

All of this just dilutes the real issue. Ask the majority of people who are complaining about a lack of physical media why they want physical media, and they’ll tell you that it’s so corporations can’t take it away from them after a year or two.
This can still happen with physical media. Physical media on consoles these days is already closer to a download key than a complete, ready-to-play game. There are already examples of disc-based console games that are unplayable without some kind of online intervention. At the same time, it’s been proven possible to run a profitable business with DRM-free downloads. I’d suggest that AAA publishers use DRM for 12-24 months, then switch to DRM-free, because they’re concerned about the critical initial sales period. This sort of thing has happened in the past on PC.
Physical media are no guarantee against corporations stealing their goods back after sale. Offline DRM or no DRM are.
“To ensure the best possible player experience, this game will not run until the latest updates have been installed… Downloading… Error: Resource not found. Please try again later.”
I remember the Fallout 3 issue. The objection was that allowing the in-game use of drugs like morphine and amphetamines would encourage real-world use, so they changed the names to things like “Stim-X” or whatever which somehow made it OK.
What was particularly galling was that there was a WW2 game released around the same time in which the player character could use those same drugs. In Fallout 3, there were/are negative aspects such as addiction and withdrawal to deal with, while in the WW2 game they were just straight up health restorers and stat buffs. But the WW2 game got a pass because it was “historically accurate”.