A lot of new games do certainly suck, are being released buggy, etc. Early-Access, while not bad, is mostly paid playtesting. And I get it, devs get to see what the players like and dislike, feedback on game balance and mechanics and the like. But most devs don't use it to it's fullest potential and just use it as a platform for playtesting and easy (and free) bughunting. While nostalgia certainly plays a role in how we perceive older games we liked, I do think that games back then without patches, were put together more carefully and had way fewer bugs most of the time. Design-wise I'd say it was a learning process. Nowadays there's so much information available for almost any part of game development that AAA companies would have a hard time making very bad design decisions (there are still people working for these companies, people that make decisions, it's not the company). Milking a franchise is also not exclusive to the games industry and can be seen almost anywhere. There's one thing that makes me instantly not buy a game, and that is loot boxes WITH pay to win elements. If your loot boxes are purely cosmetic, go right ahead. But if it contains game-relevant items, equipment or characters, I'm out. Which leads to my last point. Manipulative design to get the player to buy more shiny bling bling for money... just no. It's not all bad though, modern games tend to be faster in terms of gameplay in their genres compared to older games.