What's Wrong with Gaming today?

In my opinion, the attitudes of players have changed a lot. Some people it just isn't fun to play with, and some video gaming fanbases (I'd say League of legends as a good example) actually put me off trying the game. I know it seems a bit silly to not play a game due to the fanbase, but when they make up the people that you would be really playing with it is really off putting. Knowing that you would have to pay a ton of extra money to buy DLC and other stuff, just to be as good or as cool as other plays is sad, too. I did prefer it when video games were solely about skill and knowledge, not just who has the better DLC or weapons.

 

ooooooooohhh yeahhhh....

Micro transactions
Day one non cosmetic DLC
pre ordering
Early-access
Difficulty/ hand holding
Copy games (Sports games and CoD.)
Nintendos marketing and YouTube Policies.
Amiibos
Mobile Games
Pay to win
Missing content
Australias censorship
Kinect
DRM
Unfinished games on release
Capcom
Sonic games
Communities


There are some i can come up with. Ask if you want to know more.

 

I think the main issue with gaming involve two things. The first is probably mobile gaming and micro-transactions. While I like being able to play on the go, things like Clash of Clans and Candy Crush tick me off because they make you play and then practically force you to pay if you want to get better at the games. Pay to Win is not fun, so if video game companies could stop forcing players to fork out tons of money to play a $5 game, that would be great.

The other issue is people who bring out games that are meant to offend people. Game Theory recently did a video about games like GTA and Hatred, where the lead up to the game, the developers stirring up so much controversy, actually caused it to get more sales than it would have (or should have). It is honestly appalling that developers have to do this sort of thing to get their games recognized.

I honestly wish gaming could go back to being a place where everyone has fun without needing to pay more money than they need to and play games they actually want to and not because there is some massive backlash over the violence in the games...

Now, I leave you with this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQbcnIqjdOQ

 

Milkinggggg a IP. Yeah, same old argument. But I have a lot of beef with it. Call Of Duty, AC, Street Fighter, and then re-releasing older games with 'updated' graphics. Any last-gen to current gen port. Wowsers. The list is ongoing. I'm not saying every Dev is guilty of this, but I wish that some of the AAA devs would calm down a bit. I love AC and all, but I'd kinda wish they took a break for like a year, and work on something amazing. Unity would've been so much better if Ubisoft's AC dev teams only focused on that one title rather than have several going on at once. (Black Flag was in the making when they first started working on Unity).

Then there's always-online games. Cool idea. Not so cool when the servers for said games close up shop less than three years after launch. Case in point; Destiny Of Spirits, for PS Vita. Freeium game (which I'll rant about in jusssst a moment) game. Launched last March. Recently reached a commendable milestone of one million users. Announces a week later that they're shutting down the servers at the end of June 2015. WTF. I wouldn't be so livid if for the fact that it's the kind of game that involves a massive amount of grinding just to get one last trophy. I have 220 hours clocked, and I'm only halfway there. IMO, with always-online games with no offline whatsoever, the servers for said games should be maintained for at least five years. *silently fumes*

And then there's freeium games, the malignant cancer of the video games industry. I tell it causes me so much damn ire to see freeium games and also free games too crop up on consoles, usually for a price too! I can think of Fruit Ninja for example...and of course 'Angry Birds Trilogy'. It really drives me puts seeing these things debut on consoles. The android market is over saturated with dozens of clones of the same, tried and tested games. And what upsets me then is you get people actually shelling out cash to support the bejeweled clone that Candy Crush essentially is. Unfortunately, thanks to the rise in dominance of the android and iPhone markets, it looks like these 'quick buck' games are here to stay. *sigh*

 

I have a big problem with the FPS games and Grand Theft Auto games. It sort of encourages negatively deviant behavior, and I just don't agree with basing games off of concepts of shooting others for points and crime.

Other than that, I'd say Nintendo's rate of releasing worthwhile games is absolutely terrible--I don't think I need further explanation of that.

 

Single player campaigns are gradually dying out, sadly. My biggest pet peeve though? Paying $50-$70 (or more for a game) but still having to pay for DLC? Are you kidding me? I bought into your product with my hard earned dough, all DLC should be FREE. If it's a free mobile game, I can understand. But to ask the consumer to pay extra for DLC after they've spent a lot of money on the actual game itself is such a slap in the face.

 

I think that First person shooters are becoming far too common these days. There are some fun things in those games, but I feel like those games are taking gamers away from other, better games.

 

Besides the prices, the graphics that everyone seems to judge on, I'd say games are getting more shorter than they should be.
If I bought a game for 70 dollars, I expect it to be amazing, and longer than 30 hours, without doing every side quest in the world.

 

I'm on board with the people saying they hate the microtransactions and DLC overkill. When I buy a game, I want to have it. All of it. And not worry about shelling out more money just to gain access to the rest of what I already have.

Even back in the day I hated arcade machines. What, you're going to make me put in another 25 cents just because the stick slipped and I died? That's not providing fun, that's charging a variable minute-ly rate for distracting me from more fun things.

Opposed to some people though, I don't entirely hate milking franchises, so long as there's a worthwhile distinction between entries OR it's so good that it's worth an additional pricetag for more experience with it. For example: Zelda and Megaman respectively. Zelda has like, what, 20 games now? But they're (mostly) different and new each time, in terms of how I run out and go adventuring. The first 6 or so Megamans were all the exact same game but with different stages, bosses, and powers; but the game is good enough that I'm willing to pay again to extend this game that I'm already comfortable with.

So if I was a business and creative lead at a game company, this is what I would push for: Shipping complete, user-ready games that are already fully featured, but keep DLC as an option for people who loved my game so much that they want more adventuring, not just more costumes. When it comes time for a sequel, it will either be comfortably similar to the the user while being new in a story-telling sense, or it will be new enough to feel like a completely new undertaking for the user, just with familiar characters. Not just the same story, same-ish weapons/tools, same environment, but oh boy updated paintjob!