Will that drive still work on the PS6? Will it work in 20 years? Can you buy more games after a Sony has shutdown the digital store? Can you sell your digital purchases if you don’t want them anymore?
Those are the kinds of problems physical media solves.
I buy digital media on my PC and physical media on my consoles, because PC games aren’t hardware specific whereas console games are.
Another benefit of having an external disk drive is that you can replace it if yours goes bad. I’m not sure what’s going to “end in tears,” it would work just like any other USB device, you plug it in and the console could load games from it.
But yeah, an all digital console makes no sense to me, unless it’s an interesting form factor like a handheld or an arcade cabinet. So the only console I have is a Switch, and everything else is on PC.
That’s problematic because you can resell disks. I suppose they could sign disks independently and then only allow one digital owner, but then you’d need a formal process every time you resell, or worse, disallow reselling, and the cost for producing disks would go away up (not to mention returns would be a headache).
Why wouldn’t they just buy a large stake if they’re only there for the money? The reason to buy the company out is control, meaning they can further other interests (e.g. growing XBox market share) through the acquisition.
They might experiment with ads and subscription tiers, but the real focus is always on getting users. Look at YouTube, AFAIK, it’s still not profitable (or if it is, it’s barely profitable), and not for lack of trying over the past few years. Yeah, sites like Reddit and Twitter are cheaper to run, but there’s still a ton of overhead and ads aren’t as profitable there.
Now investors want to see a return, and it’s just not happening.
I wish they’d make the drive an optional add-on that you could buy later if you decide that digital only isn’t for you, instead of using it as product segmentation. But that would be pro-consumer, so not gonna happen.
It’s already sort of a thing in embedded processors, such as ARM SOCs where RAM is glued to the top of the CPU package (I think the OG Raspberry Pi did that). But current iterations run the CPU way too hot for that to work, so the RAM is separate.
I could maybe see it be a thing in kiosks and other limited purpose devices (smart devices, smart watches, etc), but not for PCs, servers, or even smart phones, where we expect a lot higher memory load/multitasking.
That’s just not true, here are a few off the top of my head:
video games
docker containers
web browsers
productivity software
RAM is actually the one resource I run out of in my day to day work as a software developer, and I get close on my gaming PC. I have a really fast SSD in my work computer (MacBook Pro) and my Linux gaming PC (some fast NVME drive), and both grind to a halt when I start swapping (Linux seems to handle it better imo). So no, I don’t think SSDs are enough by any stretch of the imagination.
If anything, our need for high performance RAM is higher today than ever! My SIL just started a graphics program (graphic design or UI/UX or something), so I advised her to prioritize a high amount of RAM over a high number of CPU/GPU cores because that’s how important RAM is to the user experience when deadlines approach.
Large CPU caches are great, but I don’t think you can really compensate for low system memory by having large caches and a fast SSD. What is obvious, though, is that memory latency and bandwidth is an issue, so I could see more Apple-style soldered NAND next to the CPU in the coming board revisions, which isn’t great for DIY systems. NAND modules are just so much cheaper to manufacturer than CPU cache, and they’re also sensitive to heat, so I don’t think embedding them on the CPU die is a great long term solution. I would prefer to see GPU-style memory modules either around or behind the CPU, soldered into the board, before we see on-die caches with multiple GB capacity.