Sony's digital-only future angers fans, but physical PlayStation games are barely selling

[Daniel Sims]

Connecting the dots: The anti-PlayStation backlash does not appear to have cooled in the weeks following Sony's announcement that it will cease manufacturing physical game discs in January 2028. However, despite online sentiment, available sales data shows that angry consumers are not voting with their wallets.

Circana analyst Mat Piscatella recently stated that only seven PlayStation games have sold more than 100,000 physical copies in the first half of 2026. Only two sold more than 10,000 during the week ending July 11, potentially vindicating Sony's claim that PlayStation owners overwhelmingly prefer digital purchases.

Piscatella's statistic came in response to the more than 10,000 comments that flooded a recent trailer for the upcoming Sony-published title Wolverine, set to launch September 15. Compared to other Sony trailers with larger view counts, the figure suggests that conversations about the company's impending digital-only era remain heated.

2 PlayStation video games sold more than 10k physical units in the US during week ending July 11, 2026. 7 have sold more than 100k physical units year-to-date. Source: Circana Retail Tracking Service

[image or embed]

– Mat Piscatella (@matpiscatella.bsky.social) July 20, 2026 at 1:37 PM

Although Piscatella's figures offer only a snapshot of US sales, other numbers paint a similar picture. A Change.org petition demanding Sony continue manufacturing discs has exceeded 300,000 signatures, but Dr. Serkan Toto, CEO of Japanese game industry consultancy firm Kantan Games, recently told IGN that the number is dwarfed by the roughly 50 million PlayStation Plus subscribers.

Sony's 2025 fiscal year statement also confirms that 78% of the games it sold that year were digital, though the number includes titles that are only available digitally, which constitute the majority of the PlayStation 5's library. The remaining 22% of sales were physical, amounting to nearly 70 million discs. For those curious, the PlayStation titles that have exceeded 100,000 physical units so far this year are, in order, Resident Evil Requiem, Crimson Desert, MLB The Show 26, 007 First Light, Lego Batman, WWE 2K26, and Call of Duty Black Ops 7.

Frustrated users who prefer physical games are likely powerless to change the PlayStation maker's course. The company has already begun winding down disc manufacturing operations at its final plant, although games released before 2028 can still receive additional print runs after the cutoff date. Furthermore, the European Union confirmed that it cannot stop console manufacturers from abandoning physical media.

Jumping ship to Microsoft will likely not be an option for long. Rumors suggest that the company is strongly considering forgoing an optical drive for its next Xbox console, expected in 2027 or 2028. However, Microsoft is also reportedly developing a method to transfer physical game copies to digital-only devices.

Permalink to story:

Sony's digital-only future angers fans, but physical PlayStation games are barely selling

 

[DirtyDan]

I'm sure this will push playstation users to jump ship to PC, especially if the ps6 is as expensive as its being rumored. Steam machine being around that projected price as the ps6. Sure PC is majority digital, but the benefits severely outweigh the cons. Discord being built into ps helps too.

 

[Vixiy]

"78% of the games it sold that year were digital, though the number includes titles that are only available digitally, which constitute the majority of the PlayStation 5's library."
Sony failed to get used game sales banned, so they manufactured conditions to discontinue resellable copies.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Insomniacs leaked data showed over half of their sales were physical.

Sony is desperate to grab more control, so they'll shove digital only sales, dlc, subscriptions, anything to pump the digital numbers and make this look better. If you look at just games with a physical and digital release, physical still makes up a huge portion of sales.

 

[dangh]

We lost the physical fight when steam got popular. And for a good reason: convenience. I was buying ps digital games even if I had physical ones because it was easier to use. This changes nothing, really. The main change I się was to move to gog with all I could, then I have the ownership and difital convenience. With steam, psn, xbox, and more and more 9ften with Nintendo you only borrow games.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

We lost the physical fight when steam got popular. And for a good reason: convenience. I was buying ps digital games even if I had physical ones because it was easier to use. This changes nothing, really. The main change I się was to move to gog with all I could, then I have the ownership and difital convenience. With steam, psn, xbox, and more and more 9ften with Nintendo you only borrow games.

The Playstation does not have Steam.

The PC platform is a completely different animal, with widespread competition, the ability to copy, crack, and modify files, and a long history of community support.

PlayStation has none of this.

 

[LordVile95]

Im sure this will push playstation users to jump ship to pc, especially if the ps6 is as expensive as its being rumored. Steam machine being around that projected price as the ps6. Sure pc is majority digital, but the benefits severely outweigh the cons. Discord being built into ps helps too.

The steam machine isn’t as powerful as a PS5 never mind a new console and the OS is a mess. You think console gamer wants to plug in a keyboard and mouse to try and fix things in the terminal?

 

[LordVile95]

The Playstation does not have Steam.

The PC platform is a completely different animal, with widespread competition, the ability to copy, crack, and modify files, and a long history of community support.

PlayStation has none of this.

PC has no competition to steam.

 

[m4a4]

If they weren't trying to be the worst of the 3 (fighting with Nintendo for top spot), it would go over a lot better. But as it stands, they don't have the good will built up to pull one of these and come out unscathed.

I hope they get humbled hard.

 

[dangh]

The Playstation does not have Steam.

The PC platform is a completely different animal, with widespread competition, the ability to copy, crack, and modify files, and a long history of community support.

PlayStation has none of this.

Never said ps have steam.

And, steam is de facto monopoly with more than 70pct pc market control.

 

[yRaz]

I wonder if the EUs rulling on saying that phones must allow different app stores will also apply to consoles? Sony is opening up a can of worms here

 

[yRaz]

Never said ps have steam.

And, steam is de facto monopoly with more than 70pct pc market control.

They are not a monopoly but they are the dominant market force, but that seems to be because everyone loves using their service. Many gamers have multiple games stores installed concurrently with those games often launching on many of them. Why is that? Do you have a favorite grocery store? Do many people share in the idea that that is the best grocery store around? There is a reason I shop at Publix instead of Walmart.

People choose to shop at steam, a true monopoly uses its market dominance to squeeze out competition.

 

[dangh]

They are not a monopoly but they are the dominant market force, but that seems to be because everyone loves using their service. Many gamers have multiple games stores installed concurrently with those games often launching on many of them. Why is that? Do you have a favorite grocery store? Do many people share in the idea that that is the best grocery store around? There is a reason I shop at Publix instead of Walmart.

People choose to shop at steam, a true monopoly uses its market dominance to squeeze out competition.

I think you have to check the economic definition of monopoly. And yes, steam match it beautifully.
Everyone loves to use their services? Save like with ms windows, everyone loves 8ntegrated ai and uses it with love, never complained because of they didn't live it, they would move to another operating system where all the productivity applications they are paying for years will work without a hitch...
Oh wait

 

[yRaz]

I think you have to check the economic definition of monopoly. And yes, steam match it beautifully.
Everyone loves to use their services? Save like with ms windows, everyone loves 8ntegrated ai and uses it with love, never complained because of they didn't live it, they would move to another operating system where all the productivity applications they are paying for years will work without a hitch...
Oh wait

The EU is investing heavily in de-microsofting their lives. We don't see this in the US very much, but it is happening. But the thing about Valve is that they are privately owned, there are no shareholders and Gabe has it setup that Valve goes to a trust to be run and cannot be sold when he dies. People use steam because it's better, not because there is a lack of competition. And, frankly, the reason you can't take your games where you want has more to do with the DMCA than it does any market place. Oddly enough, there are countries where this is the law

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Never said ps have steam.

And, steam is de facto monopoly with more than 70pct pc market control.

No it isn't. You can play every AAA game out there without touching steam

That's not how a monopoly works.

PC has no competition to steam.

Yes it does. But then you don't understand how operating systems or memory allocation works, so the concept of monopolies and market control are WAY beyond your understanding.

 

[Jim Lahey]

The issues with digital delivery to me have more to do with proprietary control and lack of offline (re)play abilities than the format.

For example I recently set up my 360 for the kids to play some classics (rockband, Halo) and it was refreshing to plug in the console, pop in the disk and play.

No online setup/login, no 30GB update download, just 2 mins and we were playing.

In the digital, connected game space, pulling up a new title is a myriad process that seems to take longer and longer every generation - and that’s ignoring the fact that the markets want to monopolize pricing such that an old, unmaintained title somehow still costs $40+

 

[Greggs]

Getting rid of the discs wouldn't bother me so much if digital licenses were transferrable. At the very least, retail sales could continue with transferrable licenses even if you still need to download the file. It's my understanding that how Nintendo retail sales work. Since Sony made no such mention I'd have to assume they have no such intention.

 

[LordVile95]

No it isn't. You can play every AAA game out there without touching steam

No you can’t becaure steam set the prices for the entire platform regardless of storefront.

That's not how a monopoly works.

The legal barrier for being declared a monopoly begins at 25% market share. Steam are over 80

Yes it does. But then you don't understand how operating systems or memory allocation works, so the concept of monopolies and market control are WAY beyond your understanding.

Maybe you should learn how things work before presenting personal anecdotes as industry wide facts.

 

[dangh]

The EU is investing heavily in de-microsofting their lives. We don't see this in the US very much, but it is happening. But the thing about Valve is that they are privately owned, there are no shareholders and Gabe has it setup that Valve goes to a trust to be run and cannot be sold when he dies. People use steam because it's better, not because there is a lack of competition. And, frankly, the reason you can't take your games where you want has more to do with the DMCA than it does any market place. Oddly enough, there are countries where this is the law

https://www.gamesradar.com/games/valve-reportedly-threatened-ubisoft-with-a-total-delisting-of-rainbow-six-siege-by-end-of-day-tomorrow-when-it-tried-selling-it-cheaper-on-uplay/

Yeah, sure. They rule the competition, they are a largest store, and developers either follow whatever they come up with or will be delisted. Competition? Impossible. No other front-end can have a cheaper price than steam.

Steam is not better. I cant play one steam game and let my kid play other steam game on other system without acrobatics. It is so much easier to manage systems with gog, same, as with old physical games. Sure, some things, like workshop, are great on steam, but honestly that what would you expect from a more than decade old monopoly.

 

[dangh]

No it isn't. You can play every AAA game out there without touching steam

That's not the point. Steam is setting price on any of the store front, so no other store front can compete with price. Given their larger than 75 pct market coverage and being the main selling store front because of that (where the remaining 25pct is split across 5-8 other store fronts) requires other devs to a. publish there and b. Go with much smaller storefront and lost their game there, but following steam regulations. If you can buy any AAA game on other storefront only if it was accepted by valve, it is a monopoly.
Ubisoft cant sell their own game on their own storefront without following steam regulation:

https://www.gamesradar.com/games/valve-reportedly-threatened-ubisoft-with-a-total-delisting-of-rainbow-six-siege-by-end-of-day-tomorrow-when-it-tried-selling-it-cheaper-on-uplay/

And that I the real monopoly in action.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

No you can’t becaure steam set the prices for the entire platform regardless of storefront.

The legal barrier for being declared a monopoly begins at 25% market share. Steam are over 80

Maybe you should learn how things work before presenting personal anecdotes as industry wide facts.

https://www.gamesradar.com/games/valve-reportedly-threatened-ubisoft-with-a-total-delisting-of-rainbow-six-siege-by-end-of-day-tomorrow-when-it-tried-selling-it-cheaper-on-uplay/

Yeah, sure. They rule the competition, they are a largest store, and developers either follow whatever they come up with or will be delisted. Competition? Impossible. No other front-end can have a cheaper price than steam.

Steam is not better. I cant play one steam game and let my kid play other steam game on other system without acrobatics. It is so much easier to manage systems with gog, same, as with old physical games. Sure, some things, like workshop, are great on steam, but honestly that what would you expect from a more than decade old monopoly.

You two are wildly biased, so let me clarify the current situation. The alleged claim is that Valve enforces prices on their own storefront must be as low as on competitors' storefronts. No one besides you two are claiming that Steam actually sets prices for game publishers.

The name for this policy is called pricing parity, and Valve has denied this is enforced. There are plenty of examples in MANY regions that games on Epic Games are much cheaper than on Steam (because Epic Games has far more granular regional pricing guidelines than Steam). Part of it would also be because Epic Games does have a lower commission than Valve.

Regarding price parity rules, there's an ongoing lawsuit regarding this, but Valve has been saying pricing parity policy is voluntary (along with the regional pricing guide that you seem to think is enforced). Here is the ongoing lawsuit: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59859024/wolfire-games-llc-v-valve-corporation/

 

[Vixiy]

You two are wildly biased, so let me clarify the current situation. The alleged claim is that Valve enforces prices on their own storefront must be as low as on competitors' storefronts. No one besides you two are claiming that Steam actually sets prices for game publishers.

The name for this policy is called pricing parity, and Valve has denied this is enforced. There are plenty of examples in MANY regions that games on Epic Games are much cheaper than on Steam (because Epic Games has far more granular regional pricing guidelines than Steam). Part of it would also be because Epic Games does have a lower commission than Valve.

Regarding price parity rules, there's an ongoing lawsuit regarding this, but Valve has been saying pricing parity policy is voluntary (along with the regional pricing guide that you seem to think is enforced). Here is the ongoing lawsuit: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59859024/wolfire-games-llc-v-valve-corporation/

Internal emails have been shown in court demonstrating Valve has threatened to remove games for having a lower price on other stores and that Microsoft is even in on it.

 

[AndreV]

When you are ignorant, bad educated or ill intended you make and public this type of titles "but physical PlayStation games are barely selling", not mentioning in the title that the majority of said physical games dont work as a physical games as they require downloads to works.

 

[Aolish]

I don't think it has to do with the physical media but rather how long does a user have it for that people are concerned about. People don't trust Sony when it comes to how long their content will be kept, this is especially true for those who read the article that Sony was removing 551 movies and that people would lose their purchases without getting any sort of refund, not even a credit (at the very least) to purchase future digital games on PSN

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Internal emails have been shown in court demonstrating Valve has threatened to remove games for having a lower price on other stores and that Microsoft is even in on it.

That's not true. I actually looked at the Bloomberg article (the source for that claim) and I could not find evidence of that. The only claim of that is what Wolfire wrote in their blog (not emails).

For Rainbow Siege 6 mentioned by your source, Bloomberg claims that there were emails that Ubisoft offered an $15 pack only on its Uplay store and that unnamed Valve employees threatened to remove the game (I could not find these emails, so they could be testimony that there was an email which we know can be faulty). GamesRadar mistakenly suggests that this pack was offered cheaper on Uplay, but Bloomberg doesn't mention any comparison to another pack.

The article makes no mention of the outcome, what other factors were involved, and so on. For example, I found testimony that showed Ubisoft and Valve were partners, and Valve was providing specialized marketing for Ubisoft because of that. In addition, part of the reason for the hostility is because after customers bought and launched R6S from steam, Ubisoft was essentially marketing an exclusive "starter pack" on its own storefront Uplay, and thus Ubisoft was using Steam to sell products on its own competing platform.