Another point on which a big part of the gaming community agrees is that games are getting released incomplete or in a bad state more and more often. The fact that updates have been made a lot easier thanks to the internet infrastructure improvements we had in the last years, made videogame development sloppy and cut its corners.
At the same time, the infrastructure allows for pieces of content to be cut-off and sold lately as DLC, and while we have some pieces of very good example (like the “plasma and vodka” dlc for that famous polish game) some other are definitely… terrible (we’re looking at you, publishers who sell the true ending separately)
Suggestion 1: it gets released when it’s ready.
Simply stop releasing games in need of an enormous day-one update. Simple as that. Sure, probably removing the physical media from the equation will improve the situation, but nobody believes it will automatically fix the issue. It takes time to print and distribute, and that is time stolen to the development, but it’s not realistic to say that it’s the only reason why some games get such big d1 updates…
And let’s be clear about the incentive: broken launches aren’t just bad for us. Refunds, review bombing and “apology patches” cost real money, and a franchise’s reputation, once spent, is expensive to buy back. A delayed game costs you a quarter; a broken launch can cost you the sequel.
this takes us to…
Suggestion 2: not enough testing
Let’s be real here, many gamers feel like they’re being used as beta-testers for the first couple weeks after a game is on the market, and that is clearly a sign of not enough testing. Most games could benefit from more testing programs, both private and open.
Investing a little more on the QA phase will counter the movements that try to boycott D1 sales and increase revenue.
This could also be done with more early accesses - games like Galdur’s Bastion 3 demonstrate how a long early access period can be very good for the final result.
Suggestion 3: DLCs are okay, but…
…but not if you use them to monetize on cut content. It’s crystal-clear that some games are released with missing pieces, that are then sold as DLCs - and games that get downloadable content released in the first two weeks are proof of this.
And let’s not enter the “true ending missing” territory - or the “additional characters that break the game” one.
It’s getting really unnerving for some gamers - please, review your “DLC policy”.
Suggestion 4: periodic releases
We don’t need a new TextMessage from Responsibility every single year - and this is true for every franchise that releases on a fixed schedule.
We know annual releases are a proven revenue machine, so we won’t pretend that asking you to stop is realistic. What we will point out is that the machine wears out: every rushed installment spends a little of the franchise’s reputation, and fatigue eventually shows up in the sales numbers - it always does. Meanwhile, the series that took an extra year and came back stronger, critically AND commercially, keep proving the alternative works.
Take more time, at least every few installments. The games deserve it. The players deserve it. The sales, historically, reward it.
Suggestion 5: the “Express Ticket” pre-order trap
Another recent trend is to lock the launch date of a game behind a paywall. Publishers charge an extra fee (often $20 or $30) for a “Deluxe” or “Premium” edition that allows players to play the game three to seven days early.
Let’s be clear: this is not “early access” – this is artificially delaying the standard release of the game to squeeze more money from the most eager fans. Even worse, it turns these paying fans into day-negative-five bug testers who pay a premium to experience the launch-week issues before the first day-one patch is even released.
Stop artificially delaying standard editions. If you want to charge a premium for deluxe versions, include actual content (soundtracks, artbooks, expansions) rather than capitalizing on artificial time gates that divide the community.