gaming If you could get rid of one thing in the gaming industry, what would it be?

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 41,649]

The gaming industry has a lot going on. All sorts of developers and publishers are trying different tactics to get our money. Some of these, can actually be good! A lot of them, are you simply cash grab tactics that would be better off abandoned or reworked.

 

With so many aspects of the gaming industry out there, if there was one thing that you would want to get rid of in the industry, what would it be? This could anything, a business tactic, a game franchise, anything like that.

 

For me, the answer is very simple.....

 

SEASON PASSES

Season passes, to me, are one of the worst things EVER in the gaming industry. These things exist purely because of greed. Think about it. They guarantee that a game will have DLC upfront, they are sold with the game before the game even launches and it could potentially consist of content that is left out of the game. It feels insanely greedy and it also shows to me that the game might not be supported after the season pass period has ended.

 

Look, I am fine with DLC, I understand that games are more expensive to make nowadays than before, and I understand that devs want to make up the loss. But why must they do it with season passes? Why not just scrap these passes and keep the DLC a secret and release it when it is ready instead of shoving it in our face? I mean, that is how it USED to be. Season passes are just annoying. If they are going to make DLC, they should go about it a different way. Also, season passes tend to highly diminish the quality of any DLC.

 

The runner up for me is annual releases. Screw those.

[Ruddboy Olaf 10,628]

DLC, you have to pay for. Remember when you bought a game and got the full game? Yeah, those were good times.

[Zachary 5,521]

The one thing I would get rid of DLC!

 

Yup, That's it.

 

Paying for Stuff from DLC? No Thank you.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Zachary

[strongwilled_pegasus 5,156]

the esrb, I know, I'm nitpicking but I'd absolutely get rid of the rating system as I don't need the government micromanaging my habits

[Luminance 2,186]

I would get rid of excessive DRM.

[Megas 27,738]

DRM, I don't know how any game can benefit from that shit

[Sparklefan1234 171,812]

I wish the gaming industry would get rid of DLC because,

 

it's ridiculous to have to wait for months after buying a game to get the full experience.

[LeafFerret 3,382]

I say DLC, back in the day, what you had in the game was what you got and the only way to get the bugs fixed was to buy an updated version or wait a few years for the sequel to be released. I think the companies have gotten lazy by not putting much effort into their games and relying on DLC and Patches to fix the games instead.

[Twilight Dirac 721]

Always online DRM.  I am looking at you Uplay!

Edited January 4, 2017 by Twilight Dirac

[Scrubbed user 3,416]

Pre-orders.

 

What incentive do developers have to actually make the game good if they can get people's money just from a reveal trailer at E3?

[Corgis 574]

DLC is disgusting, especially if the game is over $50.  I don't mind it if the game costs less then $20 but paying $60 then another $40 is bonkers.  The worst is when the developers release a game with minimal content and then sell bits that should have been included in the first place.  Look at BF1, it's a WWI game and the French and Russians are DLC!  They should have been in the game to begin with but EA just wants to grab as much money as they can, even though it's $80 CDN to begin with then it's probably going to be $60 to get the DLC.  

 

I could rant so much on this madness, I don't even play games made after 2010 mostly just because I hate all the DLC that is being put out their.  I mostly play Indie games now since a fair amount of them are DLC free.

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

the esrb, I know, I'm nitpicking but I'd absolutely get rid of the rating system as I don't need the government micromanaging my habits

The esrb is not government. It is a industry self-regulation. The history behind it is intersting. The government threatened regulation if the industry did not regulate itself.

[They call me Loyalty 1,948]

Producer's rights over artistic license.

It'll be a system based on trust. Also we'll replace all humans with animals, they're not to be trusted. Well, neither do capuchin monkeys.

Please, all humans, and capuchin monkeys, stand on the side of line which says "Hell"

Thank you very much.

[strongwilled_pegasus 5,156]

wrong word sorry,  of course I know the history, I really must be getting tired as my thoughts are getting jumbled, I substituted one word for

another and now I don't even remember the original word...

 

my whole point is that   I don't want someone else thinking about what is and is not appropriate content wise.

 

 

maybe "bureaucracy" is the word I was looking for? IDK

[Envy 6,172]

I don't want to say DLC, because developers keeping content coming keeps a game a fresh. On the other hand, when it's obvious that the developers are holding back features that belong in the game on day one to charge you for them later, then it is very annoying. My largest experience with this is The Sims. In this day and age, weather/seasons and pets should to some extent be present in the base-game. But nope. And the Sim fanbase even defends this nonsense. I've had it.

 

I say this, but then I experienced F2P. I experienced Kingdom Hearts Unchained. EA's money-grabbing with The Sims pales in comparison to this, and that's saying a lot. I always understood F2P as being one of two things or a combination of both: They get you with very small microtransactions and/or they give you some part of the game for free and give you a price to pay to gain access to the rest of it.

 

....Unchained does not fit into either of those categories, and outrageously so. In Unchained, the amount of money one would expect to pay to gain access to the full-game only gets you access to some features for a week. One week. How much is that? Fifteen dollars! Back in my day, mobile (GB/GBC/GBA) games cost twice that to get them in full, no strings attached. Fifteen dollars should gain you access to those features permanently, not for one week!

 

And then there's the medal pulls. Don't even get me started. With the $15 you would get enough for one pull. Which is outrageous in of itself. This is not a microtransaction. If a pull cost $0.99, then it would be all fine and dandy with me. I would call that a microtransaction, but they expect $15... That's just speaking for the first pull you get with the VIP quests. You'd spend $30 or more (I forget exactly how much) for a second pull.

 

..These pulls would have to be pretty fantastic to expect such outrageous costs right? No, they're not. Pulls are random. Chances are you won't get what you want. And then they expect you to make five pulls to get the guaranteed premium medal. They expect a ton more for you to be able to guilt it. Even worse, this use to be ten pulls, not five. On top of that, they try to scam people even more by tossing out special medals if thousands of dollars are spent.

 

Worst part... People actually do it. No one should. People should have disowned this game until the pulls were dropped down to a dollar or less.

 

I really hope that Unchained is an outlier in the F2P realm, because that is outrageous.

 

It's strange, though, because I have become addicted to that game. Not by spending any money, but by trying to work my way through the game without spending any money. I have not been addicted to a game so long for many years. Over a decade, in fact. So, I kind of like it, actually.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Envy

[Unikitty 1,212]

Console exclusivity. Everything else, if managed well, is perfectly acceptable. DLC is fine, so long as it's used in the right way. An example being Super Smash Bros for WiiU/3DS. Nintendo released the game for a standard price and with a full fighter roster, and then over time had their team continue to work on the game, making new fighters and stages. The game already was in a completed and full state, and it was made very clear that the fighters were being developed post-release. So I find it completely acceptable that they put a price on the new fighters, as it means the developers were being paid.

That's a good example of well-done DLC. No paywalls, no cut content. Just genuine post-release development, giving people more of what they wanted and for only a small price.

 

But some elements have no value whatsoever. Console exclusivity has no purpose other than swaying a buyer into a certain system. It is purely an agreement between publishers as a way to secure money. A good example is Sunset Overdrive, for Xbox One. They were struggling to get funding, and companies such as Sony and even Nintendo turned them down. But Microsoft stepped in and gave them all the funding they needed, even letting them keep their creation rights to the game. But all they asked in return was for the game to be an Xbox One exclusive title, one to be there for launch.

 

Exclusivity has no reason to exist and only serves to fuel console wars and drive up console sales.

[nolongerabout 403]

EA. I would send EA to the pits of hell for what they have done and the standards they have directly caused to exist in the gaming industry.

 

Then again, I shilled out for the Battlefield 1 ultimate edition, so I'm probably part of the problem...

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

A lot of people are complaining about DLC, and other things. But do you still pay for it? If you don't like it, don't support it. I don't play online, I don't buy non physical media, and I don't buy DLC. Don't complain about it, and then buy it. The developers will keep making it if you keep giving them money.

 

When I heard the Xbox 3 had to be online to play, I canceled my preorder. But I bought one when they got rid of that requirement. I guess I'm kind of hypocritical.

 

I would get rid of DLC, download-only games, pre order bonuses, and limited editions and releases. They should make as many copies as needed to keep the resell value down and cut back on scalpers.

[Steve Piranha 29,428]

Bad practices of DLCs today. DLC for cosmetic content? Fine, I'm not buying them, but others might have their fun for it. DLC for extended content? FUCK YEAH. Selling DLC of content that SHOULD be in the game on the get go that'll otherwise WILL be incomplete without it? That a big NOPE

[Stone Cold Steve Jobs 22,441]

 

Have to agree with most of the others here. This infuriates me.

[Babyyoshi309 1,829]

I would get rid of EA. Seriously, F*** EA!!!!!!!! I HATE EA!!!!!!!!! SPORE IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE GAMES, BUT I CAN'T PLAY IT BECAUSE EA F***ED IT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SERIOUSLY, F*** YOU EA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  :=:  :=:  :=:  :=:  :=:

 

 

 

 

 

*Edit: Other than that, I would get rid of all DLC outside of Borderlands 2 (the Borderlands 2 DLC are amazing, and unlike most games, the BL2 DLC were made long after the actual game, so it actually adds stuff instead of completing it). Specifically Depth DLC...

Seriously, I paid $40 for your game, I am not going to spend 5 more dollars just to change the look of my shark!!!!

 

*Double Edit: If anyone is thinking about getting Borderlands 2, DEFINITELY get Game of the Year Edition, it is definitely worth the extra money.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Babyyoshi309

[Derplight Sperkle 1,013]

Microtransactions in AAA games. 

 

I can't believe that after you spend $60 on a game, that the publisher decides to throw in more ways to spend money. Supply drops in COD? Sure you can earn them slowly or spend some more money, you can get a whole bunch at once! And the rewards are random on top of it. You want this weapon that you can only get from these supply drops? Well have fun opening a crazy amount just to get it.

 

Or you can go into the latest Deus Ex. Pay more money and get more unlocks, but only on that one save! You want it on another playthrough? Spend more to buy it again!

 

I feel sorry for the developers. Most of the time this business model comes from the money grabbing publishers, not the creative teams behind our favorite games.

[Ganondorf8 11,322]

I'll have to join the bandwagon by saying DLC but not in the usual way. I like how DLC does add additional content to a game despite it should have been there from the start. You go through a game and when you finish it, you sometimes wish that there was more you could do in order to lengthen the experience. That is what DLC does but then the practice behind it is sadly flawed. It should be relatively cheap or even free in some cases or implemented better. Make it more readily available without players having to wait for it. Maybe make it worthwhile rather than something simple. If this can't be done then do away with it.

[Discordian 6,015]

Really? People are saying DLC? When was the last time you played a game without its DLC and the game actually felt incomplete? There are very few games that are made with the intention to cut out main features like the ending to the game.

 

I play almost all of my games without DLC and I've never once felt like my experience was incomplete. Hell, the few times I have it always felt superfluous and out of place and didn't belong in the game in the first place. Even if you play a completely unpatched game you will not run into anything game breaking in most games unless the game itself was inherently broken.

 

Name a game that was utterly incomplete without the DLC and I can name five that would be fine or even better off without it.

 

If there's one thing I would get rid of in the industry it's the ridiculous notion of getting rid of a very useful function that ensures we don't have to deal with broken games, that simultaneously allows developers to add on to a game after they're done with it. Some games don't really have a way to be made into a sequel and extra ideas that wouldn't take up a whole game can be added into the game later instead of being cut out entirely as they would have been in the past.

[The MegaBrony 219]

Cutscenes, including Final Fantasy VII's millenium-long attack animations, and ESPECIALLY ones where the player character is defeated easily by the same troops he or she was just tearing through.