So, we had pre-order bonuses, collector editions, expansions marketed as sequels, subscriptions, DLCs, Microtransactions, day one DLCs and newest "invention" - seasonal passes. I miss good old days when publishers were releasing the base game and an expansion after 6-12 months. It was fair and I was happy to pay.

What is next? 6 hours a day gameplay limit? Want to play more? Buy additional subscription unlocking 12 hours a day only for 20 euro(or 20 Australian dollars and 20 US dollars, because in gaming business all the currency is the same, huehuehue) a month! 30 euro a month for those hardcore gamers playing 24h a day, you save 10 euro!

A cloud service. Not only saves but your whole game.
Good thing we have indie devs. I hope their number will grow.

Also:
http://www.gog.com/forum/general/are_you_interested_in_paying_100_a_year_to_use_microsoft_office

They will start charging for virtual ammo with the first person shooters

I'm assuming that streaming games is what many publishers would love to enforce. Especially as you could be forced to buy any new incarnation of their games as they could simply turn off support for their older titles by saying "sorry, not many people are playing game X anymore."

Streaming games is definitely a no go for me, especially when they only guarantee a game to be available for 2-3 years after release.

Subscription based streaming (as with OnLive, there are now a couple of models emerging testing the water)

edit -this is not neccisarily bad - I would not mind pay for example £10 per month and get unlimited access to 10 games per month, then later buy the ones I really like and want to keep. The others - no need to pay more for them.

Atleast no one has gone so far as to open up an online store for you to go and buy the virtual equipment and weapons you will need to be competetive in MP. Could you imagine a company being so screwed up as to actually try that!?

I believe he was being sarcastic.

Anyway, I don't get the whole furore about the MS Office thing. I don't consider $140 for a market-leading product to be excessive.

Pay per minute.

Well, I have the impression that games are cheaper than ever, so I am not complaining. (Never owned a console, by the way.)

DLC Endings! That would be the clincher. Pay for the game mechanics, then select you ending from a number of styled results.

Pay per ammo pack and pay to repair gun wear and tear in f2p shooters came to mind. I think Sony had a game like this already that was f2p on PC and is shutting down now. EA is already selling materials for crafting for Dead Space 3. Having that extend to MP is just a short while off. Also there are f2p games that sell equipment through cash shops. I think The Old Republic is a good game, but they sell star ship upgrades for space missions through the cash shop. That isn't direct power, but they let you do the missions easier and thus get more in game currency per day to buy better gear.

Personally I am already at the point of just waiting for a GOTY edition for games I know will have several $10 DLC packs. I also don't care for games that sell cheap then you look and see 10-20 or even more pieces of DLC in the shop for them.

Damnit. Why didn't the sarcmark ever take off? It is if they want to keep leading the private market, you know, Mr. and Mrs. Middle Class. They own the business market, no doubt about that, but for an ordinary family $140 is a lot to spend.

We already have weekly charges for games down here in Mexico.

Yes, really. Cell phone games.

Damn it! I blame the hangover.

And I don't consider $140 excessive for a product that you'll use for 3-∞ years for a middle class family. In fact, your key PC components are way pricier than that and need regular replacing.