@firedrakez: I've heard about a lot of people jumping ship, but not about what you just said. Interesting. I'll need to read up more on it. I don't have much love (or hate) for microsoft, but they are one of the companies you hear the least amount of shitty practices coming from. Maybe I'm just under a rock.
@UltimateBastard: Then they will probably succeed in running the long term. They will have to release more content, though, as in full fledged expansions as opposed to quick crash grab DLC content, or they will risk having things go stale quickly and cause discontent. If you can't do that it's better to just focus your efforts on an ending. This is likely why there is a stigma surrounding game on comparatively smaller scale than MMOs. It is hard to build a game around this and there are good developers with a lot more funding and steady income that can't even do it right.
@CTBradums: It hasn't really been bad at all, to be honest. Also to be fair NIER could potentially appear anywhere given how convoluted it's reality/universe hopping scheme along the way from its prequel Drakengard is. Otherwise they generally try to tie the Final Fantasy cameo appearances into the lore of XIV. For example the FF Tactics/FF12 Raid and story arch places the events of those games in XIV's very distant history.
Monster Hunter, however, was blatantly a marketing attempt but luckily it's not really tied into the core gameplay and you kind of have to go out of your way to do it.
@Warlord_Irochi: Production costs have gone up but so has the number of consumers that pay for their work which seems to be why they wanted to keep pumping more resources into their games in the first place.
Compare Diablo 2 that sold probably four million copies in its life time. Diablo 3 at least halved that on its release date and went on to sell over 30 million copies worldwide. The cost has gone up in large part of their own decisions. To attract more people and fans. This has worked for the most part but now they're finding out they can't release good games anymore and can't sustain the quality expected of a triple A title any longer. It's why they sell dozens of millions of copies while a small time indie game like Rimworld will only sell a bit over a million while still being heralded as an innovation. They've pushed for technological heights and forgot that game design was actually really important.
Either way, none of it is good for them because they're now knee deep in investors and aren't making as much as they used to due a lot of misguided choices. Let's just hope that as their world burns and crumbles around them that rising indie developers learn from these mistakes and do not repeat them.
@UltimateBastard: Apologies, I meant to explain in full detail this morning but it was touch and go given I did not have time.
When someone refers to an "end game" they are talking about the content you'll be playing in once you hit a level cap of sorts. In example Final Fantasy XIV. When you hit max level or "finish" the current story arch you are essentially in end game where you will fight through dungeons, trials, hunts, daily roulette, raids etc for the "end game" gear while you wait for them to push more story out.
You see the story or the game itself hasn't "ended". There was no "the end". Consider it like a purgatory until the story that has not yet ended continues and you're given more content. This is not like a sequel or anything as it all pertains to the same game. These practices are often found in MMO style games and almost just as often are not very fulfilling or enjoyable.
Seripa's comments