Shower thought: FPS games are the reason why micro transactions are so insane in modern gaming. Why? FPS games are the root of MLG, but are also the most widely popular among all ranges of gamers from casual to pro. It's easy to exploit the FPS mechanic with loot cratesnew maps will always be in demandMLG pushes popularity of genre, and is backed by heavy marketing (for instance, COD and Destiny))But what if FPS games followed the same leeching payed content method as say, MMOs? Like instead of paying $60 for the title, and $20 for every DLC there after for 3 years until a new title comes out [like DICE games] ... What if it followed a more...WoW approach? Could you imagine paying $25 down for a title, and then having the game constantly updated graphically and mechanically for decades without ever needing a new title or a new server? And for only $15/mo it could be true! So why are MMO fans more willing to pay more money in the long run compared to FPS games? I imagine MMOs are more of a lifestyle choice for gamers that continually play them. Almost every 13 year old boy [first world countries only] plays COD on a semi-regular basis. They shell out something like $60/year for a new title and the probably buy DLC here and there as well. The time they spent playing is probably not approaching the "shit bucket" level of old school WoW players. Now lets look at another paid service genre. Virtual card games ie: Hearthstone. A new setlist is released every 3-4 months for $50 pre order, and if you want to remain even remotely competitive - you bet your ass you're buying those cards, especially when you can't use last year's cards anymore [in standard format]. So what I'm taking way too long to say is, imagine how great the world would be if instead of DICE/EA ruining Battlefront 2. Instead of hiding the majority of the content behind insane barriers and pay walls, they produced a game that followed a more, MMO style paid service. Let's take another EA/DICE game as an example. Battlefield 3. Personally, one of my favorite games of all time. What if instead of releasing Battlefield 4, Hardline and BF1, they had instead focused on creating one complete game? Because lett's be honest all of those titles were actually literally unplayable at launch and took over a year to place in a category of completed. Battlefield 4 only recently reached peak performance and it was released over 4 years ago. What I am hoping you can picture is a world where instead of releasing Battlefield 4 or any other sequels, EA/DICE spent all that time and money fixing Battlefield 3. Once the game reached peak performance, more content/maps/guns/modes could be released. Maybe, a mode that was essentially "Battlefield 4 mode" (given there are a few key differences). Another one could be "World War I mode" and would periodically have content released as if it from BF1. All the while maintaining graphic and mechanical upgrades through patches. Because I don't see a reason why at this point in time we can't just download all of this content from the source itself. We do it all the time from Steam and even Origin. Stop releasing new titles, and start releasing complete games. Hell, I'd pay a small monthly subscription fee to see a game I like updated and maintained. Because you know how hard it is to find a lively Battlefield 3 server these days? Too damn hard.