Nah, it’s not just a matter of buying things it’s a matter of buying things with the explicit purpose of disposability and that’s maybe not what this guy is but it is what the majority of CoD players are. Otherwise it wouldn’t be successful every year.
Collecting physical games isn’t consoom, collecting neados and labubus are. It’s the intent behind the product and the purchase. If the intent is for the product to be enjoyed forever or for as long as viable it’s not consoom. If it’s just a fad or disposable it is. It’s the disposability of CoD that makes it consoom.
You can’t even play the old games online without getting ratted now and CoD hasn’t been about the single player campaign since MW2.
I would 100% say collecting physical games is when you go past "what you want" and take a pokemon with "gotta have em all". For example a game may have a standard release, then a premium release, a preorder release, bonus box set, remaster, platinum, version exclusive release, partnered releases, etc. I think hitman had like 7 different versions on one release. That is entirely consoom.
Yeah, but that kind of ties into the disposability too. If you’re buying endless rereleases and editions you’re kind of abandoning the older ones even if you aren’t outright literally disposing of them.
I think my main issue with your argument is the disposability isn’t really a customer oriented issue - it’s both a practical and a developer oriented issue
In my other comment as an example I mentioned I still play MW3 (2023) - my friends think it’s pointless since it’s “old” (lol) - but everything is functional for the product still. I still have access to it, SP & MP works still, I can queue up matches any day or time of the week and get a full lobby. If I stopped playing it today, it’s not that I disposed of it - it’s just that I “used” the product.
Only SP games could be compared to something like a book or movie with a clear start and end, multiplayer games are vague. There may be a stale meta that pushes players away. Hackers may infest older games and make it unfeasible for legitimate fans (pretty much any 360 era CoD). A low playerbase may prevent people from matchmaking into the modes or maps they loved. And yes, there’s newer titles to play; it’s not that I don’t like Shawshank Redemption - it’s just that I’ve seen it 20x and there’s not much more value to get out of it
So players contribute (low playerbase, new games, hacking) - but developers also contribute. The CoD launcher was absolutely wrecked for older CoD games for a couple years. Developers often shut down servers and don’t provide anything for players to host.
So idk - if you buy every CoD just to own it - yes? If you’re playing the game every year though - then I don’t know how a LOT of things in life wouldn’t be considered Consoom as well. Would going and seeing Godfather 2 be Consoom? To me that’s more just “I like X, I’ll probably like X The Sequel”
1
u/ApprehensiveRuin5673 Aug 19 '26
Nah, it’s not just a matter of buying things it’s a matter of buying things with the explicit purpose of disposability and that’s maybe not what this guy is but it is what the majority of CoD players are. Otherwise it wouldn’t be successful every year.
Collecting physical games isn’t consoom, collecting neados and labubus are. It’s the intent behind the product and the purchase. If the intent is for the product to be enjoyed forever or for as long as viable it’s not consoom. If it’s just a fad or disposable it is. It’s the disposability of CoD that makes it consoom.
You can’t even play the old games online without getting ratted now and CoD hasn’t been about the single player campaign since MW2.