You could have made a decent buck selling them instead of just throwing them away, just saying. Many would have been thrilled just to take them off your hands. Assuming the boxes and things in them weren't in Finnish I suppose :D No idea how strong Finnish localization was back in the day.

Either way, I'm the exact opposite. Would love to have my entire walls lined with big boxes, but sadly, by the time I could start buying games on my own, their heyday was long past.

Hard disagree there. It's great being able to install version 1.0 from a physical medium and patch it to whatever version you wish, instead always being stuck with the latest update. Not to mention extreme cases, like pre-Anniversary edition Titan Quest for example.

Convenient? Probably. Easier? Arguable. Sexier? Absolutely not. Happier? No idea what that entails. Positive? What?

A nice idea - in theory.
Like I wrote in my last post, empty slip-lid-boxes can be bought "en gros" for little money. Color printers are also available everywhere (copy shops are a viable alternative).

However: delivering the original box art as a ready-to-print "box-sleeve" for your homemade "DIY- game-boxes" may be harder to do.
There may even exist legal reasons, as to why that's not possible.

Many things could, can and will be legally argued.
That's exactly the problem I was alluding to.

Game Discs only! Longest lasting medium ever made!

USB stick as an archive is done in a few years... this idea is nothing more than a joke.

Second on the list of storage is a big HDD... useful for GOG installers.

SSDs and other "NAND based" flash storage are made for handling installs and are unbeatable as a fast active drive, not as a data archive.

I got no clue why a Disc should be "obsolete". Guess this is a sort of mainstream-belief which has been infected into the mind of the "digital-people-agenda". Guess the same people soon are telling us "we should not use hard coins anymore, as it is now obsolete". "Everything should be a digit number somewhere on a server some elitists only are in control of... and the consumers will be suckling at the mothers digital-nipples forever... as long as they behave".

in theory a physical disc could become even bigger and store up to 500 GB of data. However. not required for now, as it will work as well by just using several discs, if required. Cheap to produce and even long lasting.

Big NANDs, 256 GB+, is still way to pricey for a game medium... so Nintendo is not even bothering with; they love their profit... so 64 GB is the limit. With some luck 128 GB could be doable but already very pricey.

A supreme combo is for example: BD disc as an archive and a m2 SSD as an install drive (PS5 is a good example), but works as well with a HDD as an archive (GOG installers as an example)... higher versatility but less secure and more demanding for maintenance. Those are the expert stuff... and perhaps... for the true freaks using a "Tape", which can offer the capacity of a HDD paired with the endurance of a physical disc. The main issue: It is very expensive and usually for industrial use only. Other stuff is useless as an archive and not even good as an active game drive handling installs.

Weak NAND flash.... SD cards, USB sticks... this sort of stuff... is "childrens toys", although indeed for a highly portable device nothing can beat a fingernail-sized SD card with 256+ GB... i use it as well. For handling data on a phone or camera... this is what i use it for.

Actually, if anyone asking me: A USB stick is the most obsolete thing, because a micro SD card can do everything better already. All it takes is simply a micro SD card reader (can be gotten very cheap). Or simply some external SSD... may work as well, but the size is way bigger of course.

I only use micro SD cards as an portable storage, usually in the size of 256 and 512 GB, dependable on use. Bigger than this is very expensive and smaller than 256 GB is no good value anymore (as well, simply to small for modern use). However, my phones internal 512 GB is sufficient by itself. I got it installed on a Car-Navigator (256 GB) a very small Navi-support-tablet (256 GB) and on a dashcam (512 GB).

whatever you do, don't go on ebay and don't check what they are worth today...
SD card only support a limited number of read / write cycles, they are not designed to be used as a main hard drive

USB sticks can be gotten pretty cheap at a good capacity; this is surely not a price issue, but they simply are not good as a data archive and not even truly portable anymore. Those days we already got somewhat affordable high performance micro SD cards. So the sticks are pretty much obsolete very soon. For the SD cards all it takes is an adapter on a PC... but most portable devices do not need an adapter of course. For those who always need an adapter... simply leave the SD card inside the adapter... it will work the same way like an USB stick but the card can be taken out if required (for certain devices).

However, USB-C is surely not a issue, because many sticks already got this "port" attached... and nowadays any modern PC got at least one USB-C port.

Of course, not that i recommend overwriting a SD card for more than 500 times, but even in a abusive use... it is hard writing over 500 times the amount of 256 GB on it, believe me....
It will way sooner die because it simply gets to old... for example if used on a dashcam in a car, which is all the time writing stuff on it... hours and hours... in a row at times. So far no SD card has died doing to... not even in several years of use.

Just make the maths: 500 times x 256 GB... this is 125 TB... do you even nearly produce this "write load" on any m2 SSD? Most likely no... unless you are working in the industry, but not for private use.

On my PC, the only SSD i am even, at least barely... able to "wear out" is the very tiny 256 GB SSD build into a Notebook. Yet, even this one is still at around 60%, after over 4 years of excessive use.

Any of the 2 TB + SSDs on my gamer PC.... no way i can even wear them down to less than 90% in over 5 years, no matter how much i write on them. Bigger size = more write tolerance of course... so "size does matter".

My 2 TB system SSD, used for 2 years now, got 20 TB written on it and 99% endurance left. Even if it got 20 times lesser cycles (500 instead of around 10 000) it would still be at around 80% endurance left.

So, in almost any case... the wear is not a issue. We only have to worry its composite temperature because a controller may not live for very long if it always gets way to hot. The NAND is not even the issue here because it simply never gets to hot in almost any circumstances... it is a controller only vulnerability.

The biggest issue by far is simply "the limited hold up time of any charge inside the NAND", however, so far i know no good proof of how long it actually can hold a charge, this is very difficult to answer. Yet, i would not feel save for any NAND which is either "older than 5 years" or "not powered up for more than one year in a row". Perhaps some high quality NAND may be good for up to 10 years of use and 2 years without powering up but this is surely almost the limit.

Fact is simply, if it comes to sheer "hold up endurance", a Physical Disc or a Tape is supreme, a HDD still very good... and any other stuff i would not recommend as an archive-storage... simply to less endurance for an archive-duty.

Oh and i never heard something like "read cycles"; because this is not a issue in general. Although, every electronic part is vulnerable to aging, and with increased miniaturization the aging-process will in general increase. So... yes, a 3 nm chip got supreme performance but it surely will not have the same lifetime comparable to a 8 nm chip. So, a excessive miniaturization only makes sense if we need "maximum performance". If we just want the most reliable storage ever.... or processor... a high size or high nm processor is surely longer lasting, this is a physical rule as a hard law. Intel knows the deal.... their chips died like "iittle flys"... if abused with way to much power and Volt. It never happened in their entire history but now they know its bounds. In this case.... a huge HDD or Tape, by common sense... is in general more sturdy, just by the law of physics.

I did think about that "I wonder if I could get a hefty amount of money by selling these boxes/CDs away", but since I myself felt, especially after I joined GOG and started getting the same games digitally, that their value to me was waning to me, I felt it is probable they will do the same to everyone else as well.

For instance, I still have the original Falcon 3.0c floppy disks + manual + cardboard box. Do you figure that has some value (by selling it)? To me the value is less than 0€ because the floppies are unusable by now, the grey box is not a work of art and just takes room in my cupboard, and I have the Falcon Gold collection on GOG which includes this same game in an updated and playable form.

I just don't see why someone would want to pay any money to get that box and floppies from me, and if there are such people, they must be rare and I'd figure they've already found the box + floppies from flea markets decades ago.

To me the alleged value of old physical PC games is immaterial, a bit like NFT which crashed when people just figured suddenly that maybe those things have no real value after all.

I just tried to come up with as many positive adjectives I could think of.

It just blows my mind that I now have over 2600 GOG game installers in one physically small(-ish) USB hard drive, while back in the day I had to have two big shelves from the floor to ceiling to store a couple hundred physical PC games.

Also, I feel physical games are restrictive because they require some physical device to be able to even install and play the game. Floppy disks need a floppy drive, optical discs need an optical drive, NES 8-bit cartridges need a working NES unit etc.

Those physical restrictions almost feel like DRM to me, restricting how and where I can use the games. And also when those physical media eventually break up or become unreadable (e.g. my Falcon 3.0c floppies), I lose the games.

Digital DRM-free installers have much less such issues, they can be easily copied to newer and better medium or keep several copies of them even in the cloud, and they are much more likely playable far in the future as well (using PC emulators if needed, like Winlator in Android devices or a x86 PC emulator on some future non-x86 computers etc.

The game not working would indeed severely drop the value. There is still some demand for just display collector pieces (the boxes themselves, accompanying material etc.), but it is priced much lower without the game.

As for value in general, as long as the game itself works, is in good condition and has all the accompanying material it can get pretty high. Witchaven big box for example:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/156438743734

and here is just the box, without the game:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/365203027920

The value of all functioning physical copies that are not bound to any online DRM will only ever keep going up (depending on condition of course). Those that are available digitally are harder to sell, but collectors are still willing to pay a decent amount for physical stuff, if reasonably priced.

An optical drive that costs 20-40 bucks (internal vs external) and lasts you 10+ years? Truly an unsurpassable entry barrier. I pay more for a monthly internet fee. Just a note - I am still using the DVD drive that came in my pre-built PC back in 2009. Have since upgraded the PC numerous times, but the drive is still the same.

True, though to me, putting a disc in the drive or attaching an SSD with the installer is basically the same. The only argument here is the physical deterioration of the medium, though with good care, it easily ranges in decades. Original discs can last a surprisingly long amount of time, as long as you don't use them coasters or something. Burned discs are another topic entirely, those do tend to have shorter lifespans.

16 bit installers are a bit iffy, but can be gotten around with older Windows emulation for example.

And a GOG game will need a capable PC, dependable on the game... you forgot.

Not necessarily, if you have e.g. an emulator. After all, we play the MS-DOS games usually running in DOSBox, or maybe ScummVM.

Physical media is an extra obstacle on top of that. You can't install nor play a CD-based game without an actual optical drive that can read that CD. Sure you could turn the CD into an ISO and mount it with some emulated CD image software.. but then it isn't physical anymore as you turned it into a digital ISO image, to overcome the physical restriction I just mentioned.

Oh god I have a few original boxed games including two copies of Daggerfall and definitely shouldn't have checked ebay.

Unlikely to sell them as it would be inconvenient to do so but as someone with little space to store stuff and not a huge amount of money it's very tempting.

My PS5 is installing a game to a SSD and then it basically is "digital", in your language. Why? Because in modern times we play any game from a m2 SSD for performance purpose. So, a physical disc is simply firstly a long lasting archive, and secondly a "proof of purchase", at third "a nice real collection, especially if Steelbooks involved".

I dunno why i should decide between "Disc" and "digital" if i could have BOTH AT ONCE.

I could as well put GOG installers on a disc of course, but so far it was to much of work to me and only the most complete games would be worthy to put them on a disc for archival purpose... yet, why not.

There are as well some nice art for the cover and what else... someone simply will have to be creative. Why should i chose between one single thing if i could have all at once?

Because to lazy to "put an disc inside?" Oh dear... if i would be that lazy in my daily life i may as well stop to cook my own food, stop polishing my car.... stop brushing my hairs... simply stop moving a single finger for the sake of "maximum convenience". i do not chose this life of being as lazy as humanly possible, for the sake of maximum quality and simply because "I got a choice" and i want to PRESERVE any choice,

"But i always have to switch out the disc if i want to play any game".

Answer: Simply play a game from start to finish, and do not switch out a game every single day. It does not make much sense, except for testing purpose and if a new install is needed.

"But if i use the digital marketplace my games all start up instantly by a single click".

Answer: In general every game, no matter its source, will have to be installed first. On top of that, if a SSD is to small the game may have to become installed and uninstalled if we enjoy to "switch around games every single day", which is not any less of a struggle than using a disc. Most PS5 and PC gamers do not have a drive with sufficient size in order to store and install the entire archive unless their archive is so tiny... like 10 games, that they may not even be capable to "switch out discs" a lot because just way to less games available.

I just think, apart from being very lazy, we just love the idea of having it digital because this is the stuff most of the society and friends are doing. The majority can never be wrong... and any minority, with the exception of powerful elitists, should become wiped out, along with their interests... because it is simply obsolete.

"But on a disc the data is oudated soon?"

Answer: Sure... on a SSD the data is as well outdated soon.... so if we want to have the data updated either update the data, play the old data (usually works) or wait for a "final version" of any game (may happen),

I dunno the issues.... yet i could not care less as long as a company is not trying to get ride of any stuff the majority is not sufficiently supporting,

Then simply GET the optical drive! I know, it is weird becoming confronted by so much common sense.

Yes a lot is possible using a disc, dependable on the individual taste and possibilities. It IS still physical because you should still own your disc, no matter how it will be used.