230°
Submitted by Pozzle 656d ago | opinion piece

Far Cry 3: Should Release Delays Be Outlawed?

Or should developers just delay announcing games until they are actually near completion? (Far Cry 3, PC, PS3, Xbox 360)

KumaKreations  +   656d ago
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.
KMCROC54  +   656d ago
Too worlds 1,2, too human, to name a few.
slaton24  +   656d ago
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
Army_of_Darkness  +   656d ago
I prefer delays over DLC.
But when they pull shit like a delay, followed by a DLC, I'd say F@#K you.
#1.1.2 (Edited 656d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(0) | Report
HK6  +   656d ago
Test Drive Unlimited 2 is a great example of a delay not helping the game at all. The MP didn't even work until months after release on TDU2.
HammadTheBeast  +   655d ago
LoL Duke Nukem.
zeal0us  +   655d ago
Two worlds 2 was an improvement compare to Two Worlds 1.

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
#1.1.5 (Edited 655d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report
interrergator  +   655d ago
i thought too human was fun :)
Neo Nugget  +   655d ago
^
Same, but the death scene really was a gamebreaker for some people.
Gaming101  +   655d ago
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.
360ICE  +   655d ago
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.
Nitrowolf2  +   656d ago
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.
#2 (Edited 656d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
KumaKreations  +   656d ago
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?
360GamerFG  +   656d ago
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.
theDECAY  +   656d ago
Forza was always going to sell well. Not really a great comparison.
raymantalk1  +   656d ago
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.
neoMAXMLC  +   655d ago
Do you read what you write??
dumahim  +   655d ago
Are you posting from the past? FM4 already came out.
FrightfulActions  +   656d ago
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.
#4 (Edited 656d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
DwightOwen  +   656d ago
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.
annus  +   656d ago
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.
DwightOwen  +   656d ago
You're right. 'Beta' is the stage I was thinking about, where all the known bugs have been fixed and the developer is preparing to go gold.
WeskerChildReborned  +   656d ago
Nah cause delays are usually to improve the game.
Trenta27  +   656d ago
Is this article for real?
AngelicIceDiamond  +   656d ago
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.
TronEOL  +   656d ago
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.
annus  +   656d ago
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.
#9.1 (Edited 656d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
sriki007  +   656d ago
well they are delaying it to make it look and play better...
T3MPL3TON  +   656d ago
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.
gcolley  +   656d ago
delays are your friend
Trekster_Gamer  +   656d ago
Such a stupid premise to an article it is not even worth clicking on to read. Some articles are RETARDED!
isarai  +   656d ago
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
Ducky  +   656d ago
Valve would have to leave the gaming industry then. =/
taquito  +   656d ago
"Far Cry 3: Should Release Delays Be Outlawed?"

-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
#16 (Edited 656d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
helghast102  +   656d ago
If they need to delay the product to touch up on the quality, then what's the problem?
You want a halfassed broken game? Go play a Bethesda game then.
wallis  +   656d ago
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.
seanpitt23  +   656d ago
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.
GarandShooter  +   656d ago
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?

Please enlighten me.
Kushan  +   656d ago
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.
jay2  +   656d ago
Release dates are always estimates till the game goes 'Gold'. So we've got to always hope for the best.
Yodagamer  +   655d ago
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.
BrianC6234  +   655d ago
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.
FinaLXiii  +   655d ago
No but anouncing it and then canceling afterwards should be outlawed like The Getaway for PS3 for example.

Its false advertising to push console sales numbers.

I know that i bought a PS3 in 07 to play that game.
#25 (Edited 655d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
30°

Here Is An Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag Inspired Environment Powered By CRYENGINE

8m ago - Crydev member ‘thundercliffe’ has been working on a map inspired by Ubisoft’s latest Assassin’s C... | PC
10°

How to Handle a Sore Loser Like a Professional Gamer

11m ago - The man you see on the left is Sanford Kelly, a Street Fighter 4 professional and a really bad lo... | Culture
20°

Trials Fusion review | Gamesblip

19m ago - Gamesblip offers their opinion on Ubisoft's Trials Fusion for the PS4. | PS4
20°

Team17 Announces Schrödinger’s Cat and the Raiders of the Lost Quark

34m ago - T1 - Team17 has announced their latest covalent bond with independent developer Italic Pig to tur... | PC
Ad

Enter to Win a PS4 and More!

Now - We are buying one lucky N4Ger a PS4 just for commenting on any N4G story! | Promoted post
20°

VGU Diablo III: Reaper of Souls Review

36m ago - If you think the world of Sanctuary is safe, think again. After battling the forces of evil, you... | PC
Related content from friends