The landscape of video game consumption is undergoing a seismic shift. For decades, the tangible thrill of unboxing a new game, the weight of the cartridge or disc in hand, and the pride of a curated game shelf were integral to the gaming experience. Today, however, the digital tide is rising, with downloadable software, subscription services, and cloud gaming increasingly becoming the norm. While giants like Sony and Microsoft have largely embraced this digital-first future, Nintendo has remained a notable champion of physical media, particularly its iconic cartridges. But with the impending arrival of the Nintendo Switch 2, speculation abounds: will Nintendo, too, fully succumb to the digital current? This report delves into gamers’ perceptions of this transition, exploring price considerations, consumer hesitancy towards non-physical products, the inherent risks of this shift for consumers, and the profound psychological dimensions of owning physical versus digital games.

I. The Unstoppable Tide? The Gaming World’s March Towards Digital

The move away from physical video games is not a subtle drift but a powerful current reshaping how games are bought, sold, and experienced. Statistical evidence paints a clear picture of a rapidly changing market, with digital formats asserting dominance across platforms.

• A. The Shrinking Shelf: Statistical Evidence of Physical Decline
  The decline in spending on physical video game software is stark and accelerating. In the United States, for instance, spending on physical game software has been more than halved since 2021 and now sits more than 85% below its peak in 2008.¹ This trend is not confined to one region; globally, revenue from physical game software was an estimated $8 billion in 2023, with projections showing a decrease to $6 billion annually for 2024 and 2025.²
  The broader market context further emphasizes this shift. In 2024, the global video game industry generated an estimated $184.3 billion in revenue. Of this staggering sum, physical games accounted for a mere 4.6%, or $8.5 billion, while digital revenue, encompassing full game downloads, add-on content, and subscriptions, captured the remaining $175.8 billion.³ This disparity underscores physical media’s shrinking portion of an otherwise expanding market.
  The transition is not entirely uniform across all gaming platforms. The console market, for example, saw 84% of its sales from digital sources in 2024, meaning physical media still held a 16% share.⁴ In contrast, the PC gaming segment has almost entirely transitioned, with physical sales constituting a negligible 1%.⁵ This divergence suggests that the factors driving the “death of physical” operate with different intensities depending on the platform. The traditional console experience, often associated with gift-giving, collecting, and a robust second-hand market for typically higher-priced games, appears to offer some continued, albeit diminishing, relevance for physical copies. The PC market, often more utility-driven and benefiting from established digital distribution platforms, has embraced digital formats more comprehensively.
  Furthermore, the immense financial strength of the digital market is not solely built on replacing physical unit sales with digital ones. While revenue from digital full-game sales is projected to remain stable at $8 billion annually from 2023 to 2025 – notably the same figure as physical software revenue in 2023 – the significant growth in the digital sector is heavily propelled by other streams.² Revenue from add-on content, such as DLC and microtransactions, is forecast to climb from $15 billion in 2023 to $19 billion by 2025. Similarly, subscription services are expected to grow from $10 billion to $11 billion over the same period.² This diversified revenue model, offering continuous engagement and monetization opportunities that physical media cannot easily replicate, makes the digital transition particularly attractive for publishers. It’s a shift not just in delivery format but in the fundamental economics of game publishing.
• B. The Digital Default: Sony and Microsoft’s Embrace of the New Norm
  The major console manufacturers, Sony’s PlayStation (holding a 45% global market share) and Microsoft’s Xbox (with a 23% share), have largely adopted a digital-primary strategy.² While physical editions of games are still released for their consoles, their overarching business models are increasingly centered on their digital storefronts (PlayStation Store, Microsoft Store), expansive subscription services (PlayStation Plus, Xbox Game Pass), and the burgeoning market for digital add-on content.
  Microsoft’s approach, in particular, signals a broader strategic evolution. The company has begun porting some of its major first-party titles, such as Forza Horizon 5, Halo: The Master Chief Collection, and Gears of War, to competing platforms, including the PlayStation 5 and potentially the upcoming Nintendo Switch 2.⁶ This move indicates a de-emphasis on exclusive hardware-tied physical sales and a pivot towards maximizing software revenue regardless of the platform it’s played on. Such a strategy inherently favors digital distribution due to its ease of multi-platform deployment and lower logistical overhead.
  This strategic shift by major players like Microsoft suggests that the traditional “console wars,” once fought primarily on the battlefield of exclusive hardware and game titles, are evolving. The new frontier appears to be ecosystem entrapment. If flagship first-party games are no longer sacrosanct hardware drivers, the core value proposition for consumers and companies alike changes. The aim becomes to draw users into comprehensive digital ecosystems where ongoing monetization can occur through subscriptions, direct digital sales, and in-game purchases across the widest possible user base. In this paradigm, physical exclusivity becomes a less critical strategic asset compared to sustained digital engagement. Consequently, physical media is increasingly positioned as a legacy format, a collector’s item, or a supplementary option rather than the primary engine of revenue and growth for these industry leaders.

Table 1: Global Video Game Revenue – Physical vs. Digital Snapshot (2023-2025E)

Category	2023 Revenue (USD)	2024 Projected Revenue (USD)	2025 Projected Revenue (USD)	Source(s)
Physical Hardware	$19 billion	$18 billion	$19 billion	2
Physical Software	$8 billion	$6 billion	$6 billion	2
Digital Full-Game	$8 billion	$8 billion	$8 billion	2
Add-on Content (DLC, MTX)	$15 billion	$17 billion	$19 billion	2
Subscriptions	$10 billion	$11 billion	$11 billion	2
Total Digital Content Revenue	$33 billion	$36 billion	$38 billion	Calculated
Global Digital Games Market (Total)		$175.8 billion (2024)		4
Global Physical Games Market (Total)		$8.5 billion (2024)		4
Percentage of Total Game Spending (2024)		Digital: 95.4%		4
		Physical: 4.6%		4

Note: “Total Digital Content Revenue” above is calculated from Digital Full-Game, Add-on Content, and Subscriptions from ²/.² The “Global Digital/Physical Games Market (Total)” and “Percentage of Total Game Spending” figures for 2024 are from ⁴/⁷, representing a broader scope including mobile and other digital transactions, providing a comprehensive view of digital dominance.

II. Nintendo: The Cartridge Champion in a Digital Arena

In a gaming world increasingly dominated by digital downloads and streaming services, Nintendo stands out. With a significant 27% global market share, the company has maintained a strong commitment to physical game cartridges for its highly successful Switch console, which had sold an impressive 137.72 million units as of February 2024.² This adherence to physical media is not merely a vestige of the past but a deliberate strategy that resonates deeply with a specific segment of its audience.

• A. The Enduring Appeal of the Cartridge
  One of the primary reasons for the continued success of physical Nintendo games lies in their perceived and actual value. Gamers consistently highlight the robust resale value of Nintendo Switch game cartridges, especially when compared to physical games on other consoles, where frequent and deep digital sales can quickly devalue physical counterparts.¹ For many Nintendo titles, acquiring a second-hand physical copy is often the most economical way to play them.¹ This sustained value makes the initial investment in a physical Nintendo game feel more secure for consumers.
  This phenomenon is not accidental. Nintendo’s President, Shuntaro Furukawa, has explicitly stated, “Our objective is not to simply increase the share of digital sales, but to maximize overall game software sales, including sales of physical software”.⁸ This declaration underscores a conscious strategic decision to continue catering to the portion of their player base that values, and indeed prefers, physical media.
  Nintendo’s success with physical media is intrinsically linked to its unique audience composition and its distinct content strategy. The company’s target demographic is notably broad, encompassing families, younger players, and dedicated collectors.⁹ For the family market, physical games are often preferred due to the ease of gift-giving and sharing within a household without navigating complex account permissions. Collectors, a passionate segment of the gaming community, inherently value the tangibility and displayability of physical cartridges and their packaging. Furthermore, Nintendo’s first-party titles, which are central to its appeal, tend to maintain their retail price for extended periods and experience less frequent deep digital discounts compared to games on Sony or Microsoft platforms. This pricing strategy naturally supports a healthier second-hand market and bolsters the resale value of physical Nintendo games ¹, making physical purchases an economically sound choice for consumers who anticipate reselling their games later. This interplay between audience characteristics, content strategy, and the tangible benefits of physical media creates a self-reinforcing cycle that sustains Nintendo’s physical game sales.
• B. Catering to Collectors and Families: Nintendo’s Niche
  Nintendo’s marketing prowess often involves leveraging nostalgia and appealing to a wide age spectrum, from children around 12 years old to adults well into their 30s and 40s, with a significant cohort in the 20-25 age range.⁹ This demographic frequently includes individuals who grew up with physical game media and retain a strong appreciation for its collectability and the tactile experience it offers.
  The company’s long-standing focus on family-friendly content is another cornerstone of its physical media strategy.⁹ Games designed for shared experiences are well-suited to physical formats, which can be easily passed among family members or lent to friends. This aligns with parental expectations for safe and accessible gaming environments.
  Moreover, Nintendo has masterfully employed strategies such as limited-edition console releases and collector’s editions of games, tapping into the “fear of missing out” (FOMO) among its fanbase.¹⁰ These practices further fuel demand for physical Nintendo products, transforming them from mere software carriers into desirable collectibles.
  In a market where its primary competitors are aggressively pushing towards digital-first or digital-only models, Nintendo’s continued and vocal commitment to robust physical releases, as articulated by President Furukawa ⁸, serves as a significant brand differentiator. This is not simply about clinging to legacy formats; it is a calculated strategic choice. This stance resonates powerfully with a core segment of its user base that values tangible play experiences ⁹ and reinforces Nintendo’s unique brand identity. For gamers who may feel disillusioned by the increasingly ephemeral nature of digital-only games on other platforms, Nintendo’s perceived dedication to physical media can foster stronger brand loyalty and a sense of stability.

III. The Switch 2 Horizon: Evolution or Revolution in Game Delivery?

As anticipation builds for Nintendo’s next console, the Switch 2, a central question revolves around its approach to game media. Will it continue the company’s tradition of robust physical cartridge support, or will it signal a more decisive shift towards the digital formats favored by its competitors? Leaks, rumors, and official pronouncements offer a glimpse into a potentially complex and evolving strategy.

• A. The Rumor Mill: Cartridges, Keys, and Digital Dilemmas
  Whispers from within the industry and data leaks suggest that Nintendo may be planning a multi-faceted approach to game distribution for the Switch 2. Three primary formats have been repeatedly mentioned: traditional digital-only releases, new high-capacity 64GB physical cartridges, and a more controversial option known as “Game Key Cards”.¹¹ These Game Key Cards, reportedly codenamed “POTION,” are physical cartridges that, instead of containing the full game data, primarily serve as an authentication key, requiring users to download a substantial portion, if not all, of the game from the internet.¹¹ This concept has already sparked debate and concern among gamers who feel it undermines the core benefits of physical media.¹¹
  The original Nintendo Switch supported a range of cartridge sizes, from 1GB up to 32GB, allowing publishers flexibility based on game size and budget. Leaks indicate that the Switch 2 might streamline this, possibly offering only a single, higher-capacity 64GB physical cartridge option for full game releases.¹¹ Some reports even suggest a specific manufacturing cost for developers for these 64GB cartridges, around $16 per unit.¹²
  On a more reassuring note for physical media advocates, Nintendo has reportedly confirmed that Game Key Cards, should they materialize, will not be locked to a specific user account or console, meaning they can be resold or lent, similar to traditional physical games.¹² The Switch 2 itself is expected to feature 256GB of internal storage, a significant upgrade from its predecessor, and will utilize microSD Express cards for further storage expansion, which offer faster data reading speeds.¹³
  Official announcements regarding the Nintendo Switch 2 have begun to clarify some of these points. Nintendo has confirmed its commitment to publishing games in a physical format for the new console. These new cartridges will boast higher reading speeds and be capable of storing larger amounts of data. They will be visually distinct, featuring a bright red color and a “Nintendo Switch 2” banner on the packaging.¹⁶ Furthermore, Game Key Card releases will be clearly marked with a specific symbol and text on the game box to inform consumers about the download requirement.¹³ Several anticipated first-party titles, such as Mario Kart World, Donkey Kong: Bananza, and a new The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild installment (distinct from the original Switch title), are expected to be released as full-game cartridges, containing all data on the physical media.¹³
• B. The Developer’s Cut: Cost vs. Consumer Preference
  The potential cost implications for developers are a crucial factor in understanding the Switch 2’s media strategy. The rumored $16 manufacturing cost for a 64GB Switch 2 cartridge is considerably higher than the costs associated with the smaller capacity cartridges used for the original Switch, and significantly more than producing Game Key Cards, which are noted to be cheaper.¹² This price differential could heavily influence developers’ choices, particularly smaller studios or those operating with tighter budgets. They might find Game Key Cards or digital-only releases to be more financially viable options, even if it means deviating from some consumers’ preferences for fully contained physical games.¹¹
  Despite these economic pressures, some publishers remain committed to traditional physical media. Limited Run Games, a company specializing in physical editions of digital and retro games, has publicly pledged that nearly all of its Switch 2 releases will be “true” physical games, with the full game data contained on the cartridge.¹³ This stance caters to a dedicated niche of collectors and preservationists. However, even Limited Run Games acknowledges that exceptions may be made for partnership releases, where the final decision on format might rest with the original developer or publisher.
  The emergence of the Game Key Card concept represents a contentious compromise. It appears to be an attempt by Nintendo and publishers to balance the consumer desire for a physical product—a box to own and display—with the escalating costs and logistical challenges of producing high-capacity cartridges for increasingly large modern games. However, for many staunch advocates of physical media, the primary allure is the possession of the complete game on a tangible medium, independent of mandatory downloads or server availability.¹¹ A Game Key Card that necessitates a significant download is often perceived by these gamers as a “fake physical” offering. It presents the potential downsides of both formats—requiring the physical card for access like a traditional game, yet also demanding substantial downloads and storage space like a digital title—without delivering the core benefit of self-contained, offline ownership. While the ability to resell these Game Key Cards is a positive aspect ¹³, it doesn’t fully address the fundamental concerns around game preservation or the feeling of “true ownership” that many physical buyers seek. This approach could, therefore, alienate the very consumers it ostensibly tries to accommodate, potentially pushing them towards straightforward digital purchases out of frustration, or damaging the trust they place in Nintendo’s commitment to physical media.
  Paradoxically, Nintendo’s cartridge strategy for the Switch 2, particularly if high-capacity cartridges prove expensive for developers and Game Key Cards are met with consumer resistance, might inadvertently accelerate the adoption of digital games, even if this runs counter to the company’s stated goal of maximizing overall software sales, including physical.⁸ If the “true” physical option (a full 64GB cartridge) becomes a premium or less common offering due to its cost ¹², and if Game Key Cards are viewed unfavorably ¹¹, consumers may increasingly gravitate towards the convenience and unambiguous nature of direct digital downloads. This tendency could be further amplified if, as one analyst suggests, Switch 2 games are priced in a way that subtly encourages digital purchases.¹² Consequently, while Nintendo may continue to offer physical options, the interplay of economic realities for developers and evolving preferences among consumers could steer the Switch 2 market more rapidly towards digital dominance than the current Switch landscape might suggest. President Furukawa’s commitment to supporting physical sales will face a significant test if the physical offerings themselves are perceived by the market as compromised, inconvenient, or poor value.

Table 2: Nintendo Switch 2 – Rumored/Announced Game Format Options & Key Considerations

Feature	Digital-Only	64GB Cartridge (Full Game)	Game Key Card (Download Required)
Key Characteristics	No physical media; direct download to console	Physical cartridge with full game data on media	Physical cartridge with key; requires large download
	Requires internet for initial purchase/download	Playable offline after optional day-one patches	Requires internet for initial game download
Pros for Developers	Lowest distribution cost; direct to consumer	Caters to collectors/physical media fans	Cheaper to produce than high-capacity cartridges
	Flexible pricing/sales	Potentially higher perceived value	Allows for a physical retail presence
Cons for Developers	No physical retail presence; platform fees	Higher manufacturing cost (e.g., rumored $16) 12	Negative consumer perception; partial download
		Production logistics	Still incurs some manufacturing/distribution costs
Pros for Consumers	Instant access; no physical storage needed	True ownership; full game on media; collectable	Has a physical box; resellable/lendable 13
	Often discounted in sales	Resellable/lendable; no large download needed	Potentially cheaper than full 64GB cartridge game
Cons for Consumers	No resale; license not ownership; server dependent	Higher initial price; requires physical swapping	Requires significant download & storage space 13
	Requires storage space	Potential for physical damage/loss	Not a “complete” physical game; internet needed
Gamer Sentiment	Accepted for convenience/price	Highly preferred by physical media advocates	Mixed to negative; “fake physical” concerns 11
Source(s)	General Knowledge11	11	11

IV. The Price of Play: Gamer Perceptions of Value in Physical vs. Digital

The transition from physical to digital media is not just a matter of format preference; it is deeply intertwined with perceptions of price and value. As gamers navigate this evolving marketplace, the cost of games—and what they receive for that cost—is a persistent point of discussion and, often, contention.

• A. The Sticker Shock: Full Price for Intangibility
  A common frustration voiced by many gamers is the pricing parity between digital and physical games at launch.¹⁸ The argument frequently made is that digital versions, lacking the costs associated with manufacturing, packaging, shipping, and retail distribution, should inherently be cheaper.¹⁹ This expectation is buttressed by an understanding of the publisher’s economics: approximately 15 years ago, a developer might have earned only about $10 from a $60 physical game sale. In contrast, a $60 digital sale today could yield around $42 for the publisher, representing a significantly higher profit margin.²⁰ When these substantial savings for the publisher are not visibly passed on to the consumer in the form of lower launch prices for digital editions, a sense of being overcharged can emerge. Some gamers go as far as to label digital games priced identically to their physical counterparts as a “scam,” particularly given the absence of resale rights and the often-debated nature of true ownership that accompanies digital purchases.¹⁸
  This consumer price expectation for digital goods appears to be fundamentally mismatched with prevailing publisher pricing strategies, especially at the launch of new titles. While publishers benefit from the reduced marginal costs of digital distribution ¹⁹, consumers often perceive that these savings are being absorbed entirely as increased profit rather than being shared. This perception can lead to feelings of unfairness, particularly when the digital product they are purchasing comes with inherent limitations—such as no ability to resell—that physical products do not have.¹⁹ Arguments that games, when adjusted for inflation, are cheaper than in previous eras ²⁰ may not fully resonate with consumers who see a fundamental shift in what they are “buying” (a license to access versus a tangible good) coupled with a clear reduction in the seller’s production and distribution costs.²⁰
• B. The Allure of the Sale vs. The Second-Hand Steal
  Price sensitivity is a major driver of purchasing decisions. Digital sales events, where games can often be acquired for half their original price or even less, are a significant attraction for many players.²¹ Indeed, for a considerable segment of the gaming population, the primary determinant of whether to buy a game, and in what format, is simply “what is cheaper”.²¹ One gamer noted that 90% of their game purchases were digital specifically because of the attractive pricing during sales.²¹
  However, the “cheapest” option is not universally digital. For Nintendo platforms, the strong second-hand market often means that used physical cartridges represent the most budget-friendly way to obtain a game.¹ This contrasts with other console ecosystems, where frequent and aggressive digital sales can, over time, significantly devalue physical copies, making digital the more economical choice for patient buyers.¹ For collectors of physical games, there’s also the long-term financial consideration: some report being able to sell their curated physical collections for more than their initial investment, an outcome entirely impossible with a library of digital licenses.²¹
  This demonstrates that the most cost-effective way to acquire games is highly context-dependent, varying by platform, the age of the game, and an individual’s purchasing habits and intentions. For Nintendo enthusiasts, the vibrant resale market for physical games ¹ makes buying physical copies, even at or near launch, an attractive proposition, as a portion of the cost can often be recouped. On other platforms like PlayStation and Xbox, the prevalence of deep digital discounts ¹ encourages many gamers to wait for sales, making digital the preferred route for bargain hunters. This platform-specific economic landscape fosters different consumer behaviors. A potential shift by Nintendo towards more aggressive digital pricing for Switch 2, or policies that devalue its physical games (such as a heavy reliance on Game Key Cards that are perceived as less valuable), could significantly alter the unique economic balance that currently characterizes its ecosystem and influences its fans’ purchasing patterns.
• C. The Wharton Study: Why We Value Atoms Over Bits
  Academic research provides further insight into the valuation disparity between physical and digital goods. A study by Atasoy and Morewedge from the Wharton School found that people consistently ascribe less monetary value to digital goods than to identical physical versions.²³ Across experiments involving various items like souvenir photographs, books, and films, participants were willing to pay more for, and were more likely to purchase, the physical iterations.
  The core reason identified for this difference is the greater capacity of physical goods to foster a sense of “psychological ownership”.²³ The very materiality of physical items—their tangibility, the ability to touch and hold them—and the perceived control one has over a physical object enhance this feeling of “mine-ness,” which in turn increases its perceived value.
  These findings suggest an intrinsic devaluation of digital goods that creates a psychological hurdle when consumers are asked to pay “full price.” Even if all other practical considerations, such as resale value or manufacturing costs, were equalized, consumers might still subconsciously feel that a digital game is worth less simply because it lacks a physical presence. This inherent psychological bias means that publishers pricing digital games identically to physical ones are contending not only with rational economic arguments from consumers (e.g., lower publisher costs, no resale for consumer) but also with a deeper, almost instinctual, perception of lower worth. This contributes significantly to consumer hesitancy towards paying premium prices for intangible digital products ¹⁸ and highlights a fundamental mismatch between the perceived value of a digital good and the price often being asked for it.

V. “Mine to Keep?” Ownership, Risks, and the Ephemeral Nature of Digital Games

Beyond price, the transition to digital gaming raises fundamental questions about ownership, permanence, and the risks consumers face when their game libraries exist primarily as data on servers rather than as tangible objects on their shelves.

• A. The Licensing Labyrinth: Do You Truly Own Your Digital Games?
  A pervasive sentiment among gamers is that digital game purchases do not confer true ownership in the way physical media does.¹¹ Instead, the consensus is that buying a digital game typically means acquiring a license to play that game, subject to the terms and conditions set by the platform holder or publisher.¹¹ This contrasts sharply with the perception of outright ownership that comes with a physical disc or cartridge.¹⁹ While some may argue that “possession is 9/10ths of the law,” implying that physical possession grants a form of de facto ownership regardless of End User License Agreements (EULAs) ¹¹, the legal reality for digital goods is generally more restrictive.
  This distinction fuels significant concern: digital access can potentially be revoked, licenses can be altered, and consumers often feel they are at the mercy of companies like Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo for continued access to games they have “purchased”.¹⁷ The legal framework surrounding digital game purchases often defines them as services or revocable licenses, yet consumers, especially when paying full retail prices comparable to physical editions, often perceive their transaction as an act of acquiring ownership. This fundamental disconnect between legal reality and consumer perception is a potent source of anxiety. The idea that a game one paid $60 or $70 for could become inaccessible due to corporate decisions, server shutdowns, or changes in licensing terms—all factors outside the consumer’s control ¹⁷—is deeply unsettling. It undermines the perceived value proposition of digital games, irrespective of their convenience.
• B. When Games Vanish: Delisting, Server Shutdowns, and Digital Dust
  The fear of losing access to digital games is not merely hypothetical. Gaming history is unfortunately replete with examples of games being delisted from digital storefronts, or having their servers shut down, rendering them unplayable or permanently unobtainable through legitimate channels. Notable instances include the much-lamented P.T. (Playable Teaser), the original PC version of Metro 2033, Darkspore (which became entirely unplayable after its always-online DRM servers were deactivated), Maplestory 2, the recent delisting of Spec Ops: The Line, and several classic Leisure Suit Larry titles being removed from Steam.²⁴
  Even platform holders themselves contribute to this uncertainty. Nintendo, for example, announced the discontinuation of online services for its 3DS and Wii U software, including the closure of their respective eShops for new purchases.²⁴ Such precedents understandably cause apprehension among current Switch players about the long-term accessibility of their digital libraries on future platforms or after a console generation ends.
  In contrast, physical games are often seen as offering a more reliable safeguard against such digital ephemerality. As one gamer articulated, “20 years down the road they can still pop it in their system and play it” ²⁶, assuming the console hardware remains functional. While physical media is not without its own risks—discs can scratch, cartridges can degrade due to factors like rust or UV damage if not stored properly ²⁶—the control over the preservation (or lack thereof) of a physical item often feels more directly in the hands of the consumer. With digital games, that control predominantly lies with the platform holder or publisher, making the consumer a passive party subject to external access decisions. This power imbalance is a significant driver for the preference for physical media among gamers who are risk-averse or particularly concerned with the long-term preservation of their games. Each documented case of a delisted game or a server shutdown transforms abstract fears into concrete evidence, eroding trust in the long-term viability and stability of digital-only game libraries.
• C. The Preservation Predicament and the Value of Physical Archives
  Beyond individual access, the shift to digital has profound implications for the broader cultural issue of game preservation. Physical media is widely regarded by archivists, historians, and many gamers as crucial for ensuring that video games, as an art form and historical record, remain playable and accessible to future generations, independent of the whims of digital storefronts or the lifespan of online services. The case of Cyberpunk 2077 being released on a high-capacity Switch 2 cartridge, potentially at a higher cost to the publisher, was noted by some as a positive step for preservation.¹²
  The rumored Game Key Card model for the Nintendo Switch 2, however, has drawn criticism precisely because it appears to undermine this preservation aspect.¹¹ If a physical card still requires a substantial download to be playable, it offers little advantage over a purely digital version in terms of long-term, offline accessibility and completeness.
  As publishers increasingly favor digital distribution and potentially less “complete” physical releases like Game Key Cards ¹¹, the responsibility for long-term game preservation is implicitly being outsourced. While corporations might argue that digital formats are more secure against physical degradation ²¹, the risks of delisting, platform obsolescence, or rights management issues leading to inaccessibility are very real.²⁴ This environment often leaves the critical work of preservation to dedicated enthusiasts, community archivists, and, in unfortunate cases where legal avenues for access disappear, to the realm of piracy. In this context, true, complete physical releases become more than just consumer products; they become vital archival objects. The debate surrounding Game Key Cards ¹¹ is, therefore, not just about consumer convenience or publisher costs; it is intrinsically linked to the question of who bears the responsibility for ensuring that today’s games survive in a playable state for posterity.

Table 3: Physical vs. Digital Games – A Gamer’s Perspective on Ownership & Risk

Aspect	Physical Games	Digital Games
Perception of True Ownership	Generally perceived as “owned outright” 19; “possession is 9/10ths” 11	Often perceived as a “license to play,” not true ownership 11
Resale Value	Can be resold, potentially recouping costs or making profit (esp. Nintendo) 1	Generally no resale value 18
Lending to Friends/Family	Easily lendable 17	Difficult or impossible to lend traditionally; some platform-specific sharing may exist
Long-Term Access/Preservation	Playable as long as hardware functions; good for preservation 19	Dependent on server availability, platform support, publisher decisions 17
	Game Key Cards requiring downloads are a concern 11	Risk of delisting or service discontinuation 24
Risk of Loss/Damage	Susceptible to physical damage (scratches, rust), loss, theft 19	Immune to physical damage; account can be lost/hacked (though games often recoverable)
Server Dependency	Generally low for core gameplay (post-installation/patches) 21	Often high for initial download, updates; some games require constant connection
Platform Lock-in	Game tied to physical media, playable on compatible consoles	Game tied to user account and specific digital ecosystem/platform 18
Value Retention	Can retain or increase in value (collectibles, rare games) 21	Value is in access; no asset appreciation
Source(s) for Gamer Perceptions	1	11

VI. The Collector’s Heart, The Player’s Hand: Psychological Drivers of Preference

The choice between physical and digital games is not solely a rational calculation of cost, convenience, or risk. Deep-seated psychological factors, including the allure of ownership, the power of nostalgia, and the expression of identity, play a significant role in shaping gamers’ preferences.

• A. The Power of Touch: Psychological Ownership and Perceived Control
  The research by Atasoy and Morewedge compellingly demonstrates that physical goods have a greater capacity to instill “psychological ownership” compared to their digital equivalents.²³ This heightened sense of ownership stems from the very materiality of physical objects. Their tangibility allows for direct interaction—touching, holding, manipulating—which in turn fosters a stronger sense of perceived control over the item. These factors combine to create a feeling of “mine-ness” that is often weaker with intangible digital goods.
  Gamers frequently echo these academic findings in their own words. Sentiments like, “I just like the box art and being able to hold the game in my hand” ²¹ or the appreciation for “the general awesome feeling of having a new physical thing that I can look at and feel and smell and place among my other beloved games” ²¹ speak directly to this phenomenon. Conversely, when discussing digital games, some express that “it doesn’t even really feel like I have them—it’s more like I have access to them”.²¹ This distinction highlights how the lack of physical presence can diminish the emotional connection and the feeling of true possession.
  The endowment effect, a well-documented cognitive bias where people ascribe more value to things simply because they own them, is likely at play here. Psychological ownership is a key catalyst for this effect. Physical games, by allowing rich sensory engagement—sight of the artwork, the tactile sensation of the case and cartridge, even the nostalgic smell of a new game for some ²¹—strengthen the association between the game and the owner’s self-concept. This, in turn, enhances psychological ownership and perceived value. Digital games, primarily experienced through a screen and offering limited sensory feedback beyond the audiovisual output of the game itself, may struggle to evoke the same depth of psychological ownership, potentially contributing to their lower perceived value as identified in the Wharton study.²³
• B. Nostalgia, Identity, and the Curated Shelf
  For a significant portion of physical game buyers—32% according to one survey ²²—the act of collecting is a primary motivation. The desire to “have games on the shelf” ²¹ and to build a “cool collection to display” ¹⁷ is a powerful driver. This goes beyond mere storage; a game collection can become a tangible representation of personal history and identity.
  Physical goods are often perceived as more permanent and better suited to serve as reminders of past experiences, while digital objects can feel more transient and ephemeral.²³ This perception of permanence makes physical games ideal vessels for nostalgia. Nintendo, with its portfolio of iconic franchises and marketing strategies that frequently tap into nostalgic sentiments ⁹, is particularly adept at leveraging this connection. Furthermore, the identity relevance of a specific game or series can significantly increase a consumer’s preference for owning a physical copy, as demonstrated in an experiment involving Star Wars merchandise where individuals who identified more strongly with the franchise showed a greater preference for the physical DVD over a digital version.²³
  A curated shelf of physical games, therefore, is more than just an accumulation of software; it serves as a physical manifestation of a gamer’s journey, their evolving tastes, and a part of their identity.²³ Each game box can evoke specific memories, represent significant personal milestones, or signify a connection to a beloved fictional universe. This “legacy potential” ²³, the ability for a collection to tell a story and be passed on, is something that a digital library, often presented as a mere list of titles on a server, struggles to replicate with the same emotional resonance. The act of collecting, curating, and displaying physical games becomes an act of identity construction and personal storytelling, making the physical format deeply meaningful for many enthusiasts.
• C. The Convenience vs. Connection Trade-off
  While the psychological benefits of physical media are compelling for many, digital distribution offers undeniable advantages in terms of convenience. Instant access to games from anywhere with an internet connection, the elimination of physical storage clutter, portability (especially for handhelds like the Switch or Steam Deck), and the ease of switching between titles without swapping cartridges are all powerful draws.¹⁷
  However, this convenience often comes at the cost of the deeper psychological connection, the sense of true ownership, and the tactile satisfaction associated with physical media. The decision between formats frequently becomes a personal trade-off. Some gamers, while acknowledging the inherent benefits of physical copies, find that the practicalities of their current life circumstances—such as friends living far apart (making lending difficult) or diminishing returns from reselling games—lead them to prioritize the everyday convenience of digital.¹⁷
  Hardware design itself can also influence this trade-off. One user who transitioned to an all-digital library on the Steam Deck cited the immense convenience, yet recalled that when using the Nintendo Switch, they were sometimes less inclined to play their physical games simply due to the minor inconvenience of having to swap cartridges.²¹ This illustrates how the user experience designed into the hardware can subtly nudge preferences towards one format over another.
  Ultimately, the “value” of convenience is subjective and, for a significant segment of the gaming population, can overshadow the psychological benefits of physical ownership. For these pragmatic users, the practical advantages offered by digital games—ease of access, portability, and a clutter-free gaming setup—are compelling enough to make the emotional or psychological “loss” from not possessing a tangible object an acceptable compromise. This suggests that there may be distinct psychological profiles or varying need-states among gamers when they approach the physical versus digital decision, with some prioritizing emotional connection and tangible ownership, and others prioritizing utility and seamless access.

VII. Navigating the Next Level: The Future of Game Consumption

The video game industry stands at a crossroads, balancing evolving business models with deeply ingrained consumer desires. As technology continues to reshape how games are created, distributed, and experienced, the future of game consumption will likely be characterized by a complex interplay of these forces.

• A. Balancing Business Models with Consumer Desires
  Publishers are unmistakably drawn to digital distribution due to its inherent advantages: higher profit margins resulting from eliminated manufacturing and retail costs, and the potential for continuous revenue streams through DLC, microtransactions, and subscription services.² This economic incentive is a powerful force driving the industry towards a digital-centric future.
  However, a significant and vocal segment of consumers continues to express a strong desire for the traditional benefits of physical media: tangible ownership, the ability to resell or lend games, and the assurance of long-term preservation.¹⁷ This preference is particularly pronounced among users of platforms like Nintendo’s, which has historically catered to these values.
  The emergence of hybrid solutions like “Game Key Cards” ¹¹ can be interpreted as an attempt by the industry to find a middle ground. These formats try to offer the appeal of a physical retail product while leveraging the cost efficiencies of digital delivery for the bulk of the game data. However, this approach carries the risk of alienating consumers who seek the full benefits of physical media—namely, a complete, playable game on the cartridge itself—and may perceive such compromises as “fake physical” or poor value. If publishers, including Nintendo with its Switch 2, push too aggressively towards digital-only formats or “physical-lite” options without adequately addressing core consumer concerns about ownership, value, and preservation ¹⁷, they could face a backlash. This might manifest as reduced sales for these compromised formats, an increased demand for specialist publishers like Limited Run Games that focus on complete physical editions ¹³, or, in a more concerning scenario, a greater temptation for some consumers to turn to piracy if legitimate avenues for true ownership feel increasingly restricted. Alternatively, the market could naturally segment further, with a mass market embracing the convenience of digital and subscriptions, and a dedicated niche market willing to pay a premium for “true” physical releases that guarantee completeness and collectability.
• B. The Role of Choice and the Potential for Hybrid Futures
  Innovation in how digital rights are managed and how access is provided could play a crucial role in alleviating some consumer anxieties surrounding the shift away from physical media. Nintendo’s own exploration of “Virtual Game Cards” for the Switch 2 is an interesting development in this regard. These are described as a system to help manage purchased digital games, potentially allowing play on two different systems or even facilitating lending or borrowing of digital titles.¹⁵ If such systems can be implemented robustly to offer genuine flexibility in usage rights—approaching the ease of lending or reselling currently associated with physical games—much of the consumer hesitancy rooted in economic and ownership concerns ¹⁷ might diminish. While this wouldn’t satisfy the collector’s desire for a tangible object ²¹, it could address key anxieties for a broader audience, making the ongoing digital transition smoother and more palatable.
  The continued success of companies specializing in physical releases, such as Limited Run Games ¹³, also demonstrates an ongoing, albeit potentially niche, market for tangible game products. This suggests that even in an increasingly digital world, there will likely remain a space for physical media, catering to collectors, preservationists, and those who simply prefer the tactile experience. The future may not be a binary choice between physical and digital, but rather a spectrum of options.
• C. The Evolving Gamer-Game Relationship
  The fundamental shift from games as predominantly physical products to games as services or licenses for access is profoundly altering how gamers interact with and perceive their interactive entertainment. The psychological dimensions of collecting, the desire for permanence, and the satisfaction derived from tangible control ²³ will undoubtedly continue to shape the preferences of a notable segment of the market.
  Ultimately, the definition of “value” in gaming is becoming increasingly personalized and contextual. As the methods for acquiring and playing games diversify—from outright physical or digital purchase to subscription-based access and cloud streaming—”value” is no longer a monolithic concept solely tied to the price of a boxed game. For some consumers, value is found in achieving the lowest possible price point, whether through sales or second-hand markets.²¹ For others, it lies in the unparalleled convenience and breadth of choice offered by a vast digital library or a subscription service.¹⁷ For another distinct group, value is inextricably linked to the tangible ownership, collectability, and display potential of a physical item.²¹ This fragmentation of value perception means that game companies, including Nintendo as it launches the Switch 2, will need to navigate these varied expectations carefully. Success in this evolving landscape may depend on offering a diverse ecosystem of choices that cater to different needs and preferences, or risk failing to meet the multifaceted demands of the modern gamer, particularly without alienating a traditionally physical-preferring base in the pursuit of digital growth. The challenge lies in embracing the future without entirely discarding the valued aspects of the past.

Works cited

1. Mat Piscatella: The rate of decline in US physical video game …, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/1i9qng7/mat_piscatella_the_rate_of_decline_in_us_physical/
2. Gaming Console Statistics and Facts (2025) – Market.us News, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.news.market.us/gaming-console-statistics/
3. 2024 was terrible for the physical format and the future looks bleak in the face of the unstoppable advance of the digital format – AS USA, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://en.as.com/meristation/news/2024-was-terrible-for-the-physical-format-and-the-future-looks-bleak-in-the-face-of-the-unstoppable-advance-of-the-digital-format-n/
4. Games industry made $184.3 billion in 2024, consoles segment was 84% digital, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.tweaktown.com/news/102255/games-industry-made-184-3-billion-in-2024-consoles-segment-was-84-digital/index.html
5. Global physical game revenue Falls Nearly 10% in 2024 As Digital Dominates – ThingLabs, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://thinglabs.io/global-physical-game-revenue-in-2024-drops-nearly-10-to-just-8-5-billion
6. Rumor: 2 More Huge Xbox Franchises Coming to PS5 – Game Rant, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://gamerant.com/xbox-ps5-versions-ports-halo-master-chief-collection-gears-of-war-rumor/
7. The Gaming Industry in 2024 by the Numbers — A Review by GamesIndustry | App2top, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://app2top.com/news/the-gaming-industry-in-2024-by-the-numbers-a-review-by-gamesindustry-276003.html
8. mynintendonews.com, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://mynintendonews.com/2024/05/14/nintendo-confirms-its-commitment-to-physical-games/#:~:text=As%20Nintendo%20President%20Shuntaro%20Furukawa,importance%20to%20certain%20segments%20of
9. Nintendo Marketing Strategy: Insights And Tactics – drbrand agency, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://drbrandagency.com/marketing/nintendo-marketing-strategy/
10. Breaking Down Nintendo’s Core Audience and Marketing Success – Keegan Edwards, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://keeganedwards.com/breaking-down-nintendos-core-audience-and-marketing-success/
11. Nintendo offering three formats for Switch 2 games – My Nintendo …, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://mynintendonews.com/2025/05/11/nintendo-offering-three-formats-for-switch-2-games/
12. Nintendo Switch 2 leak about cartridge sizes reveals why Game-Key Cards are preferred, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.notebookcheck.net/Nintendo-Switch-2-leak-about-cartridge-sizes-reveals-why-Game-Key-Cards-are-preferred.1014131.0.html
13. Publisher Promises Its Switch 2 Game Carts Will Have Full Games On Them – GameSpot, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.gamespot.com/articles/publisher-promises-its-switch-2-game-carts-will-have-full-games-on-them/1100-6531469/
14. New Nintendo Switch 2 leak suggests Game-Key Cartridges might be preferred by publishers | Tom’s Guide, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.tomsguide.com/gaming/nintendo/new-nintendo-switch-2-leak-suggests-game-key-cartridges-might-be-preferred-by-publishers
15. Nintendo Switch 2 launches June 5 at $449.99, bringing new forms of game communication to life – News, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.nintendo.com/us/whatsnew/nintendo-switch-2-launches-june-5-bringing-new-forms-of-game-communication-to-life/
16. Nintendo Switch 2 FAQ – Part Two: Nintendo Switch 2 Games & Upgrades – Feature, accessed on May 13, 2025, http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/feature/70781/faq-all-your-questions-about-the-nintendo-switch-2-answered-with-sources-nintendo-switch-2-faq-part-two-nintendo-switch-2-games-n-upgrades
17. Do you prefer physical or digital games and why? : r/NintendoSwitch, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/1j7wd0h/do_you_prefer_physical_or_digital_games_and_why/
18. Physical or digital games? Is the jump from physical to digital worth it? : r/videogames – Reddit, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/videogames/comments/1jjjcl1/physical_or_digital_games_is_the_jump_from/
19. Fading Physical Media and its Impact on the Gaming Industry, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.ixiegaming.com/blog/physical-media-and-its-impact-on-the-gaming/
20. Is game pricing actually a legit big concern or are we focusing on negativity? – Reddit, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/AskGames/comments/1jy46z5/is_game_pricing_actually_a_legit_big_concern_or/
21. Do you prefer physical or digital games? : r/videogames – Reddit, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/videogames/comments/1i61bwk/do_you_prefer_physical_or_digital_games/
22. Why do gamers still buy physical games? | GamesIndustry.biz, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.gamesindustry.biz/why-do-gamers-still-buy-physical-games
23. marketing.wharton.upenn.edu, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/04.04.2019-Morewedge-Carey-PAPER-DigitalvsPhysicalGoods.pdf
24. Shut Down or Discontinued Video Games – Digital Preservation Coalition, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.dpconline.org/digipres/champion-digital-preservation/bit-list/practically-extinct/bitlist-shut-down-discontinued-games
25. Seven of the most infamous games in PC history are being delisted from Steam, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.pcgamesn.com/leisure-suit-larry/steam-delisted
26. Misconceptions about Digital vs Physical : r/truegaming – Reddit, accessed on May 13, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/truegaming/comments/4q2tw1/misconceptions_about_digital_vs_physical/