- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 5,429 (0.85/day)
- Location
- Tennessee
System Name | AM5 |
---|---|
Processor | AMD Ryzen R9 7950X |
Motherboard | Asrock X670E Taichi |
Cooling | EK AIO Basic 360 |
Memory | Corsair Vengeance DDR5 5600 64 Gb - XMP1 Profile |
Video Card(s) | AMD Reference 7900 XTX 24 Gb |
Storage | Crucial Gen 5 1 TB, Samsung Gen 4 980 1 TB / Samsung 8TB SSD |
Display(s) | Samsung 34" 240hz 4K |
Case | Fractal Define R7 |
Power Supply | Seasonic PRIME PX-1300, 1300W 80+ Platinum, Full Modular |
There is no need to download anything if you have a physical copy. Anything else?
I want to know the voodoo magic though!!
Anyway, glad you didn't try to defend that statement. I asked you if your definition of owning a game is having a physical copy? You could have just replied and state yes, rather than stating some nonsense.
Games being physical copies kind of sucks in my opinion. Why?
- You are limited to the capacity of the physical format.
- Most times, the disk must be grabbed to play the game.
- Physical copies lead to more pirating, worse for developers.
- I like to be able to download my games when and where I want, without bring my case of physical copies along with me.
The same way bing or duck duck go are competitors of google. Sure.
There is "competitors". There is no real competition and that's what's important.
The definition of monopoly is the the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service. In this case control.
The definition of monopoly would be if Google purchased Bing and DuckDuckDuck to block them from the market, or if they didn't allow any others search engine on Android. That doesn't support anything you just said. You're stating Google is a monopoly because of market share, which doesn't make them a monopoly.
People prefer Google because it provides the best service. People prefer Steam because it provides them the best service.