One of the main problems I see is that they always have this ridiculous need to make the world map bigger and bigger. Then the developers are left with the daunting task of filling it with amazing quests and places. But what we end up getting is a lot of repetitive, uninspired fetch quests with bad writing. And it's to be expected to be honest. I would make the world map the size of Skyrim and let the team focus on fewer missions and less world-building. Quality over quantity always.

@mezzanine58:I think OP still has a point. No matter where we look, everyone is trying not to offend any minority's sensibilities or do anything that might get in the way of this newfound women's empowerment. And Disney, being the family company that it is, is doing this to the point where its shows are extremely bland, generic, formulaic, and completely lack personality. By definition, having a personality makes it impossible to make everyone happy—you can't please them all, and we actually hate people like that, laugh at every joke, agrees with everyone, tries to please everyone. Be yourself, stand up for something!

Games are getting way too big and ambitious, it's almost impossible to get such projects right. The expectations are unrealistically high. In my opinion we should go back to smaller maps and let developers focus on a high quality main story with a fewer side quests. Starfield's map is something like 1000 times bigger than Skyrim which is absurd and unnecessary. On the other side of the sectrum we have games like god of war 2013 or mass effect 2 that are about 45 hours long but worth every second.

@gaeandilth: That's easy, quality over quantity always.

@RogerioFM: DL2 has a vastly bigger map than RE4, it's a lot harder to deliver it bugs free from day one.

@stickemup: You are being too rigid, don't go into poetry or it will drive you insane.

@faithxvoid: Unless you have a great setup with a projector and 7.1 surround sound the experience will be quite lacking. I watched Dunkirk on IMAX, then a while ago I watched it at home on a 55 inch TV and I thought boy this movie is half as good like this. And you can't compete with a 3D theater either, many movies loose a lot without the 3D aspect. I never experienced Avatar like I did on IMAX 3D, no chance you can emulate that unless you have an awesome setup. I seriously pity those who watch this big budget 3d experiences on their TV's, the first time is the best.

@Bazz3442: I remember when I played DS3 back then, after all the bash the game had I was expecting a piece of shit literally. It turned out to be one of the most memorable gaming experiences I've had. People complain that it got more sci-fi oriented than the other two, yes that's true. But this franchise was never scary to begin with, scary is Amnesia, Layers of Fear, maybe Outlast. You can't get scared when you have an unlimited supply of guns and ammo, fear is something you feel when you are helpless, utterly defenseless in a nightmarish atmosphere. So to me it was an improvement, you can't terrify me but you can still make me jump off my seat and deliver a great story and atmosphere. And the totally did. So I think it was angry fans who ruined Dead Space not EA.

@dzimm: I meant the amount of switch owners interested in that particular franchise. People who buy a switch do so mostly for the Nintendo games such as pokemon and mario, it's usually a different breed of gamer IMO. On the other hand the power of that console is laughable making the games much harder to optimize.

@dzimm: I would image the market share being quite small in SWITCH not justifying the hassle.