@StevenG they don’t control the way a piece of media entertainment is distributed by another publisher. It’s up to the other publisher if they want physical or digital.
The issue is, if the publisher doesn’t see value in buying 32 gig cartridges for the game, they have a cost to the publisher that some publishers might not want to swallow, so they opt for a digital only.
This isn’t Nintendo’s fault.
On the matter of approval, it doesn’t differ between physical and digital but the actual content of the piece of media in question, Nintendo obviously approved of the content, if it is to be released digitally.
But Bethesda, obviously doesn’t see benefit in investing in physical cartridges for a physical release.
You seem to be seriously misinformation on this matter.
@Jokerwolf : This isn’t merely an issue of licensing though. Unlike the PC version of games, developers do not need to do any additional work to ensure that the software can run on other hardware (unless they consciously make the effort long after release due to incompatibility with new drivers/GUIs etc. but modern games are typically future-proofed in this respect), whereas developers need to allocate additional resources to get the software working on new dedicated video game consoles (hence why they wouldn’t want to give away these versions away at no additional cost). Similarly, one could make the case that buying a movie should entitle one to any future remasters/restorations of the film in perpetuity (despite any associated costs in such an endeavour) , but this wouldn’t be economical for a lot of producers/studios.
I understand where you are coming from, and perhaps in theory, publishers could sell a universal license for games (that entitle one to a game on multiple and/or future consoles if one were to, say, link the same publisher, in this case, Bethesda account to their NNID, Xbox account, PSN account etc.), but I am not sure how feasible this would be in practice, or if publishers would be apprehensive about such a system due to the likelihood of it being exploited.
Games by third party publishers usually drop to levels low enough that this shouldn’t really be a concern. I paid peanuts for the PC version DOOM (2016) and I would buy it again in a heartbeat if it comes to GOG.
I interpreted comment #2 as being an opinion rather than a demand or some expression of ‘entitlement’. ‘I think “this” would be more incentive for what is on offer here, and as this isnt the case I will pass until it’s on sale’. I don’t see the issue with their sentiment. I didnt interpret ‘should’ as meaning ‘must’, I read it as ‘would be better if’. At the very least I can understand why some people would be put off by the release, and I dont see a problem there either.