We always hate it when a game gets delayed. But under the right circumstances...doesn't that actually help the game get better? Should games really be rushed out? Or should they take the time to get better?
*Remembers Watch Dogs, Driveclub and Assassin's Creed Unity* Suuuuuuuuuuuuure!
And Master Chief Collection MP matchmaking and BF4 could have used the delay too.
Sometimes I wonder if its because they just didn't test them thoroughly. Everything for MCC was there content wise I just doubt it was tested outside of a small internal test unit.
Cd projekt red, nuaghty dog and rock steady I think will benefit from the delays. Console optimization these days means 28-30p @ odd resolutions with full hdd day one patch. Soon they will let you pre order to get patches early. Everything is getting patched like f!#/:-?ing pirate. If delays make games better then HL3 will be orgasmic! They are even delaying the alpha stage! Gabe has the concept in his head and is delaying it till it's perfect for pre production delays. There are three stages in valves development when they get to stage 3 bame open delayed beta. My great great grand children will on that hype train!
A delayed game means it wont meet its deadline because its unfinished or because it has bugs and issues that needs sorting out. I encourage delays so that developers give us the best possible product they can. But at the same time, i hope that the game is itself was worth the wait.
It all depends on the developer. It's fine when a delay comes from a developer that's passionate about their game and want to deliver the best game possible, like Naughty Dog and Rocksteady. Other times delays come from developers that just can't deliver and have unrealistic expectations, like pushing as hard as they can just to meet the holidays. It maybe that developer just isn't that great and is way behind where they should be.
It really is a double-edged sword, and I knew that going into writing this piece. True, there are games that were delayed heavily and failed to meet our expectations. But there were also games that were delayed heavily and exceeded expectations. It really depends on the developer and what they do with the extra time given I guess.
Did it make DriveClub or The Oder better? the public wont know because we dont know the real reason why the game was delayed and we dont the playability of the game when it was delayed.
And if they didn't delay them? Driveclub would have been a lot worse and the Order wouldn't have performed as well as it does.
Hard to say without knowing what state the game was in as of it's originally intended release date, but a delay is certainly better than rushing to meet a deadline.
No, it makes them playable, barely, with a several gig day one update patch.
Yes, but if they suck on release, they were even worse before the delay.
Doa5:LR on PC is looking to be god awful despite having a month delay and 3 months before you can even play online. They even spouted some pr statement saying they want to give pc users "the best possible experience." The game is missing everything the ps4/xone versions have like the new stages, soft engine, destructible clothing in the SR costume pack, and limited PC configuration in general. Only saving grace is modding and I'm sure that delay was done to make it harder to mod the game otherwise nobody would bother buying their 2 $93 season passes.
Yes and no, It obviously didn't help watch dogs. But at the same time I felt it helped in the case of dying light.
Yes Duke Nukem proves this.
Delays of a few months are not long enough for them to "improve" the gameplay in any significant way. All a few months does is provide the game better QA. If developers substantially change gameplay in only a few months they are risking reduced quality. I laugh at betas a few weeks before launch. All that allows a dev to do is tweak a few things here and there. They need many months before of beta to truly improve the game quality, and then a full year to alter the game play and balance significantly.
Not lately, it hasn't...
Smash Bros was delayed and it was fantastic. And with Arkham Knight, it'd be really hard for Rocksteady to fail based off what we're seeing.
Not all delays are created equal- I don t think anyone has issue with delays that are used to improve/finish the game- It is not the delay that people get frustrated with, it is typically the reason/potential reason for the delay. For ex. If a delivery date was announced too early for the dev to have confidence it could be met is 1 type of delay- announcing games for E 3 or other marketing reasons, knowing the actual date will be moved back is another- Games are often announced to entice people to buy a console sooner rather than later only to have the game delayed after many consoles have been sold (see Wii U at launch) Delays happen to pacify current and potential userbase's for a period of time too IE to buy time etc. DKTF was delayed from holiday 2013 till late Feb 2014 in order to fill a huge pipeline gap in software cycle for 1st half of 2014 even though it was ready to ship holiday 2013 Raynman Legends was delayed because they were afraid there were not enough users at that point to purchase the game and cover dev cost, much less make a profit So generally speaking no rational person would get upset because a game is delayed for further work/improvement before release - the frustration/anger comes from the reason(s)s and/or perceived reasons for the delay-
Oh totally agree, reasoning is very much the point of the article I wrote. If Uncharted 4 had gotten delayed and I didn't read that blog about why, it wouldn't have affected me. But BECAUSE they said they want to please fans and give Nathan the sendoff he deserves, hence the delay, that spoke to me. There are always bad reasons for delays, but if a game is delayed for the right ones, I'd like to think it'll be better for it.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.