Well they have to say something for the industry but keep their mouth shut for us the consumers. I do not mind the delay, what I do mind is when they delay a game and it still turns out like crap, which sucks. Great post.
sad thing is no matter the game if its cod,ffv13,or many others someone will find something wrong with it and complain...nothing is perfect i got too worlds 2 and i like it delays are to help fix bugs they have found or to add a new game mode for example.....i hope that made some since im half asleep...lol
The only reason anyone got upset over a game being delayed is this one - you have no life, and nothing else to do than play videogames. Blame yourself.
Really? I felt rather sure, after reading the first paragraph that surely this must be a joke article.
First of all, his first idea is a macro idea, that without macro-control (or as we would have said "a governing body") would be subject to individual judgement. Should developers do this for the sake of consumers? Yup. Will they? No, as we clearly see. So it's not really that interesting.
The second idea is just too awful. A governing body would control release dates? False advertising is one thing, little does he know that if you do have money on a delayed game you can demand it back, or sue for false advertising. If you think it's annoying that a game is delayed, then send an angry letter. Don't demand the establishment of an institution that fines (really?) companies that are already in a problematic financial situation.
Believe it or not, companies do lose money on advertising a release date that later reveals itself to be false.
The thing is many devs feel confident enough that they could push a game out on time, when in fact there is still work left to be done. That leaves plenty of room for error to occur during that time. A release date now a day is really used to keep people interested and hopeful for that period of release. It brings hype, which increases sales even with a delay. I'm not bothered with the delay TBH.
I prefer having a release date and a delay occur than rather a game with no release date (FF VS 13, Last Guardian, GTA5, ect) cause at least I know it's coming.
I like when they announce release dates. It prevents the developers, for the most part, to slip away with their game and never be heard of for years. Youknow what should be outlawed? Announcing a product that isn't heard from for years. Agent and FF VS 13, WTF are you guys.
Honestly I agree especially games that turn out to be vaporware which means they never come out like Starcraft Ghost. Why mention something as a teaser and do not produce?
I think they should hold off on announcements until the game is months from completion. Forza 3 was announced a mere few months from release and look how well that game was recieved (sales wise for those that believe 2 years to create hype and pre orders is necessary).
This not to say that should the game NEED more polishing that they should release it anyway. Far from it. But don't announce a game and 3 years later we wondering if it still even exists, yes I'm looking at you Agent.
yeah forza 3 was so great when it released it had millions of bugs in it they should of not released it and fixed all the bugs then released it who wants to buy a game and then have loads of bugs in it ?
and forza is always going to sell well since on the 360 there is no other exclusive racing games on xbox worth mentioning anymore.
hopefully when forza 4 comes out they will of learned from the past 3 games and fixed all bugs.
Delay announcing a game? No, announcing the game, even years in advance (though such lengths are excessive), helps spark hype to the consumers and will result in more press and potentially better sales. Not giving out an actual release date until it's dead set? Totally.
Would be nice if an actual date wasn't given to the public until say, 2 months prior. There would still be 'insiders' leaking it to the internet though, but at least it wouldn't be 'officially' announced as the release date. It'd probably be something like Amazon, Gamestop or Walmart 'accidentally' adding the release date to the preorder.
Games should be announced once they hit Alpha, along with a release date, so that the only thing left to do is polish it up and rake in the sales while hype is at an all-time peak. This waiting 1-2 years is pure bullshit. It only serves to create an unreal level of expectation which many games then fail to live up to.
You do realise that a huge amount of games are announced around alpha time right? I'm assuming you don't actually know anything, and are just throwing around the word alpha.
Also just so you know, alpha is just a RUNNING version of the game, it doesn't even have to have good graphics or physics. The time between alpha and going gold CAN be over 2 years, go look at Diablo 3 if you want a good example.
The only I guess "positive" factor of games being delayed is less patching. It seems like when a game gets released we have to go through 3 to 4 patches in one month.
Just a side note. But Far Cry releasing in Nov/Dec means death of any potential sales it was gonna take in. September was a good month for them BorderLands 2 was there only competition within that month roughly.
Going up against Halo, Black Ops, and Assassin's creed isn't to smart.
I think we'd all be better off not knowing games' release dates. That whole thing should be left for talk between developer and publisher. Then once the dev/pub knows the game is near completion, near going gold, then announce the release date.
Or if they want to give fans an idea of when it'll be released, use the whole (for example) "Q2 2012" thing. Or just say Fall, Winter, Summer, etc. At least then any one of those options give you a solid window that wont disappoint people waiting for a game.
Isn't that what is usually done? Games that get delayed last minute are because there are last minute bugs, features, something not working as intended, things taking longer than estimated (maybe poor project management), or other non intended problems that have arrived.
I believe companies need to start being honest. Put the game out when it ready not to meet a deadline, and us customers end up getting some sh*tty game. Just be honest. If the game needs 2 -3 years of extra attention and fine tuning fine, at least then I know it was delayed because they wanted to make it as good as possible unlikes some games that get delayed to build further hype so that people will flock to it even though it's utter trash.
My guess is they have no clue what delays are for. If it's delayed it's to fix an issue, to ignore the issue and release it anyway would result in a very shitty, possibly broken entirely game. Usually the only time something delays the game is when it's something game breaking
Devs should just have the sense to only put a date down when they're positive, but if they don't then tough luck. If you're so stupid you actually think these guys are sat there with 25% of a game and they know EXACTLY how long it will take to finish the final 75% then you should just hold your breath until the stupid stops. When far cry 3 gave us a date that's not a release date, it's more of a mission statement for them, and if we take it and act like it's law then it's our own fault when it changes.
And as for last minute delays, for example every ubisoft game on PC, then honestly just tell the offending company to fuck off and not buy the game because it's just bad treatment of their community. However if you're SO annoyed you have to buy the game anyway but you can't let the delay go then congratulations you've sent the company a signed photo of your anus with the words "use me" written across it. We seriously need to start speaking with our wallets more and recognize the capitalist nature of our relationship with devs.
i can remembr at E3 when they did a 4 player coop demo and they was all trying their best to make this side of the game look good and interesting and sadly they all failed miserably it looked average at best.
Outlawed? Seriously? Exactly what thought process leads one to believe or even consider that a government should waste the time to draft and enact, then enforce a law over so trivial a matter?
It's a non-issue, it doesn't matter if a game gets delayed, you just have to wait longer. You're essentially asking the developers to predict the future or forgo months (or years) of marketing, meaning your project is a bigger risk.
Not at all, i'd rather have a delayed non-buggy release than a buggy game at launch, granted that isn't always the case, but when a game gets delayed it means they have time to put the extra polish a game might need.
Why would someone even waste time thinking about this? You can't make laws that say a develop has to release a game on a certain date. And if they don't talk about the game until it's ready gamers won't know about the games.
40°
80°
30°
30°
Ad 
50°
10°
40°
20°
30°
20°
But when they pull shit like a delay, followed by a DLC, I'd say F@#K you.
Amy and Alpha Protocol could be added to that list though. Both had some hype behind them, got delayed and both fail to succeed.
Brink is one of those games that should have been delayed and beta tested
Same, but the death scene really was a gamebreaker for some people.
First of all, his first idea is a macro idea, that without macro-control (or as we would have said "a governing body") would be subject to individual judgement. Should developers do this for the sake of consumers? Yup. Will they? No, as we clearly see. So it's not really that interesting.
The second idea is just too awful. A governing body would control release dates? False advertising is one thing, little does he know that if you do have money on a delayed game you can demand it back, or sue for false advertising. If you think it's annoying that a game is delayed, then send an angry letter. Don't demand the establishment of an institution that fines (really?) companies that are already in a problematic financial situation.
Believe it or not, companies do lose money on advertising a release date that later reveals itself to be false.
A release date now a day is really used to keep people interested and hopeful for that period of release. It brings hype, which increases sales even with a delay. I'm not bothered with the delay TBH.
I prefer having a release date and a delay occur than rather a game with no release date (FF VS 13, Last Guardian, GTA5, ect) cause at least I know it's coming.
I like when they announce release dates. It prevents the developers, for the most part, to slip away with their game and never be heard of for years. Youknow what should be outlawed? Announcing a product that isn't heard from for years. Agent and FF VS 13, WTF are you guys.
This not to say that should the game NEED more polishing that they should release it anyway. Far from it. But don't announce a game and 3 years later we wondering if it still even exists, yes I'm looking at you Agent.
and forza is always going to sell well since on the 360 there is no other exclusive racing games on xbox worth mentioning anymore.
hopefully when forza 4 comes out they will of learned from the past 3 games and fixed all bugs.
Would be nice if an actual date wasn't given to the public until say, 2 months prior. There would still be 'insiders' leaking it to the internet though, but at least it wouldn't be 'officially' announced as the release date. It'd probably be something like Amazon, Gamestop or Walmart 'accidentally' adding the release date to the preorder.
Also just so you know, alpha is just a RUNNING version of the game, it doesn't even have to have good graphics or physics. The time between alpha and going gold CAN be over 2 years, go look at Diablo 3 if you want a good example.
Just a side note. But Far Cry releasing in Nov/Dec means death of any potential sales it was gonna take in. September was a good month for them BorderLands 2 was there only competition within that month roughly.
Going up against Halo, Black Ops, and Assassin's creed isn't to smart.
Or if they want to give fans an idea of when it'll be released, use the whole (for example) "Q2 2012" thing. Or just say Fall, Winter, Summer, etc. At least then any one of those options give you a solid window that wont disappoint people waiting for a game.
-lol...no....with all the bugs are games have as is.....definately not.
devs need to have some leeway to make the best game they can!
-that said, it does suck when a game i'm really looking forward to gets delayed
You want a halfassed broken game? Go play a Bethesda game then.
And as for last minute delays, for example every ubisoft game on PC, then honestly just tell the offending company to fuck off and not buy the game because it's just bad treatment of their community. However if you're SO annoyed you have to buy the game anyway but you can't let the delay go then congratulations you've sent the company a signed photo of your anus with the words "use me" written across it. We seriously need to start speaking with our wallets more and recognize the capitalist nature of our relationship with devs.
Please enlighten me.
Its false advertising to push console sales numbers.
I know that i bought a PS3 in 07 to play that game.