Watch Dogs delayed and pushed back their release now Witcher 3 just announced they were pushing back the release to Feb 2015 instead of this year. Are we going to see a trend of pushing release dates back for more "polishing"
Please let Dragon Age come out this year and let it already be polished and no delay.
*for the record I'd rather a company delay a release to make their game better than just release it with bugs and broken.*
God I hope not.
*sigh* I'd love an opposite trend - where games suddenly announce a release date months ahead of schedule.
"Dragon Age Inquisition, in stores April 2014!"
By doing this though, it'd mean adding less to the game.
I don't think Mes was completely serious there. If we could get the same game that we're going to get in the fall right now, who wouldn't want that? Most of us realize that is not feasible, but we really want to play it, so we dream.
No I mean a magical world where things get released early because everything just happens to be done ahead of schedule.
Don't get me wrong - I know I'm dreaming.
Actually I did understand that you meant "Imagine DAI at our Fall release but available now." I'm saying, though, that if we were able to snap our fingers and have what we'd like to have for Fall flawlessly done today, it means that we'd have more time to add more (because there's always more!), or to simply keep polishing and what have you.
If the game were "done" tomorrow, it'd mean that we could still keep touching it up!
It's new gen folks, delays are always the worst in this period as devs are cracking tech from new consoles and lots of issues appear. Don't be surprised if DAI and many other games get delays as well. Hell, at this point it looks like even annual Assassin's Creed may be get delayed
They're probably also more unbearable as the game library is still young so people are chomping at the bit?
its hard to see long term sales when the publisher declares a game like Tomb Raider 2013 to be a failure after six months and then after a full year its announced to be profitable.
It's important to note that "failure" and "profitable" are not exclusive, however. Failure is simply failing to reach what one had planned to reach.
What with the amount of work put into the game since then, would Bioware have even managed to make a playable game? Considering the first playable build of the game was made in Dec 2013 and as we know from dev posts featured tonnes of missing textures, non-existant animations and synthesised speech instead of actual voice acting, as well as masses of bugs such as NPC's eyes floating in front of their heads.
The game's scope would probably been dialed back, we would have likely worked longer hours, and terms like playable and so forth are somewhat nebulous.
Changing the release date shifts our own goalposts and allows us to focus on different things, so it's not a straight up comparison to look at the timelines for when things became "playable."
One delay may be regarded as a misfortune. Two seems like carelessness.
I appreciate wanting your product to be 'the best it possibly can be', but I only accept that excuse from developers once per title, and DA:I was already postponed for a year. When a product has multiple delays, especially lengthy delays, that tells me that the studio has very poor time management skills.
Such an excuse wouldn't fly even once in other industries, it doesn't even work in school.
But I don't think DA:I is going to be delayed again.
The difference with school and a lot of other stuff is that it's not like delays don't come with a cost (it's not cheap to delay a title).
Plenty of other industries have multiples delays too. The issue comes with whether or not, when it comes time to delay, if it's deemed worth it to spend more money. If it's concluded that spending more money will result in a net increase in revenues to cover the further expenditure, it's useful to do it. Note, that even if it's been a financial mess up until the point and you've sunk million and millions of dollars into it, if you think that an extra $100k will net you $500k in revenue, you should delay.
The issue is that frequent delays say "we have low confidence that our assessments will be accurate." This creates a risk.
With regards to video games, the customer honestly shouldn't care, in my opinion, about delays. The only thing that matters to me as a gamer is whether or not the released product is something that I enjoy. While a game that takes a long time in development is not a guarantee that the game's quality will be good, I will take a slightly altered perspective: any game that is delayed is probably better served by being delayed than released at its current state. Even a game like Duke Nukem Forever, which took a looooooong time, likely doesn't provide a superior experience if it was released any time before its eventual release. The only way an earlier release date for DNF would make for a better game is if they were also able to change other aspects of production. That's the kicker, and that's the real issue for a game being subpar. Unfortunately, by the time you release the game is subpar, you've already spent that time in production on something that is subpar.... you can do one of three things at that point: delay and assume the risks that come with that; release the game as it is; cancel the game outright.
But if a developer feels the game isn't even good enough to release yet, I'm skeptical that me demanding that they actually release it would be an advantage. Canceling the game is no impact (I'm not currently playing the game anyways), and delaying the game simply means that I may play it in the future... it's not suddenly stopping me from playing the game.
Retour en haut
