Several games have interesting or obscure caveats in terms of their release or their playability, and it's worth mentioning them for the sake of completeness. For example, Donkey Kong Junior is listed as a Gameboy Advance release, which is technically correct, but it was only playable via the e-Reader, which is not obvious. Additionally, Donkey Kong Junior also exists as a playable game within Game and Watch Gallery 3 and 4, which may technically not count as a release but deserves mentioning somewhere. There are several examples of games with unique scenarios like this, and this data doesn't really have a section where it could easily be integrated. Furthermore, some games have memes or cultural phenomena around them which also lacks a section. A trivia section to serve as a catch-all for data like this would be great, so long as said trivia can be cited and verified.

I feel like there should be a general category for certain series. Such as Zelda, Mario, Megaman, RE, Digimon all under one catergory instead of individual games(unless they are a new). IGDB already implements this under what they call "Collections."

What do you think? People who play older titles but are a part of said series' community would be more in their line of audience. It's better than having them spread out in random places like Retro or Just Chatting. So instead of having massive communities around certain games, whether they are thriving or dying, you can have a continuous community around a certain series.

Currently IGDB's release date options don't allow for tracking both a game's initial early access release and the date at which it was declared to be in full release — e.g. Hades was originally released in early access for Windows on 12/6/18 and went into full release for Windows, Mac and Switch on 09/17/20. Currently, there can only be one Windows release date. Not only does this create ambiguity as to which date a page should go with, but ultimately both are valuable information and should be included on the page – there are contexts in which users will want the initial date, there are contexts in which they will want the 1.0 date, and there are contexts in which they will want to compare the two.

If desired, accommodations could be made for additional release date types as well (alpha, beta, multiplayer-only, etc)

Some of the games don't get results through the API because the names used by ROM (and other game images) documenting organizations have some rules that don't apply to IGDB's main title rule.

Some of them:

If the title starts with an article, it goes to the end of the title. (Legend of Zelda, The)
If there is a non-standard character, like slashes, quotes, etc, they are removed.
The Japanese naming scheme uses double vowels instead of singles ones.

It would be good to have as an alternative title option something like: "Alternative title - No-Intro Naming Convention".

I'm pretty sure it is good both as a catalog stand point and also useful for third party applications that work with ROMs (TOSEC, No-Intro and Redump follow similar rules).

Just as a remark, these organizations are of people who document the information about games, but don't endorse piracy, as many think. They share DATs, a specialized database file, which contains only information about the games.

It would be nice to add 'hardware bundles' of games to the database. With NES & SNES Classic Mini, Mega Drive Mini, Neo Geo Classic, Playstation Classic Mini, Capcom home arcade, 1Up Arcades and several other mini consoles on the market, it would be nice to integrate those as 'hardware bundles' - bundles of existing games that are bundled in one hardware release.
it could be realised with a dedicated category like Main Game, DLC, Bundle,… or just marked as Bundle. The platform where it is released could be either specific for each release or could be one general "hardware bundle" platform.