Should yearly releases of games be restricted?

[AkydefGoldberg]

I was just browsing the FIFA 14 and WWE2K14 threads and having not been a next-gen console gamer (still got a PS2!) I was slightly relieved that I don't have have a situation where I would buy FIFA one year and then have to buy it the year after that for some marginal improvements and fork out

[JDD]

Ive always thought that sports games should be every 2 years, with a $15 dlc that includes roster updates/new modes/improvements coming the year after a game is released, insted of a new $60 game every year.

[Everlong]

Ive always thought that sports games should be every 2 years, with a $15 dlc that includes roster updates/new modes/improvements coming the year after a game is released, insted of a new $60 game every year.

Yeah, I really like that idea as well. And it'd be so easy to do, too... but financially they'd be stupid to do it, because they still get people buying these same games every year. At least with the Call of Duty games, while they basically are the exact same multiplayer game with new maps they do have new campaigns (even though they're only like 7 hours long...).

Really, these executives aren't worried nearly as much about quality as they are about quantity. Which is lame.

[SlightlyJames]

Ive always thought that sports games should be every 2 years, with a $15 dlc that includes roster updates/new modes/improvements coming the year after a game is released, insted of a new $60 game every year.

Yeah, I really like that idea as well. And it'd be so easy to do, too... but financially they'd be stupid to do it, because they still get people buying these same games every year. At least with the Call of Duty games, while they basically are the exact same multiplayer game with new maps they do have new campaigns (even though they're only like 7 hours long...).

Really, these executives aren't worried nearly as much about quality as they are about quantity. Which is lame.

To do something I normally don't and defend Call of Duty, those games do technically have 2 years of dev time each.

While annual releases generally don't bring much improvement with each iteration, if people (usually including myself) want their roster updates and minimal changes enough to pay full price for them then I see no reason to restrict that in any way.

[Buck]

By what exactly would they be restricted by?

I'm totally in agreement with you, and I don't have a 360 or PS3 either.

But seriously dude, the only restriction that could happen is if the dumbasses stop buying the crappy games year after year.

No idea when/if that'll ever happen, but when we see that day, maybe they'll stop coming.

[AkydefGoldberg]

By what exactly would they be restricted by?

I'm totally in agreement with you, and I don't have a 360 or PS3 either.

But seriously dude, the only restriction that could happen is if the dumbasses stop buying the crappy games year after year.

No idea when/if that'll ever happen, but when we see that day, maybe they'll stop coming.

I think I was describing it in some sort of fairy land, the restriction that is, where there's some sort of a rule where games can't be released annually lol or more likely, co-operation begins in companies and they decide to improve the quality in their games by having a longer break in between and be nice to the paying fans.

But ain't going to happen I know.

If I had a next-gen console, I don't think I'd be buying FIFA every year. Do people here trade FIFA 13 when they buy 14? I can't imagine trade in prices are that great because retailers know it won't ship out now that the new one was out.

[Settee]

Sports games are one thing, but releasing games like COD and Assassins creed every year makes no sense. I find that the games that take the longest between sequels are the best, for example; Kingdom Hearts, Elder Scrolls and Fallout, GTA. The longer the wait, the bigger the hype. Plus the reason I don't buy yearly games new is because I don't wanna spend 65 dollars every year for the same ReReleased game.

[Str8Shooter]

Yeah having them come out every year is dumb, expect for the monetary aspect. At this point the games just can't possibly be changed or upgraded enough to justify that type of price tag. They should be like half price every year, like $30 brand new, I could stomach that easier.

I think there's a lot of people who are mainly sports gamers, and they probably only get 2-3 sports games a year and those are the only games they get. So to them it really doesn't matter anyway, because they'll still choose to get it.

[joegvo]

They won't and there is nothing that wouldn't allow them to. As long as people pay for the game every year nothing will change with when they release the next game.

[ShaneOfan]

They shouldn't ban it, doe it suck that for sports games I can't get updated rosters? Sure but honestly each season usually lasts me a few weeks tops anyway than I draft fake people or sign people from other teams anyway. And in the defense of the game companies, they don't force you to buy anything.


Also FWIW, NCAA Football is NOT planning to release a game next year.

[DBSoT]

Every sports game I buy I wait till the price drops to half price before I buy it. Not worth the roster update.

[The Legend]

They shouldn't ban it, doe it suck that for sports games I can't get updated rosters? Sure but honestly each season usually lasts me a few weeks tops anyway than I draft fake people or sign people from other teams anyway. And in the defense of the game companies, they don't force you to buy anything.


Also FWIW, NCAA Football is NOT planning to release a game next year.

NCAA might not release another game again.

[JPG619]

Ive always thought that sports games should be every 2 years, with a $15 dlc that includes roster updates/new modes/improvements coming the year after a game is released, insted of a new $60 game every year.

I would dig that. Some games just make some small improvements and updated rosters to the games and charge full price were they could just make it DLC to patch the game to the latest version. It seems more better that way. Plus games like WWE would have a bigger rosters since you will have last years roster and this years so you have a lot to play with. However for guys already in the game like Punk and Cena they just have to update there attire since they were the same as years before just different attires.