Nintendo’s most recent Nintendo Direct came with a surprising announcement that most people didn’t expect. It wasn’t a new game, or a look at a game we’ve all been waiting to hear more from – it was their new approach to digital games. Nintendo showcased what they call ‘virtual game cards’, a new way to approach digital games, especially when it comes to sharing them with others.
If you missed it, the new system allows players to load and eject their digital games on their systems as if they were physical cartridges, with the option to load them onto consoles belonging to others for two weeks if shared via local connection. On the surface, this is just a nice announcement that makes sharing digital games easier. The simplification of the process prevents folks from sharing their entire virtual libraries with everyone around the world, whilst still allowing genuine family and friend groups to share games between each other without overly harsh restrictions.
However, I think it goes deeper than this. As we rapidly approach a future of gaming where digital purchases dominate over physical ownership, I believe the concept of a ‘virtual game card’ is actually a step in the right direction, and a move that’s surprisingly pro-customer from one of gaming’s biggest names.
To understand what makes Nintendo’s approach good, let’s briefly consider what makes others bad. Digital gaming is a great choice for accessibility, and it’s incredibly convenient to have your gaming library ready to download and start up in an instant. There’s no physical storage space restrictions to hold you back, and nothing preventing you from buying a game at any time. The issue comes when we consider what you actually own, though.
Digital games are not actually owned by a gamer once they make the purchase. They own a licence to play the game, but it can be revoked at any moment. Licensing issues can cause a game to be delisted from a store, or problems with your internet connection can leave you unable to pass the online check that you have the licence to play the game. We paid for it, and mostly we can use them, but they still aren’t entirely ours like physical games are.
Whilst Nintendo’s new virtual game card doesn’t exactly reinvent the wheel, there is one key aspect I think is hugely important in leading to change – the framing. Something about phrasing the new system as a virtual, digitized version of the standard Switch game cartridge feels very different. Usually, digital games exist as just nebulous entities; the PS5 and Xbox don’t offer “digital disks”. The removal of the reference to a physical tangible object and just becoming “digital game” helps to lower our expectation of what we’re receiving, and divides physical and digital media in a way that makes it easier to brush off when our digital media is taken away or changed.
Framing the virtual game card as a ‘card’ is to make specific reference to it as a digital version of the physical copy. This really makes it feel like you own a game, and as such it would be a lot harder to defend removing or changing access to them in future, and a lot easier for the general public to argue against it. Revoking access to a virtual game card would effectively make it not a game card anymore – physical games can’t just disappear. So the specific terminology makes me honestly quite optimistic towards the digital future, at least on Nintendo’s side of things. They’re a gigantic company, and with all their research and marketing they never use a word accidentally. It’s intentional they’re resculpting the phrase ‘digital game’ to become a ‘virtual game card’, they know what the connotations of that are, and it feels pretty good to feel like a company is at least trying to frame it as if a digital game is ours.
Now, it’s not completely perfect. Nintendo seemingly hasn’t taken any meaningful leaps to protect digital gamers, and they aren’t showcasing anything more than a new way to share your games. I think the change in framing is an important one, as it gives customers more leeway to argue that our digital games should belong to us as our physical cards do – more than ever if they’re going to claim they’re virtual game cards.
The actual implementation of the virtual card system is good, but a tiny bit limited. Whilst flicking virtual game cards between Switch consoles seems easy and intuitive, a restricted 14-day window to borrow a game is a little lacking, especially if it’s a massive title like The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. Whilst you could just meet up with the person and lend the virtual game card out again, it would be nice to be able to make the window at least a month, if not entirely up to the individual.
Whilst Nintendo’s virtual game card system isn’t changing the way digital gaming works in practice, the change in framing to reference physical cartridges goes a long way to make games feel like we own them – and gives us a better opportunity to defend our ownership should it ever be challenged. It’s only a small change, but the phrasing mixed with the ease of use in their new approach to digital gaming is a welcome one, and a step in the right direction if the future will be all-digital.
Do you like Nintendo’s new virtual game card approach? Do you agree with our opinion that its framing and implementation could be a good thing when it comes to digital game ownership? Let us know your thoughts in the comments down below, and keep your eyes on GameLuster for more breaking gaming news in the lead up to the Nintendo Switch 2!
