A third of physical PS5 games and half of Xbox Series discs need downloads to work properly, report shows

midian182

Posts: 11,906   +182
Staff member
A hot potato: Since PC gaming went pretty much fully digital many years ago, some console gamers have bragged about their machines' ability to play physical discs and the advantages that brings. But a new report illustrates how just because a game is on a disc, it doesn't guarantee you won't need an internet connection to play it.

From Sony's decision to end production of discs for new PlayStation games in 2028 to the Xbox network outage that stopped some disc-based titles from working, there's been a lot of conversation about physical media recently.

One topic revolves around the many discs that don't work (to different degrees) without an online connection, usually to fix a game-breaking bug. The testers at Does It Play (via Ars Technica) found that most disc games are "plug and play," but a sizable minority can't be played as intended straight from the disc.

The results show that 27% of all the physical releases the site has tested require some sort of download to fix game-breaking bugs or obtain core game content not stored on the disc.

On the PS5 specifically, 34% of tested disc releases are not fully playable as intended without a patch. Half are beatable but have serious bugs or are missing content, while the other half require a download to play properly or at all.

It's a much worse picture on the Xbox Series X. Only 50% of tested physical releases were complete and playable as intended from the disc. Another 12% could be beaten but were too buggy or missing content, leaving 38% that required some form of download.

Those Xbox results come from just 78 entries, compared with 792 for the PS5, so the difference should be treated cautiously. The Nintendo Switch 2 performed better, with 75% of its tested releases complete and beatable without a download, although its sample was even smaller at 48 entries.

Reliance on downloads weakens what was once physical media's biggest selling point: long-term access. Once servers close, missing files and essential patches may become impossible to obtain, creating a major problem for preservation. Then there are players who buy a game requiring a download but have no internet connection to obtain it.

Physical copies still offer advantages, of course. They can be resold, lent to friends, and are often much cheaper than digital versions. It was recently reported that some physical PlayStation games cost up to 90% less than their digital counterparts.

But as the recent Xbox outage demonstrated, owning a disc doesn't always protect players from server failures. Microsoft said disc-based entitlement checks should not have blocked games and is preparing a fix, though it still hasn't fully explained why some valid discs failed.

Permalink to story:

 
This is the problem with modern physical media that I wrote about recently: https://geekbravado.com/playstation-killing-physical-discs-sucks-but/

It's not every game but a lot of them are still fully reliant on server availability, even with the disc and when the server inevitably get turned off, they become coasters. My girlfriend bought Black Flag Resynced for Xbox recently and in two places on the front of the box, it says that Internet is required to install the game. This despite the fact that the full installed size of the game takes up less space than the capacity of a Blu-Ray disc.

Publishers do this to prevent leaks and also because when many AAA games go to manufacturing, they aren't actually gold yet because so many AAA games ship unfinished now. This being allowed to happen renders the physical discs a gamble as to whether they'll actually be useful or not in the long-term.
 
"Owning the disc no longer guarantees you can play without an internet connection"

That should be grounds for a lawsuit, since buying the physical media should entitle you to NOT depend on a internet connection unless clearly stated on the front cover that it needs Internet connection to have the entire product, because as of now they make it look like it's needed only for day 1 fixes.
 
This is the problem with modern physical media that I wrote about recently: https://geekbravado.com/playstation-killing-physical-discs-sucks-but/

It's not every game but a lot of them are still fully reliant on server availability, even with the disc and when the server inevitably get turned off, they become coasters. My girlfriend bought Black Flag Resynced for Xbox recently and in two places on the front of the box, it says that Internet is required to install the game. This despite the fact that the full installed size of the game takes up less space than the capacity of a Blu-Ray disc.

Publishers do this to prevent leaks and also because when many AAA games go to manufacturing, they aren't actually gold yet because so many AAA games ship unfinished now. This being allowed to happen renders the physical discs a gamble as to whether they'll actually be useful or not in the long-term.
First of all no one should be supporting Ubisoft games since they are the number one publisher attacking gaming ownership with their "only online" requirement.

As consumers we are letting these companies take more and more away from us, and we need them to disclose what we are not getting on the game discs.
 
"Owning the disc no longer guarantees you can play without an internet connection"

That should be grounds for a lawsuit, since buying the physical media should entitle you to NOT depend on a internet connection unless clearly stated on the front cover that it needs Internet connection to have the entire product, because as of now they make it look like it's needed only for day 1 fixes.

No you’re buying a licence and have the rights granted by that licence
 
No you’re buying a licence and have the rights granted by that licence
Nowhere on the packaging of the physical game states you are not getting the full product at purchase. Legally based on the packaging you can't agree with unknown terms and conditions.

That's the part that needs to be clearly disclosed.
 
"Owning the disc no longer guarantees you can play without an internet connection"

That should be grounds for a lawsuit, since buying the physical media should entitle you to NOT depend on a internet connection unless clearly stated on the front cover that it needs Internet connection to have the entire product, because as of now they make it look like it's needed only for day 1 fixes.
Where in any nations' legal code is this stated?

While it certainly would be nice, there is absolutely no legal grounds for anyone to be suing over this.
 
Where in any nations' legal code is this stated?

While it certainly would be nice, there is absolutely no legal grounds for anyone to be suing over this.
When you buy a pack of gum you don't expect it to be missing pieces unless it's clearly stated on the front packaging...right?...why should a game be missing pieces of information required to be part of the full product and most importantly not even stated in the front packaging.

Just because no one yet have taken the time to look into it from a legal standpoint, it doesn't mean there are not grounds for a lawsuit.
 
When you buy a pack of gum you don't expect it to be missing pieces unless it's clearly stated on the front packaging...right?...why should a game be missing pieces of information required to be part of the full product and most importantly not even stated in the front packaging.

Just because no one yet have taken the time to look into it from a legal standpoint, it doesn't mean there are not grounds for a lawsuit.
Completely different argument… gum says “50g” or whatever on the package - if you don’t get that much gum, you could sue…

A video game makes no such promise - in fact, it actually states that you DO need an internet connection to play.
 
Nowhere on the packaging of the physical game states you are not getting the full product at purchase. Legally based on the packaging you can't agree with unknown terms and conditions.

That's the part that needs to be clearly disclosed.
I think toh need to read your box a bit closer
 
Nowadays most of everything needs an internet connection to operate in some way shape or form. If you don't have an internet connection, you own a paper weight.

I remember playing single player games years ago without a internet connection. If the game needed an update, you downloaded and installed the update, then you were right back to playing the game again. To this day you can still play those games without an internet connection.

Pretty soon you won't be able to walk out your front door without an internet connection.
 
So, people need to:
1) Install game from disc
2) Download all available updates from the Internet
3) Backup to storage media in case install is needed in future.
And ideally:
4) Reverse engineer games to PC where only assets are required to play game. Nothing else.!
 
Betcha on the TOS on the package, or when you install it, it will say that you don't own anything so to speak, but are "licensing" the software and the TOS can change at anytime.
 
The disc will never be taken away by the likes of Sony or Microsoft, but owning it is no guarantee that one can play the game. Problem with console games now is that it MUST be updated before you can play. You can take it offline for awhile, but at some point, you will still need to connect it online.
 
The disc will never be taken away by the likes of Sony or Microsoft, but owning it is no guarantee that one can play the game. Problem with console games now is that it MUST be updated before you can play. You can take it offline for awhile, but at some point, you will still need to connect it online.

Yes, as I stated in a prior post:
1) Install game
2) Download all updates so you are on latest version
3) Back up game to storage media
4) Reinstall game in future if necessary without Internet connection. How? Because you already got it updated to the latest version in the past.
Of course, we will always have the hacks/cracks for these games also. Reverse engineered source ports that run natively on the PC. The PC proves itself, once again, to be the master of all devices. No other is needed. Piss on Sony's PlayStation and Microsoft's XBox, and Nintendo's devices as well.
And then we have Good Old Games and their game preservation program doing incredible work for all gamers. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo would like people to rent games by the minute I'm sure to milk gamers bone dry. Thank God for the smart people in the world who can take that pipe dream away from these insatiable thugs.
 
What is needed: that at least the EU makes mandatory games to be released as ownership and license. Those under ownership must be completely usable offline and independently...
 
What is needed: that at least the EU makes mandatory games to be released as ownership and license. Those under ownership must be completely usable offline and independently...
No, you don’t own software you own a license to the software
 
No, you don’t own software you own a license to the software
And that idea is what problem overwhelmingly have an issue with. It's legal because a law drafted 30 years ago when digital market places didn't exist is being applied to a time it world it was never intended to govern.

And laws, in the legal sense, are not some absolute rule, they're made by people and written on a piece of paper. They are abstract ideas that often have unintended consequences. The question should never be "is it legal" the question should be "who does this benefit and why".

The question should never be if it is legal because laws are pass, repealed and amended all the time.
 
Last edited:
And that idea is what problem overwhelmingly have an issue with. It's legal because a law drafted 30 years ago when digital market places didn't exist is being applied to a time it world it was never intended to govern.

And laws, in the legal sense, are not some absolute rule, they're made by people and written on a piece of paper. They are abstract ideas that often have unintended consequences. The question should never be "is it legal" the question should be "who does this benefit and why".

The question should never be if it is legal because laws are pass, repealed and amended all the time.
No it’s how most copyright laws work? You only own the licence to one version under the agreement presented before you purchase it.

How would you change it then?
 
No it’s how most copyright laws work? You only own the licence to one version under the agreement presented before you purchase it.

How would you change it then?
The license agreements are based on the DMCA. How would I change it? That when you hit "buy" you own an unrevokalbe license where the terms of service cannot be changed after the purchase. words exists for these types of deals already like "rent" or "lease". They intentionally deceive consumers and then hide behind the law like what you're doing. Hardly anyone benefits for this and overall makes the world a sworse place. The really kicker is that they're using legislation to make rules for a world they couldn't have dreamed existed when it was drafted

But then we have people like you who are defending it even though that these laws don't improve your life at all and generally make it worse. And what do you gain from defending it? How does keeping the laws in place that enable these companies to sell you a license make your life better?
 
Back