What is everyone's opinions on ethical use of traditionally unpopular game distribution trends?

Avatar image for Zuon
#1 Edited by Zuon (357 posts) -

I am hoping this question doesn't go against the Gamespot rules, and I want to stress that I am 100 percent for buying any game for sale that you wish to play. Game devs have families to feed, too.

But my question is, can some ideas that have become popular within the "scene" be intelligently implemented into the official distribution of these games?

My main argument is what is often referred to as "rips." While playing a game with its original texture, video, and audio quality is the objectively best way to go, games are quickly approaching and going over the 100gb filesize marker, and not everyone has that kind of space, especially if they do more than just play games on their computer. Would it be a good idea for game developers/publishers to offer various different versions of their game on Steam - like a "lossless" option and a "space saver" option with compressed data files? This was (sort of) done with older PC games where they offered a choice between "Minimum," "Typical" and "Full Install" options. I don't see why we couldn't go back to that.

A couple years ago, I would make an argument for the default ability to play without the CD/DVD inserted in the drive, but, no one even puts their entire PC games on physical media anymore, so that one's not worth bringing up.

Mods, if you deem this post a breach in the rules, please remove it as you see fit. But please understand that I am not advocating for anything sketchy. Just something that may legitimately be useful for consumers if it were widely adopted as part of the genuine game distribution practice.