Sorry if this has already been asked to death. Please feel free to ignore if you are someone that is tired of having answered this in the past.

I could never understand the people that hate digital console games, but not digital PC games for the longest time. No one really elaborated on it and I always thought about it, but I never understood why it was the case.

Now, obviously if we're looking at PC gaming, I'm talking about Steam since that's what the majority of people refer to when it comes to PC gaming. Steam has great sales often and pretty much all the AAA titles are available there. Consoles have Playstation Network or XBox Live or Nintendo eShop. I only have experience with PSN and eShop. Aside from pricing and sales, I just see no difference between PC digital game distribution and console digital game distribution. They're digital. They're tied to accounts. They're DRMed. They're rental for indefinite amount of time only.

People keep saying they get physical games for consoles, but love Steam. Why? Shouldn't people also want physical games for PCs as well? The reasons they give out for consoles is that they want the offline access to their games, have a sense of ownership, re-sell their games and play the games without having to download large files. If we apply this to PCs, shouldn't it be the same thing?

They both have the disadvantage of shutting down and people losing their games. When I was gaming on PC during the 90's, some games required the CD-ROM to be in the drive while they were played while others could be copied onto the hard drive in full (ex. Duke Nukem 3D). I still have a plethora of full PC games on discs. My copy of Marc Ecko's Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure can be installed on my PC and there's no need for Steam. I love it. That's what I miss about PC gaming. It wasn't until I got Serious Sam HD: The First Encounter in 2011 on disc that I was baffled by the internet requirement and Steam activation (I didn't want to be forced to use a client). I wanted freedom from that. Shouldn't PC gamers want this? Why are people so complacent with Steam when they could lose all their games if they're either banned or the servers go down or the licensing for games expire? They say this for consoles, so what's the idea? I don't get it.

Now, if we were to talk about digital GOG games and digital console games, then I would understand more since GOG is DRM-Free. There is no need for internet activation. When you buy the game, it feels like insurance as long as you copy the game onto a disc or external hard drive. You can play it without the internet and you can install it the old school way when it was much better IMO at least.

There are several reasons why people prefer digital downloads on PC but not on console. My frame of reference is the PS3, as that is the only console I have extended experience with.

1. Digital downloads on the PS3 are sloooooow. A game which I could download and install in 5 minutes altogether on my PC will take 10 minutes to download, and then an additional 10 minutes to install on my PS3.

2. When you buy a console game as a digital download, you know that you will lose that game when you upgrade to the next generation, with no possibility of reselling the game. On PC, while you can't resell the game either, you won't lose it just because you upgrade to a better PC.

3. Regarding digital downloads over physical copies: A physical disc can break. A digital download cannot. Yes, the store you bought it from may go out of business, but with Steam that is unlikely in the extreme, and with GOG you can back up your installers however you want and still install them forever.

I've used Steam on 6 different computers over almost 10 years, both notebooks and desktops, and I still can play the first game I registered on the platform (Half-Life 2) without issue; even spent 3 years without buying a single game due to lacking a credit card, and everything worked perfectly. And, when I recently spent a week without internet access, the only games that gave me problems were those that also used Ubisoft's UPlay.

Putting Steam and PSN/Xbox Live on the same level just because they're both digital stores with DRM is akin to saying a high-class restaurant is the same as McDonalds because in both you pick from a menu then your food is handled to you by an employee; there's a vast difference in the model and quality of service here.

1. The problem is that with people who are on limited data plans, they can only download so much and when even physical copies of PC games today don't give them the option of installing a game offline (ex. Fallout 4 for PC doesn't even contain the full game data on disc), there's really no other choice for the PC gamer.

2. Good point. PCs will always have backward compatibility.

3. I know on GOG, they still allow you to download a game that you bought even after it's no longer available to buy (ex. Duke Nukem 3D and for a while, Fallout 1 & 2), but is that the same case with Steam? Wouldn't that be a problem? I know that I stopped buying games from iTunes, because games like Marvel vs Capcom 2 and Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 were pulled while games that I have purchased in the past have been removed from my purchase history altogether.

Thanks for explaining.

Yeah, this is true. The one thing that has stood out that I loathe about PSN is the fact that if I wanted to play a game like Overwatch, I would need to buy a subscription for PS Plus which is just additional money on top of that $79.99 game. That's asinine.

Also, you need to enable a primary PS4 in order to play your digital games offline...which is horse shit.

You can also ask for a refund from Steam, but you can't from PSN.

My problem with Steam isn't the quality of service, it's more of this idea that I have no control over how I want to access my games. It's why I also dislike PSN and most other digital services. I'm forced to use a client that I don't even want to use in order to access the content that I would gladly buy otherwise. I want the insurance that my games will be available to me without a client. I remember when I was new to Steam and I wanted to play my games offline and couldn't, because I forgot to turn on "offline" mode. Yes, that could have been obvious to anyone and doesn't take a second to look for, but let's say you just forgot to do it onetime. That means for that onetime you get no access to your games that you bought. Steam makes PC gaming almost exclusive to it and it's that lack of choice as a consumer that bothers me. It's like all department stores disappearing with only Wal-Mart being available. It's either Wal-Mart or nothing. That's what it feels like to me. It's this reason why I'm glad GOG exists.

I dislike consoles because I can't officially improve/fix/upgrade their hardware and software is either bound to some media prone to wear, or is rented - which means I don't actually own it and that right can be one-sided revoked from me at any period of time.

TL;DR they are not a real thing, disposable.

edit: "hate" is the wrong word.

Wishbone gave a very good explanation. I'll add some minor points for why console gamers might like physical copies:

1. Used games. Either because they buy a lot of their games used, or sell their own games to help buy the next game they're going to play, it's important to a lot of people.

2. Collection. Console gamers usually tolerate, or even enjoy, having lots of crap around the house, like tons of game boxes. Even the consoles themselves I find very cumbersome and inconvenient. I have them out of necessity to play certain games. If I could reduce all my gaming needs to a single laptop, like I've already done with music, movies and TV, plus get it all digitally, I would do it in a heartbeat. My place would be the minimalist paradise of my dreams.



It's also worth noting that the PSN is a really, really shitty store. I tried checking the sales during Easter and looking at the "All Deals" section had just three games, looking at the "Flash Sale" had a whole different set of games discounted, and under the "Easter Deals" there was a third set of games. Then switching to a different account on a different region it had all these games under "All Deals". Go figure. Not to mention that it has no wishlist function at all. How can you make a store and not make a wishlist? Technically it does have one, but only if you access it on PC, and even then all it does is put the games on a list and it won't email you when one of them goes on sale. Or at least that's how it was last time I checked.

And let's not forget Nintendo's digital distribution.

Wii: content locked to the console.
Wii U/3DS: content locked to the console.
Wii U/3DS after Nintendo Account: content locked to the account... and the account cannot be activated or slowly moved from one console to another unless you a) have two consoles or b) call Nintendo (I can't call Nintendo, I live in freaking South America which Nintendo LEFT).

Just to add to PSN and Xbox, the "no backwards compatibility" assurance makes it a worse deal than PC digital. Cross-buy does help, but what about the following gen? Will they make backward compatibles consoles in case I don't know, the current gen breaks? Will they have cross-buy?

I buy digital on 3DS because it actually costs less than half the physical price in my country. But in the US, is either the same cost or more.

Those were my two cents.

I don't necessarily hate digital games on consoles, but there are a few differences that cause me to prefer digital for PC and physical for consoles:

PC digital games can be backed up on an external hard drive. Even most DRMed ones if you look around for the tools to do so. Beyond that, the sales for digital games are really cheap and often bring prices well below what it would cost to pick a game up physically. And physical can be a minefield anyway, with horror stories of boxes filled with nothing but Steam codes making the whole thing more trouble than it's worth at times.

You can't back up digital console games like you can with PC ones. The sales are often underwhelming (though I've noticed lately that they're starting to get better about this) and physical copies can usually be purchased for less money, not to mention resold to further bring down the end cost of playing that game. Sometimes I browse around looking for games on Amazon, and it's not uncommon for physical console games to be on sale for half or less what the digital code costs despite the digital version offering much less flexibility. The price differences become even more stunning if you buy used.

Very simple really, Developers love digital products and digital DRM'd stores. The consumer base is either not interested or not aware that this totally hands back any control to the developers, in fact a lot of consumers appear to be totally in favour of handing of rights to anything, as seen in another post here talking about GOG going down the route of rentware.

Is the question mainly "why do console gamers (still) prefer buying games as physical versions, and PC gamers are largely now buying digital downloaded versions?"? Because the question in the title didn't make sense to me, at least I haven't noticed any "hate" for console digital games, but then I am not really a console gamer (my newest gaming console is a Playstation 2).

I have no idea if that is true (ie. console gamers don't like their digital stores for games), but assuming it is true:

1. Console gamers are still more familiar with popping in a disc and start playing. When PC games were still mostly on discs, it used to be that the PC game needed to be installed on the PC anyway, and the only purpose for the physical disc after that was to check that you still own the game. A nuisance.

Console games, on the other hand, had the game mostly self-contained on that disc. Pop the disc in, and start playing. The only thing on top of that would be save games, which you'd save to e.g. a separate memory card.

While console games apparently have moved more and more to the PC model (where the games are installed on hard drives, they get updates etc.), I guess console gamers still just have the habit to "rely" on physical releases.

2. A bit related to the earlier one, I think piracy had "taught" many PC gamers already to the idea that games can be obtained by downloading them from the internets. Hence it would be a much smaller jump for PC gamers also to adopt into buying and downloading their games online digitally.

So for many PC gamers it wasn't necessarily a jump from buying physical games to downloading them, but downloading them from legit stores instead of some bittorrent site. Of course many were probably both (sometimes buying legit physical games, and sometimes torrenting pirated versions), but they were still more familiar with the concept of downloading games online. Legit stores just make it easier and more secure, than pirate sites.

Similarly, console gamers might still think about the ability to borrow/lend games with their friends, which basically means physical games. (PC gamers had already the idea of "borrowing" games by torrenting them, no gaming friends needed). I don't know though if current PS4/XBone physical games can still be borrowed, or are they usable only with the first user?

3. My guess is that it is still much more common with consoles (than PCs) that it is a parent buying a game for their console gaming kid, than the player buying a game for themselves. As a birthay or Xmas present etc., and I guess such non-gaming parents feel more comfortable going to a brick&mortar store where the staff can tell them what is popular now, in order to buy their kids a new game for a present, than buying something online digitally.

It also occurred to me "how about mobile devices? They don't have physical games for parents to buy for their kids.", but then I feel their market is quite different from both console and PC games in that free-to-play games really rule on the mobile devices. Parents don't necessarily have to buy their kids anything on them, the kids just download free-to-play games on their own (and occasionally bug their parents for buying some microtransaction items for those games).

4. Last but not least... are all gaming consoles necessarily online anyway, or are many of them still complelety offline (which of course affects the idea of buying and downloading something online for them)? Is it similar as with e.g. modern TV sets that sure you can connect them online in order to get some extra features... but many people just don't do that, their TV sets are completely offline from the internets.

So even if modern consoles have the ability to go online, maybe many families still are offline with them?

I hate both. But with PC the alternatives got killed; if you still find a PC retail corner its nothing more than a pityful and sad excuse of a gloryfied steam/ubi/origin key collection in boxes with maybe half a fistful of notable exceptions (like Witcher titles).

Probably what console gamers fear & see coming in the future.

A console game has been, until recently, A licensed copy of a copyrighted material.
While
PC games have always been A licence to install and use copyrighted material.

Let me make this more clear.

A console game is like a book. Buy a book and you own that physical item, with all the rights that come with owning a physical item. You can sell it or privately lend it and so own. We've got about four thousand years worth of laws and social contract that deals with such things.

A PC Game is like an imaginary magic wand which you wave to make the book appear. Only the person that has the magic wand is allowed to read the book. Unfortunately all the laws of the land deal with real physical objects, and are not very good when it comes to magic. You might be able to sell that wand, or let a private individual use it, or not. We've had this magic for about 50 years and the laws and defined rights are seriously lacking . So its up to the magicians that made the wand to make up their own rules, and the great thing it they have magic to enforce which ever rule they want (DRM).

Console owners don't like digital games, because they don't like magic. Or more precisely the lack of rules and control. Console owners fought against microsoft when they tried to turn Discs into wands (original XBox one design would have bound games to accounts just like steam and killed the console 2nd hand games).

Console owners know that gameX will be released at £60, in a month they know they can buy it new for £50, in 3 months £40 and 6 months it will be about £20 brand new.

With digital, games will remain at full price for much longer (normally years), only available cheaper during random sales or many years after release. They know they can't sell them or get them second hand.

Console owners, those people the laughably named PC Master race call peasants, will keep fighting against going digital for as long at they can.

With PC. We have no choice. Even when games came on discs, we really we're getting wands. Once the technology (magic) got developed enough publishers (magicians) had the ability to enforce their own rules.

Some people "like" digital games in the same way they like paying for bills direct debit. Its not that they like paying bills, its just easier. Since buying physical discs still forces you to use the digital service, its easier to skip that step.

Other people "like" digital games like they like breathing air, there is no other option. Physical PC games are very rare, and once again most link you to the digital service anyway.

Other people openly embrace digital games. I'm sure they've got their reasons....

No, you can play whatever version of HL2 has been forced on you. This goes for many other games on Steam where the game can be changed however the they want breaking or removing parts of the game you may want to keep and ruining compatibility with older mods.
Offline mode isn't guaranteed either. It didn't work properly for ages and you can still be caught out if you have limited internet and steam tries to go back online.

As for consoles from the PS3 onwards they've not only crossed the line into taking the bad parts of PC gaming but have also a negative effect on PC gaming with game makers aiming at multiple ports.

"Have always been..." Really? I don't see any real difference with my old retail PC games, compared to my old Playstation or PS2 games. I didn't feel PC games were in any way more restricted (in how I could use them) than console games, pretty much the opposite in fact as retail PC games might get mods etc. Neither required any accounts, they were self-contained. PC games might have gotten patches later, but those didn't need accounts either and once you had the patch, you didn't have to redownload it ever.

I could just as well lend or borrow an old retail PC game with a friend, as with those old console games.

It isn't until this account-bound Steam era when PC gaming has mostly become something else. Now we have been alienated from the idea of lending/borrowing games or buying them second-hand, but on the flipside the prices have also come down (so there is also less need to seek for second-hand copies, or borrow games from close friends).

Also, I feel that ever since internet became a thing, borrowing PC games from friends wasn't that important as you could just as well pirate the game you wanted to play without paying. (In my case though the reason not to borrow games is that I've never really had PC gaming buddies; I recall borrowing Duke3D CD from my godfather at some point and also he gave me his retail F-15 Strike Eagle II game (or was it III, not sure actually) as well at some point).

Second-hand PC game market was quite healthy though, I recall several such gaming stores here selling (and buying) also old PC retail games, I was a regular customer.