Both of these things help to differentiate the HD consoles which I think is positive.  However I do agree with you in cases where the companies lied to consumers about the existence of other versions of games that they clearly had already planned.

But it isn't jerking consumers around if well before a game's launch you say "this version will receive DLC, and this one will not."

World War II shooters.

I disagree.  The average consumer isn't checking that out on the net.  While companies should differentiate I always believe it should be controlled to prevent using tactics that unfairly penalize the end consumer.

In short, you shouldn't buy a game like Fallout 3 on PS3 then discover PS3 version has level cap at 20 and 360 has level cap of 30 (as will be the case after Broken Steel).  Similarly 360 Mirror's Edge owners shouldn't be in the position that the PS3 has extra levels.

Timed exclusives are in a sense a denial of service approach - preventing end consumer buying games when they want to.

IMHO exclusives need to be clear cut and full game.  Anything else is only helping the console provider and negatively impacts end consumers.

QTEs are probably the worst because they are a trend that won't go away. Visual styles like cell shading and genres like FPS will see their time in the lime light then fade away. QTEs, however, allow developers to take control out of the player's hands without them noticing (okay, obviously a lot of us notice). They want to tell some grand, probably idiotic, story and not give us enough influence to stray from the path. We have movies and books for that. Of course, I hated FMVs when they were introduced for the exact same reason. I really want to tell a few hundred devs "I don't want to read/watch your hackneyed story that couldn't get published/filmed." I play games to play them, not to watch them play themselves.

Secondly, I want the current games to not be so long. LoZ:TP is so loaded with time wasting filler crap I can't play it. Give me the original any day, even if I can beat it in an hour or so. It's a hell of a lot more fun than being forced to collect shit I don't care about and can't do anything else with... every fucking time I want in a palace. It's not as bad when it doesn't influence the flow of gameplay, of course, but more and more often I see games where I have to collect mountains of shit to get anywhere. I just want to play the game, and I'd have a lot more fun if the devs took the 20 hours of crap out of their 25 hour game and let me enjoy the leftovers.

That aside, most other complaints mentioned in this topic don't affect me the same way:

I think some DLC is ridiculous, but a lot of the time there simply wasn't time enough to build it and make deadlines. If they paid above their expectations to expand the game, it's not unfair to pay them for it.

Games getting shorter is ridiculous. I've seen nothing but the opposite. When I started playing if an action-based game lasted you more than an hour - just one hour - either it was hard as hell or you sucked. Plus, as I've gotten older I've learned that the time could be better spent elsewhere.

Popular genres and milking them. They come and go, as do their clones. Notice how some people complain that there aren't enough of genre X? Tastes change. companies that want to make money and companies made by avid gamers are both likely to focus on whatever they think is cool right now. Any company that doesn't just loses money or is Nintendo and constantly accused of abandoning their loyal followers.

Lack of split-screen. Sorry guys, I'd much rather play with actual people too. In fact, outside of Diablo 2 I've never played a game online extensively (and I only did that for inventory swapping). But this is legitimately what people are asking for. I mean, how many times have people complained about Nintendo's online?

And the annoyance of voice chat I saw mentioned goes with that last one, too.


Really, though, the only trends that bother me are the ones gamers didn't ask for. People want to play the hot new genre, they want online, they want tacked on multiplayer and other artificial game extenders. If gamers didn't want these things, they wouldn't happen. Only QTEs and some aspects of DLC represent genuine departures from the demands of gamers, as far as I can tell, and neither of them are going to go away regardless.

Death of 2D gaming...street fighter, sonic and a lot of other titles are much more fun in 2D

DLC... pay $1-5 for sunglasses, jeans or sofas .. doesnt get stupider than that

WoW monthly subscription rates.. enuff said

Avatars.. I cant seem to fall in love with them..

Proprietary media memory( hard disk, flash).. yes M$ im talking to you

I actually thought they had made a new and interesting take on the Pokemon Universe with the Mystery Dungeon games when they first came out (they are completely different from the main games by the way, you actually play the pokemon instead of a trainer) but they seem to be milking this sub franchise just as much if not more

of course I am still a slave and buy each new Pokemon as it comes out and play it to death :)

Casual gaming. I just hate it.

Online only multiplayer and DLC that could have been in the game to begin with. (F you Street Fighter 4 and your costume packs)

F2P games with purchasable in-game items.

 *cough* Final *Cough* Fantasy *cough cough*