I still love that Chocolate Rein tag.

Eh, I never cared for digital distribution. I would much rather have a real copy of the game. I'm not so lazy as to not want to get out and buy a game. The only real advantage is that things will never sell out.

That said, I've spend well over $300 in VC games.

loled at the tag. If he means "you'll still need a publisher in this new digital world", I disagree. If he means "it'll still be greatly beneficial to have a publisher", then I agree.

It all comes down to the size of the budget and how much marketing the title will need to earn a profit. I mean, there are plenty of games out there that get enough coverage to do fine from word of mouth alone...

Irrelevant to the article at hand but I just saw the big change.

HEY KOTAKU! I'm boycotting your guttertrash sponsor & blocking their ads!

Advertising exists now, separately from production. Unless the big developers are planning on squeezing all available space for advertising for themselves and driving prices way up, a purely digital distribution takes away most of the cost of production (and the risk, since a flopped game won't be taking up space in warehouses and a game that hits much larger than expected won't need to worry about running out of copies) and doesn't change the price of advertising.

Sure, it's not toppling the system, the big guys aren't suddenly going to be on the bottom while indie developers are striking rich, but it makes it easier for the market that wants the games by the little guys to get them, and makes it easier for the little guys to put something out there. The smaller publishers get a boost, even if the larger ones aren't taking a hit.

@Evil Jim:
Lol, did your father beat you when he got drunk or what?

It won't strangle independent games by a long shot. You can still run your indie game online service side by side with the big boys, it's just a matter of staying in the public eye.

You mean: "Big Publishers Will RUIN Digital Distribution, Too"

It will probably be a viable option in the future.

@OneManFreakShow: well some people like not having more useless boxes and cd/dvd cases to deal with. it's all very wasteful and always has been.

Have you seen a DS game case and then looked at the DS game? Really Nintendo, what the f-

@ItsHammerTime: he has a point, the ads are a bit much and alittle all over the place.

@jp182: Unless you are the one writing the checks and feeding editor's family. I do not care for ads as long as the substance of the site is unchanged.

Digital Distriubtion is more of a convenience then revolution. This is why even "major" publishers often offer their products through their own bandwidth.

I think that servics and bandwidth will keep digital game prices high. I also think both of these things favor larger companies with the cash and talent to manage them. The support that CoD4, TF2, WoW, Unreal, etc all have are way beyond simple leaderboards and have real cost. These services are now expected by gamers. I do not think small indepenent companies have the ability to deliver the level of support that this requires.

It it's not a physical copy, I'm just not interested. I buy for keeps, not the life of one console/account/service.

@Evil Jim:
Ditto, but only because they use Flash in banners and it's a gross waste of resources. Ever since Flash supported streaming video in banner ads, they're blocked. I'm not buying beer regardless of ads, but I only find the ads tasteless, not repugnant. Well, maybe a little just because it's more of a reskin than a banner run. ("Want some beer? No? How about some beer? Too bad, have some beer! Beer beer!") When a site gets totally reskinned in sponsor bling it becomes a matter of principle to ignore it too since it's so aggressively in your face.

@fuchikoma:
I'm not sure exactly when the sponsorship started because I don't get to read Kotaku every day but I found with a brief search that they began thanking Coors & other sponsors in mid April. Most websites have advertising of one form or another but what offends me more is the sponsor. Video games may have a large following through players in their 30s but that following starts as young as grade school so seeing Coors ads here, to me equates to trying to sell beer to minors. I probably wouldn't have said anything had the ads been for video games. Those are products I actually buy.

@Evil Jim:
I agree, it's kind of like seeing the old "Joe Camel" ads in a comic book, though Kotaku's not the most SFW site thematically anyway, it seems a bit like an adult game community. You have posts like "OMG! Look! FFVII porn!" Maybe the problem with advertising beer here is assuming video games are for kids?

And normally I try to let the ads through because I understand they make some cash off them. When you have to swim through the same ad all over the page and multiple times as you scroll down, it jumpstarts my "STFU ALREADY!" reflex. It's also tacky like driving a car festooned front to back in one brand name. It's like surfing a weinermobile, haha...

@Evil Jim: I actually hate the GTA IV ads more than the coors ads. Every time I hover over those damn things, they expand or start playing movies. Definitely more annoying.

Either way, I can live with ads.

Mark has to say that since he slagged off Steam and it's owning.

No doubt big publishers will get into online distribution but if it's that easy why are they going through Steam rather than doing their own thing?

None of that matters because anyone can distribute a game on their own digitally. Epic probably won't do that because they need the support of someone with too much money to hype up their tiresome games.