I really don't think this achieves anything. They got their money so why would the care if you actually download the dlc? You're just denying yourself what you paid for.

I don't have the money to buy new games let alone roll the dice on a pre-order, but I'm not against others doing so. There has been a clear shift from the pre-dlc days of developers trying to pack as much as they can in to each game before release, but I don't think we necessarily have a right to demand they do that. If they choose to split content up and sell or give away the parts separately then that's their decision. If you think it's worth it then buy it, if you don't then don't.

Of course the main problem with pre-orders is that you don't know if it's worth it, but that doesn't mean you're making a blind purchase. If you keep getting burned pre-ordering games from the same companies then frankly you're an idiot (or smart enough to have earned the money not to care. :P). You don't lose the opportunity to vote with your wallet, because publishers know it will effect future sales if they deliver a subpar product. That's why Ubisoft's response to the Assassin's Creed Unity debacle was "Sorry, have some free dlc" and not "LOL!! GET PWND NUBZ!!!!!!"

I have this problem but to a much smaller degree so I'm not sure how helpful this will be. When I find my obsessiveness getting in the way of enjoying a game I set myself the target of doing a speed run. Not in the sense of a rehearsed shortest route but rather just looking to shave off seconds wherever I can. It's possible to be just as obsessive about this as a completionist run, so it's about redirecting instead of resisting obsessive impulses, but the result is that I'm suddenly moving through the story/locations/gameplay variations at a brisk and satisfying pace. I also like that it forces me to be more engaged in the gameplay because in a normal run through it doesn't matter how long I take to solve a puzzle or how many times I retry a section, but in a speed run every death wastes precious seconds/minutes.

Obviously I only count gameplay sections and not cutscenes (or whatever method the game uses to reveal the plot) in order to avoid feeling I have to miss out on the story.

Edit: Just to be clear, when I said "I have this problem" I meant that sometimes completionism spoils the fun of games for me and not that I have any particular knowledge of OCD. I don't want to be mistaken as giving advice on how to manage a serious medical condition.

@JamesJoule: If you're fine with old games then Warcraft 3 is pretty big on the RPG elements. In both the campaign and skirmish mode you have hero units that can level up, learn new abilities and collect loot from around the map to make themselves more powerful. I don't know what the online community is like though and if that's where your interest lies it might be too late.

Edit: Dawn of war 2 does carry over some RPG elements to skirmish mode. All units (except maybe vehicles, can't remember) gain experience and level up for better stats but no other changes. Hero units can purchase equipment to change stats and abilities. I recently started playing this game and there are still a few people online though it can sometimes be hard to find a match.

The SF4 cpu does cheat in the sense that it does things no human could hope to emulate e.g. It's supers/ultras consistently launch the exact moment you push a button.

I think it probably sends a stronger message if you make a point of buying their games when they do things right as well as boycotting their bad practices, but I'm not sure since that basically means they can have two cakes and eat them. What's so bad about origin? My only experience with it has been through the free copy of Dragon Age: Origins and aside from the inconvenience of dividing my game library it seems absolutely fine.

I see no problem with people buying yearly releases at whatever price is good for them. None of the yearly franchises that actually exist are ones that interest me but talking more generally I can totally see why people would buy them and I bet most of us have an equivalent in some other part of our lives if not in gaming. (E.g. The casual musician that sticks with the same instrument year after year) When we find something we like we sometimes just want more of it with just enough changes to keep it feeling fresh.

Ori and the Blind Forest - I still need to see more to be sure but I have pretty high expectations of this game.

Bloodborne - I don't have any plans to get a PS4 but I can't help but look forward to this anyway. XD

Honestly the only times I can believe LPs have a negative impact on sales are if the game is terrible or it's a completely story focused game like The Walking Dead. If the game is anything approaching reasonable quality then they're just free advertising and cracking down on them is like saying that if people saw what the game was like then they wouldn't want to play it.

Obviously that doesn't mean they don't have a legal right to stop them, but I think (could be completely wrong) to prosecute someone you have to show that their actions have actually harmed you and I can't see any company wanting to stand up in court and declare that no one wants to buy their game now that they know what it's actually like.

Gameplay wise I'd like to see:

1. Actual platforming instead of the incredibly boring hold-down-the-climb-button-to-progress style gameplay that is so popular.
2. Less focus on action and more on puzzles, platforming and exploration.
3. Less gunning down hordes of enemies replaced with more personal small encounters, ideally with narrative significance.

Story wise I'd like an unobtrusive framing narrative that explains why Lara and others are where they are with most of the focus being on what you uncover exploring the ruins. Ideally it would be up to the player to uncover what actually happened there without having everything clearly explained simply as a by product of proceeding through the game.