Hideki Kamiya, the visionary behind some of gaming's most celebrated works, has quietly set aside the question of physical versus digital ownership in favor of something more enduring: whether games themselves will survive long enough to matter to future generations. Speaking with characteristic clarity, Kamiya points to a cultural wound already opening — classic games rendered unplayable by obsolete hardware, their histories quietly disappearing. His argument places gaming alongside film and literature as a heritage worth protecting, and asks who, in the absence of clear responsibility, will
Kamiya Prioritizes Game Preservation Over Physical vs. Digital Format
Whether games are made available physically or digitally matters less than whether they're made available at all.
Mark
So Kamiya's saying the format doesn't matter—but doesn't that seem like he's dodging the actual concern people have? If you buy digital, you don't own it. If the store closes, it's gone.
Mimi
He's not really dodging it. He's saying that concern is real, but it's secondary to a bigger one. Games are already disappearing, regardless of format. A physical cartridge for a 30-year-old system is just as unplayable if you don't have the hardware.
Luke
Fair point, but we should be careful here. Kamiya's personal buying habits—all digital—don't prove anything about what's better for preservation. He's one person. And his argument assumes publishers will actually do the preservation work. There's no guarantee of that.
Mimi
Right, which is why he's saying publishers need to take responsibility. That's the ask. Not that they will, but that they should.
Mark
So what does that responsibility actually look like? Re-releasing games? Emulation? Keeping servers running?
Mimi
All of it, probably. Stop Killing Games is pushing for legal requirements on server maintenance. The Video Game History Foundation is doing archival work. It's not one solution.
Luke
But here's the thing—we don't know how many games are actually unplayable right now. Kamiya says "so many," but that's not a number. And we don't know how many publishers would comply with preservation mandates if they existed. These are real gaps in what we can confirm.
Mark
So the movement is real, but the scope of the problem is still fuzzy.
Mimi
Exactly. Which is why Kamiya's point matters—it puts pressure on the industry to start measuring and addressing it, instead of just fighting about discs versus downloads.
Luke
And Mexico's lawsuit against PlayStation—that's interesting because it's not about preservation at all. It's about anti-competitive practice. Different angle entirely.
Mark
So there's no unified front yet. Just different groups pulling in different directions.
Mimi
Not yet. But they're all pointing at the same underlying problem.
Le Pouls
- Countless classic games are already inaccessible on modern hardware, erasing chapters of gaming history before anyone thought to archive them.
- The familiar physical-versus-digital debate distracts from the deeper crisis: format is irrelevant if the game itself cannot be played at all.
- Publishers have profited from re-releases and remakes, but the industry's approach to preservation remains inconsistent and largely voluntary.
- Grassroots movements like Stop Killing Games and the Video Game History Foundation are forcing the question into courtrooms and legislatures, demanding legal accountability.
- The unresolved tension — who bears responsibility when a game goes dark — leaves gaming culture vulnerable in ways film and literature have largely learned to avoid.
Hideki Kamiya, the visionary behind some of gaming's most celebrated works, has quietly set aside the question of physical versus digital ownership in favor of something more enduring: whether games themselves will survive long enough to matter to future generations. Speaking with characteristic clarity, Kamiya points to a cultural wound already opening — classic games rendered unplayable by obsolete hardware, their histories quietly disappearing. His argument places gaming alongside film and literature as a heritage worth protecting, and asks who, in the absence of clear responsibility, will do the protecting.
Hideki Kamiya, the director behind Resident Evil 2 and the creator of Bayonetta, no longer owns a single physical game. Everything is digital now, and he's made his peace with it. But when the conversation turns to the format wars consuming gaming discourse, he redirects entirely. The real crisis, he argues, isn't which medium prevails — it's whether games survive at all.
In a recent interview with Video Games Chronicle, Kamiya was direct: many older games that shaped the medium have already become unplayable on modern hardware, locked inside obsolete systems that fewer people keep around. What he wants is for publishers to take responsibility for keeping their games alive — physically or digitally, it doesn't matter — so that future players can access them the way we access classic films or literature. For Kamiya, this is a cultural imperative, not a consumer preference.
The industry has moved in this direction, if unevenly. Re-releases and remakes have brought older titles to new audiences, aligning commercial interest with preservation. But the gaps remain wide. Stop Killing Games has joined legal action against PlayStation over server shutdowns for live-service titles, while the Video Game History Foundation works to archive games for research and public education. Mexico has even introduced antitrust proceedings against PlayStation over its digital-only trajectory.
The format debate will persist among players who fear losing access when storefronts close. But Kamiya's reframing cuts deeper: when a game becomes unplayable, who is responsible? That question remains unanswered, and the silence around it is where gaming history quietly disappears.
Hideki Kamiya, the director behind Resident Evil 2 and creator of Bayonetta, doesn't own a single physical game anymore. Everything he buys is digital now, and he's made peace with it. But when asked about the ongoing battle between physical and digital formats in gaming, he sidesteps the whole argument. The real question, he says, isn't which medium wins. It's whether games survive at all.
In a September interview with Video Games Chronicle, Kamiya laid out his thinking with characteristic directness. The format debate feels beside the point to him because the actual crisis is preservation. Plenty of older games—classics that shaped how people play and think about games—have already become unplayable on modern hardware. They're locked away in obsolete systems, inaccessible to anyone who didn't keep the original console gathering dust in a closet. That's the loss that keeps him up.
What matters to Kamiya is that publishers take responsibility for keeping their games alive, whatever form that takes. "Whether that's physically or digitally is less important to me, just so long as these games will be available to people in the future," he said. He frames it not just as a consumer convenience but as a cultural imperative—gaming has a history that deserves to be studied, experienced, and passed forward, the way we do with film or literature. If a game vanishes because no one bothered to maintain it, that's a hole in the historical record.
Kamiya's position reflects something already happening across the industry. Publishers have spent the last decade re-releasing older games on modern platforms, sometimes remaking them from the ground up. It's profitable, sure, but it also serves a function: it lets new players discover games they missed, and it lets longtime fans revisit them without hunting down ancient hardware and cables. The business case and the preservation case align, at least sometimes.
But the industry hasn't moved uniformly. Grassroots movements have emerged to fill the gap. Stop Killing Games, which recently joined a Dutch consumer group in suing PlayStation over server maintenance for live-service titles, is pushing for legal requirements that publishers keep games playable after official support ends. The Video Game History Foundation takes a different approach, collecting and archiving games to preserve them for research and public education. Even lawmakers have gotten involved—Mexico introduced an antitrust lawsuit against PlayStation, arguing that its shift toward an all-digital future constitutes anti-competitive practice.
The physical-versus-digital debate will likely continue, especially among players who value ownership and fear losing access if a digital storefront closes. But Kamiya's reframing cuts through the format war to ask a harder question: who bears the responsibility when a game becomes unplayable? Right now, the answer is unclear, and that uncertainty is the real problem.
Citations marquantes
Whether that's physically or digitally is less important to me, just so long as these games will be available to people in the future.— Hideki Kamiya, in interview with Video Games Chronicle
Envie de l'histoire complète ?
Lire l'original sur IGN Southeast Asia ↗
Culture & Arts