The post addresses the question of "reality" and "facts" in the context of a future that has yet to be realized. That's one of the many reasons it's long. It's a critique of both your cheap unoriginal argument - the essence of which is - "swim with the current" as well as the larger push overall for an all-digital future by particular efforts of some corps and how consumers are co-opted and thus we arrive to the "inevitability", "reality' and "facts" of the matter. You comment on the topic with certainty like it's certified to play out exactly as you envisioned and rationalized - despite the vagueness of the promise (it will happen sometime, look at the patterns, swim with the current, not against it - easy caricature of cheap thought). There are many versions of this "future', some more likely than others. The wall of text addresses that and more all-in-one, as opposed to picking out all the posts in this thread and batting them one by one. And it's not necessarily just addressed to you to apply to you personally but obviously to others who are digital future proponents with different rationale's and motivations for being pro-digital - it's a big tent. That is to say, not everything will apply to you, and that is intentional, and you shouldn't believe everything is meant to apply to you if it in fact does not. Only that which applies to you respond to, if you so wish, that's it. Throwing words like "cling" to paint the opposing side of the argument as irrational, outdated, contrarian of natural progress and all the potential negative connotations that word gives off is not the best way to faithfully argue, and you replied to me originally if I'm not mistaken. I think I made that politely clear. Words matter, and they can be turned around with the same powerful effect to argue for the sake of arguing.
You believe the all-digital future for consoles is inevitable - claps for that original thought, I'm sure I or anyone else couldn't have come up with that. For that matter, that same rationale applies to another "inevitable" future...the infant "cloud-future" - same pitch, same corps behind the push, same rationale. The response is not to say that it won't necessarily play out like that in the end (whichever undefined date that may be) but that there are also other alternative "futures", some where the speed of this change comes faster as opposed to others which take longer, or a compromise of both where both mediums of license delivery continue to exist side-by-side even if one is dominant market-share wise over the other. The suggestion to "accept" this supposed future, whose only true defined outcome is that it will be all-digital comes with a built-in suggestion to give up on physical media consumption because it's a "hopeless cause" - and anyone bitching about corps pushing all-digital consoles and the like should just accept "reality" and take their pitchforks home. Even if that is not necessarily what you meant - in the context it comes off that way, and will be interpreted that way by many readers. Needless to say, that should not be encouraged, from my pov, and imo, not necessarily correct either.
Last edited:
