Delays have become more common lately and several games have not been improved by it. Does delaying games work out better for Nintendo?
it depends, if you have a strong leadership, vision and focus for the project or game, delays can help alot because the person in charge knows what it needs to realize the task, but if you don't have that, delays could completely destroy your game, take for example Cyberpunk terrible management and end result, it wouldn't matter if they delayed the game even more cause the issue here is not time is the horrid management.
Duke Nukem Forever says hello...
"but a rushed game is forever bad" ~ not in these days of day1 patches, subsequent hotfixes and continued updates. And the over-reliance on these conveniences has given rise to sub-par deliveries.
Give me these day1 patches, subsequent hotfixes and continued updates over my old cartridges that have the bugs they were shipped with.
Yeah, when games shipped with bugs in the past, those bugs stayed in the game for the rest of time. So, I'm glad that patches and updates can fix problems spotted in games after release. What I'm less thrilled about is that it's a double-edged sword, as so many devs are now using that as an excuse to reduce the amount of time spent on bug testing so they can rush their product out ASAP. They're turning what is an excellent tool, into a crutch. Sure, in the days when games were just on a disc or cart and couldn't be "patched" post-release, barring releasing an entirely new edition of the game, we were stuck with whatever product was released at launch. The difference is, devs made extra sure to test their games so they wouldn't be buggy messes. Once in a while a game would release with a bug that slipped under the radar, but I for one recall that most games I played in those days seemed to be just fine, and I can't say I've had much trouble since with retro games ported to modern systems. I just think modern devs and publishers need to be held to a higher standard. There's no reason why a game needs to be a mess at launch. Patches and updates are an excellent tool, but they should not be treated as an excuse to cut corners. As it stands, that just gives me one more reason to wait before buying most games as I sure as heck am not paying full price for the "pleasure" of testing a game for a company whose job it was to do so.
what if u dont have internet? over a substantial period of time? u happy with a bugged out game for 60 quid? i wouldnt be. im not a fan of those day 1 patches.
Curtain_swoosh Don't you need a day 1 patch just to use your console?
“A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad.” To bad they didn't listen with Cyberpunk now look at it. Honestly I like a game that is pushed back work out all the kinks maybe add new things to the game. I don't liked rushed games pushed out the door call it done for the holiday sales. I also don't like remakes that have half the content cut and sold at full price like RE3 remake. I will gladly wait for a game that is not rushed and had the extra time worked on it it shows they actually cared for the game when making it. I can understand minor bugs and a few updates to correct the bugs but unlike Cyberpunk you patch as you go I hate.
Red tried. Gamers are also to blame, they bitch so bad about delays. They wanted the game now and thats what they got.
Only way I will bitch is if the game is delayed and turns out to be a piece of shit
Rather naive of you to think gamers forced a company to release a broken, and buggy game that's been in development for many years. It is more likely the higher-ups/investors began asking questions on why the game was taking so long to develop especially as they have to keep pumping money into the project. If what is available on the internet is correct then the investors did not even push for the game to be released early, instead, they were lied to and told the game was ready. Either way, I would not blame a few vocal gamers, what company would let some random on the internet determine when they release their product.
@Firebird360 Gamers aren't to blame they didn't bitch when Cyberpunk was pushed back for the December release. If anything gamers were mislead by the marketing of the game as a must have game. They even had Keanu Reeves marketing the game he was good in the game. Fact is someone knew the game was buggered up on last gen but they pushed the game out for the holiday season sales. Developers mentioned the game was not ready and should have been pushed back. Cyberpunk falls flat the gamers were bitching because the game is broken and voiced up because we were mislead by CD Projekt. And with a broken product you want you money back whether it's a cordless drill, cellphone, DVD player. I believe Sony got annoyed from the constant refunds they were issuing because Cyberpunk is broken I don't blame Sony for pulling the broken game. I think the reason why Microsoft never pulled the game digitally is because they sunk money and helped market the game as well. Now if Cyberpunk was pushed back to say fall of 2021 they would have had a good game on their hands. The bugs would have been worked out more features added to the game it would not have ended up as going down as the game with the shittiest launch in history.
Looks @ E.T. & BF4
It is true for every game. It is a fundamental truth. That is why the quote is so popular. Even if you fix the game post launch, you can never completely regain what is lost, and just because a mistake can be corrected, doesn’t mean it wasn’t a mistake to begin with. You never get a second chance to make a first impression.
Right, like Star Fox Zero right? That's where the quote originally came from and we all know what happen to that game.
No, it isn't. Arguably the most famously delayed game to have ever existed is Duke Nukem: Forever. First talked about in 1997, eventually announced for real in 2001 and released in 2011. Delayed immensely, and it was BAD and still is bad. Then take No Man's Sky. That game had quite the rushed release in comparison to its current status. The majority of people playing it at release were very negative about it, but look where it is now. It's done a complete 180 with loads of free updates and patches and has become quite a good game. So, there you have it, two of the most famous examples of delay and rush in the past two decades, and both speak against this "fundamental truth".
I think better wording would be “may be good” not “will be good”. Delaying a game doesn’t automatically make it a good game, but rushing a game almost certainly makes it a bad game.
Well given their track history, nintendo has some of the most stable games that don't need much "fixing" after launch compared to other companies so I would argue it definitely works. Now whether those games are good or bad is subjective.
*cough* Starfox Zero *cough*
I mean, not following that turned Cyberpunk from a potential goty contender into videogame's biggest meme, so.
Tired of seeing people use it for titles that have no chance whatsoever. There's a stark difference between the leadership at Nintendo and the leadership anywhere else. And if the foundation and development process was terrible, then delaying does nothing. If it's just a release problem or schedule issue, delaying it would actually help in the end. Besides the quote is 25 years old way before reliance on software updates existed for games.
What game has this sham done in the past 20 years. Most overrated man alive. A gorrila throwing barrels. A plumber picking up mushrooms. Aye stellar games design. Mans a clown.
This was true during the N64 days when he said the quote. It is not the case anymore given that games are no longer stuck in their cartridge without the possibility of patches in the vast majority of cases.
Delayed games aren't necessarily always eventually good. In fact, games that come out of development hell often struggle to live up to the hype. There's such a thing as too much time in the oven, and it can often lead to more hurdles a game needs to overcome. That said, slightly delaying a game has generally proven to be quite helpful, and the end product does tend to be better, so I will give that to Miyamoto. Also, this is Nintendo we are talking about. I'll forever rag on them being the only company who doesn't drop the price of their games after six months or so, but I'll also forever praise them for rarely releasing a bad game among the many they've released over the decades. At worst, I think Nintendo has released the rare ok game. They're also not known for dragging their games through the seven levels of development hell. They may slightly delay a game, but that game eventually comes out. They do often scrap early concept ideas, but those ideas often end up being revived in some capacity in other games. So when Miyamoto speaks of delays, he's not talking about Nintendo's answer to Beyond Good and Evil 2, but more reasonable delays such as maybe moving a release from spring to fall of the same year.
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.