I was so excited for this generation to start back in 2006. The next gen consoles sounded so tantalizing.  I looked over the specs of each and envisioned the million possibilites of cool and unique games they could make with them.

Was I in for a rude awakening once this generation went into full swing. 

DLC

The bane of my existance. DLC at the begining sounded like a fantastic idea. Long had I dreamed of the day when games would be expanded upon without having to wait several years for the eventual sequel. What ended up happening was we are not getting more game......we are getting LESS! How is it that I can pick almost any game from last generation/one before it, and with ease find a game that will last me more than 50hrs without doing everything. God forbid it was a JRPG, a garanteed  80hrs+. What we got this gen? A 10hr game(if you are lucky) and meaningless DLC like outfits and customizations....you know, that stuff that would have been cool unlockables last gen. Map Packs? You mean the same maps that are in the story already I have to buy slightly modded versions of it? Worst offenders have to be Capcom. How dare they purposely release a game with only half the characters, over price them, then rerelease a budgeted(but not really) version of the game a few months later with all the extras. Or Resident Evil 5. How pissed was the gaming community when they found out that the $6 DLC for online play was actually a 5mb download "key" just to unlock it on the disc. Publishers have completely missed the mark on why we originally wanted DLC in our games. We wanted to be able to get more out of existing worlds, not have you gimp the original product to sell us the parts that should have been there in the first place. At least GTAIV got it right, with the game being packed to the brim with all the usual goodies, but then released epic DLC's that could ad another good 20hrs.

Which brings me to my next topic.....

Pricing

So last gen in the US games were capped at a steady $50 brand new, and some made cheaper from there. Those game could last you at a minimum I say 30hrs but usually much much more. Now? Will be lucky to get  10 out of a game.....and would have paid $60 for it. What? So basically we are getting even less for our money. Then once you add in the DLC(that stuff that would have normally been in the game anyway) and charge a dollar per costume,5 per 2 maps or something. Ludicrous !

Multiplatform

This is more bad for the developers than it is for the Consumers, yet it does have some ill ramifications for us as well. The "Cry Wolf" tactic at the begining of this gen set off a chain reaction of sorts. You see, last gen every game was predom exclusive to one system or another. You chose your system accordingly due to which exclusives each has. What was told to developers this gen was that they would not be able to make returns unless they were on as many consoles as possible to offset costs. What happened? Most games of previous gens sold less this generation than in previous ones, one of the systems would be getting shoddy "ports", and console developers had less to defrenciat themselves from each other and make them stand out. Basically the main premise of competition was almost completely eliminated. Thank God for 1st Party Developers, otherwise we would have no end to.....

Sequel-itis

Game Developers, now being forced to release content on as many venues as possible, had less and less time to be creative. The only thing Publishers care about is making a return and only want sure bets. Sequels are the answer to that. Now Sequels are not inherently bad...but the constant release of slightly tweaked versions of last year's games or just delving into the same story over and over is not fun. I have seen more direct sequels/Remakes/ReReleases this gen than I care to count. Where is the innovation? I miss the god ol days of walking in a gaming store and looking at the box of a game I had litterally never heard of and the feeling of discovering a new Gem takes over. Now everytime I pick up a box, it looks more and more like the last box.

1st Person Stir Crazy

I always hated this view point, I much prefer my games in 3rd person. So it should come as no shock at how disgusted I was with almost every game this gen being a 1st Person Shooter(least favorite Genre). I get it, it got popular over night due to great console shooters like Halo, but this generation became beyond oversaturated with them.

Patches

Now it seems to be ok to release a known buggy game to consumers because you can always release a day one patch! This is another great idea of this gen totally warped by corporate greed. This should have been a great thing. But what we ended up with is Skyrim on PS3, a buggy mess for most. Or any of the games from this gen with gamebreaking bugs, something that rarely existed on console last gen.

Focus on Online

I liked the idea of playing games online but never totally captivated by it. The way I saw it, I need to be able to fully enjoy a game by myself even if I don't have a freind to play with. That was the only way a game got my money. Now games this gen are almost entirely focused on twitch online gaming. Anything that impeded a gamer from getting straight to the online was seen as bad. I feel the same way about Online as I do about DLC. It shouldn't be the meat and potatos, but the dessert that enriches the experience as a whole. Maybe that is just me though.

Studios Dropping Like Flies

SO many great studios did not survive this gen. I can't remember it being like that in the last few previous. Knowing that I can never get a sequel to some of my favorite games now really bothers me.

Good article. I agree with you almost 100%.

I'll never understand the reason for all the hate that FPS get.

The reason why FPS or first person in general games have become so prevalent this gen is that now that 3D gaming has been fully realized after expanding and going through some serious growing pains in the previous 2 generations, the first person perspective is the most immersive and lends itself well to 3D games the same way that side scrolling platformers and action games were staples of the 2D era.

Couple that with a mainstay gameplay element going all the way back to the Atari days... shooting things... and there's your answer why these types of games are so popular and common nowadays.

Plus, with the FP perspective, you don't have to worry about annoying camera issues that have plagued many a 3rd person action / platformer game over the past three generations and continue to do so.

I have to say that I agree with the vast majority of this wholeheartedly--too bad we're in a microscopic minority.

It DID end it for me, I barely buy any console games nowadays,

Basically I feel 100% opposit of everything here.

I love DLC, FPS, Online, Huge Franchises get great sequels, and most of the other things you apparently hate.

But hey different strokes for different folks I guess

I disagree.

You have a bunch of arguments that are all just about the method of delivering games, and while these issues can sometimes be annoying they don't change anything fundamentally.

You could have written about how gameplay has dramatically changed in this generation, how dumbed down games have become and I would have agreed with you.

My problem with FPS is just the direction in which they're heading.  Back last generation, you had your more serious real-world-combat based FPS games (for example Battlefield; Medal of Honor) while at the same time you had more light-hearted arcadey FPS games (Timesplitters) and futuristic arena combat games (Quake; Unreal Tournament).

In light of Call of Duty being a break-out success and showing how much money can be made from FPS', however, all the other sub-genres just seem to have been completely abandoned.  Everything goes for a more serious tone based on real world combat; everything tries to ape CoD's multiplayer of perks and levelling up, so on and so forth.  Sure, you get the odd, great game that bucks the trend (Halo has mostly stayed true to itself, I'm told) but the general rule is: if it's not like Call of Duty, it's not worth doing.

And that in itself is a problem.  All these games have aspirations of being better than CoD by offering the exact same experience, yet it's never going to convince the mass market to come along because they're all playing CoD - they don't want a non-named imitation.  Something like Battlefield can offer itself as a decent alternative by focusing on destructive, larger-scale combat but there's huge holes in the market (in my opinion) that need to be filled by FPS' that are a throwback to previous generations.

At least, that's my opinion & problem with current-gen FPS games. 

Nice OP, anyway.  I agree with bits and pieces of it.  

For example, studios dropping like flies as you mention has been a huge upset for me.  All these fantastic historic teams - Radical Entertainment; Bizzare Creations; Psygnosis etc. just getting ripped apart by the industry because the cost of development has scaled up so much.  It seems like there's no "middle" in the market anymore - just the AAA creations and the indie stuff.

I've already voiced my opinion about first-person shooters, and I kind of have a problem with online-focus as well.  I actually quite like online play - because to me, it's a completely new experience because we had laggy dial-up internet most of last generation so it's quite liberating to be able to play all this new stuff online as soon as it comes out.  It's just the way it's almost a necessity for any game these days to stick a multi-player mode on - sometimes they can be great (Uncharted) while keeping the quality of the single-player up; often, though, you feel like they needed another 6 months in development (Twisted Metal).

That's not to say they're all bad though.  There's a load of online experiences this generation that I have enjoyed immensely - take for example 4 played co-op on Left 4 Dead 2 with 4 friends (absolutely fantastic); or 4 player co-op through community levels in LittleBigPlanet.  In that respect, I'm incredibly grateful for online.

Other stuff: DLC - is it really that bad?  Sure, it gets abused sometimes, but I don't treat it any differently than expansion packs to games which I would gladly buy back in the 90's.  I payed for repeated expansion packs for the original Sims as well as stuff like Tiberian Sun; Populous the Beginning etc.  All of them enhanced the experience of a game I loved for a reasonable price.  If the same can be said for DLC for a game I like this generation then I have no problem paying for it.

I don't think sequel-itis is really that bad, either.  Sure, a successful game gets lots of sequels these games while a flop never gets a second chance.  But looking at it (again) compared to generations I loved (5 + 6) - take for example my beloved Spyro.  I got 3 games, one per year, on pretty much the same engine with the same basic gameplay from Insomniac.  And yet they're 3 of my favourite games of all time.  It's not necessarily a bad thing.

Also, patches.  I see where you're coming from with this - "release an unfinished game and patch it later", but it that any worse than an unfinished game releasing last generation and never being patched because it couldn't be?  Again, taking my great example of Spyro, Enter the Dragonfly released Christmas 2002.  It was rushed to get it out in time for the holidays.  It was unfinished - but not necessarily a bad game - just buggy and in desperate need of patching.  But it couldn't be.  So I ended up buying a duff product with no hope of it being fixed.

To sum up (because I could go on for ages): I haven't enjoyed this generation as much as I enjoyed gen 5, but I imagine much of that was nostalgia.  I pick my games careful and as such I've had as good a time this generation as I did last generation - there are some stormingly good games out there that seem to keep coming regardless of online focus / opportunities for DLC / sequel-itis.  I'm sorry to hear that this gen almost ended console gaming for you but keep at it, if you look carefully there's always loads of stuff to enjoy.

Good read agree with most.

This is also why I was never a fan of hdds being introduced into consoles.

Most the stuff I am happy to accept on a PC as well I can always redownload the patch or dlc and even store it on a dvd-r to reinstall later

Now imagine when a generation ends and you grow up and have some kids and want to relieve the classics with that you played with them:
1. DLC and patches = what if fire up and find the console has died? I need to then purchase a second hand console and if I want to play the games again I have to install them. But guess what? Ther servers no longer online and/or offer the DLC i had or the patches to fix the game. Therefore I am screwed.
2. Unoptimised games that require GB's to install. This was a pain as again you had to uninstall games once space ran out. Same problem if you want to relieve a classic game. Therefore I am screwed.


I think a lot of these things is partially why the retro gaming scene has exploded. To this very day I can fire up my old consoles and the games I have will work out of the box. This generation and somewhat the last, will I be able to do the same? I doubt it.