolds Yet you're constantly arguing against everyone here.

You're more negative than you think, buddy.

@DennisReynolds That's true today. The concern is tomorrow. Retailers can only compete if physical copies continue to exist. Remove the format, and PSN becomes the default marketplace with far less price competition.

Your lack of foresight never fails to amuse me.

Nobody disputes that digital is larger. The leap from "most people buy digitally" to "physical no longer matters" is the problem. Even if physical is a minority it still creates price competition, supports the second-hand market, and gives consumers ownership options that disappear when discs do.

This comment section shows the duality of man.

@Biolan Fair enough. Sandbox by the most literal definition haha

They made a dark fantasy into a quippy teenage Marvel adventure.

It's BioWare's fault Dragon Age died.

@Oram77 Are you from a different dimension?

The Wii U had tons of backlash.

A lot of people criticised the confusing name, the weak hardware, the expensive GamePad, poor third-party support, lack of launch games, slow OS, weak online services, and Nintendo's marketing.

@ShadowRJ I agree 100% but unfortunately it's never going to happen.

@Rich33 I think we've reached the point where we simply disagree, and that's fine.

My main issue is that you're defining 'more choice' purely by the number of purchasing options available today. I'm looking at it from the perspective of consumer rights and ownership. If one group gains a cheaper entry point while another group loses an integrated feature, gains an online dependency, and has to pay extra for functionality they previously got built in, I don't see that as an unqualified increase in choice.

I also don't think 'physical sales are declining' is, by itself, a justification. Companies respond to consumer demand, but consumers are equally entitled to criticise decisions that reduce ownership, convenience or long-term preservation. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.

I also don't think it's fair to dismiss concerns because some people behave badly online. Every topic has people who are obnoxious. The strength of an argument should be judged on its merits, not on the behaviour of the loudest people making it.

So I think we've both explained our positions clearly. I understand why you see this as the logical direction for Sony. I simply think it's a direction that gives Sony more control while giving physical users a worse deal, and that's a perfectly reasonable thing to criticise.

@DennisReynolds Just so you're aware, I completely disagree with you but I wouldn't try to get you banned. I think you're sometimes inflammatory with your language, but to me that doesn't justify trying to ban you.

I'd rather argue with you to represent people that have a similar opinion to mine than to silence you.

@Rich33 You're defining 'more choice' purely as 'more purchasing configurations,' while ignoring the quality of those choices.

Yes, digital-only buyers now have a cheaper entry point. Nobody disputes that. But physical buyers lost an integrated drive and gained a separate purchase, an online activation requirement, and another piece of hardware that depends on Sony's continued support.

That's a trade-off, not a free increase in choice.
If Sony had kept the built-in disc model and offered the detachable drive as an additional option, I'd agree that choice had increased. Instead, they replaced one option with another that comes with extra cost and dependency for physical users.

So the question isn't 'did digital buyers benefit?' They clearly did. The question is whether the change was an unqualified increase in consumer choice. It wasn't, it benefited one group while making the experience objectively worse for another.

You keep being limited by seeing things only by your personal experience.

@DennisReynolds That's a false analogy. I'm not claiming Sony will do something because they did it once. I'm pointing out a pattern of decisions that have consistently increased Sony's control over the ecosystem: optional disc drives, online activation, store closures, delistings, digital licensing, etc. Those are all real events.

Context explains why a decision was made. It doesn't erase what the decision was or its consequences. Saying the disc drive requires online activation for legal reasons doesn't change the fact that it now depends on Sony's servers.

And again, you're presenting your own prediction as fact. That the current storefront architecture was designed with future-proofing in mind doesn't guarantee it will remain online indefinitely. Technical design doesn't obligate Sony to keep a service running forever. That's a business decision, not a technical one.

You're really blind to the limitations of your logical fallacy.

@Rich33 You're confusing what benefits you with what gives consumers more choice. Choice isn't just about lowering the entry price for digital-only buyers. It's also about preserving the functionality people already had.

Previously, if you wanted a disc drive, you bought the console with one built in. Now you have to buy separate hardware, pay extra for it, and rely on Sony's servers to activate it. That's an additional cost and an additional dependency that didn't exist before.

If you never use discs, great, the digital model is for you. But pretending the new approach is more consumer-friendly for physical buyers ignores the fact that they've objectively lost convenience and independence. You're clearly blinded by only understanding your point of view instead of the overall situation.

@DennisReynolds No, it's not a fact. The fact is that the PS4 and PS5 currently share the same storefront. The claim that 'the PS6 will use it as well' and that it will therefore remain online indefinitely is your prediction. Those are two completely different things.

And no, context doesn't magically negate the consequences. Explaining why Sony made a decision isn't the same as disproving its impact. Optional disc drives, online activation, and store closures all increase Sony's control over access. That's an observable fact, not 'fear mongering.'

Throwing around 'bad faith' every time someone criticizes Sony isn't an argument, it's a substitute for one. It also shows how much of a blind fanboy you are. If anyone is acting in bad faith here, it's you. You're blind to any valid arguments because they don't suit your narrative.

@Rich33 You're treating the current situation as the baseline when it's actually a reduction in choice. We went from 'buy the console with a built-in drive' to 'pay extra for separate hardware that requires Sony's servers to activate.' That's not adding flexibility, it's shifting cost and control from Sony to the customer.

@For-Kier Personal fanfiction isn't a rebuttal. If you have an actual argument, make it.

@DennisReynolds The irony of saying I 'know very little' while presenting your own guesses as facts is incredible. 'The PS4 storefront will remain up' isn't a fact, it's your prediction.

Meanwhile, everything I've mentioned has already happened. Optional disc drives, online activation, store closures, delistings...those are facts. You keep explaining why Sony did them as if that somehow makes the loss of consumer control disappear. It doesn't.

I applaud your dedication. Being this consistently wrong while sounding this confident is an impressive feat.

@ShadowRJ That's a fair point. If anything, it reinforces the broader concern rather than weakens it. Regardless of why the online activation exists, the end result is still that physical hardware depends on Sony's servers to function. The reason doesn't change the consequence which is very unfortunate.

Sorry, can you speak louder?

I can't hear you over playing my disc games while PSN is down.

@DennisReynolds Nothing to support it? Sony has already removed the disc drive from one PS5 model, made the optional drive require online activation, shut down digital storefronts before, and regularly removes games and content from sale. None of that is hypothetical.

The trend is toward more platform control, not less.

@DennisReynolds Imagine calling verifiable decisions by Sony 'fear mongering' because you can't refute them. It's easier to sneer about 'plastic discs' than explain why requiring online activation for physical hardware is somehow pro-consumer.

@SteveButler2210 That's an exaggeration. Day-one patches are common, but they're usually not mandatory. Many physical PS5 games install and play entirely offline from the disc. Some games do require downloads, but that's nowhere near enough to make physical ownership "moot" for the majority of single-player titles.

@2here2there You're missing the point. The second-hand market doesn't have to be perfect to benefit consumers. It creates competition and gives people an alternative to buying directly from Sony. Pointing to a handful of scarce games that hold their value doesn't change that. The question isn't whether every used game is cheap, it's whether removing the market gives Sony more control over pricing. It obviously does.

It was a great game with room for improvement. IO proved they can make a great James Bond game and the next one could be even better.

@Swandivetotheasphalt That is such a lazy strawman. Nobody is arguing "the data is a lie."

The argument is that you're confusing market share with consumer value. Physical doesn't need to dominate sales to matter, it provides competition, resale, and ownership options.

Removing it shifts more power to Sony, which is the issue you completely missed.

The mistake I keep seeing is people treating physical sales share as if it's the only thing that matters. Even if physical accounts for a minority of sales, it still provides price competition, a second-hand market, and an ownership option outside Sony's ecosystem. Remove that, and Sony gains significantly more control over pricing and distribution. That's a loss for consumers regardless of whether physical was 10%, 20%, or 30% of sales.

Can't wait to play my physical copy that I paid money for on the PS6. I'll be able to, right? Since I paid full price like everyone else.

I guess we have really different ideas of what looks superb.

@Oram77 I'm glad you agree

@Oram77 "Everyone but the sycophants." Better?

@kyleforrester87 I was going to make a cheeky comment about MGS 4 but you beat me to it.

Of all people, I'm glad Big Boss himself made the joke.

@Futureshark

I doubt any of the "No disc no buy" crowd bought it. It's a subsection of mostly hardcore gamers and CoD is aimed mostly at casual gamers and people who exclusively play CoD.

Also people need to be absolute fools to buy this game. Digital only, barely any improvements, and it doesn't include DLC content.

People fell for the trick. You even have people here defending Sony, which shows just how comfortable they've become with having no real ownership or control over what they buy.

I've picked up fantastic physical games for next to nothing over the years. With physical media disappearing, that option is gone.

Sony will have far more control over pricing, and once competition from the second-hand market fades, prices are only going one way.

It's astonishing how many people are willing to give up ownership and consumer choice for a small amount of convenience.