Roundtable: Delays In Gaming!

[Mokong]

Righty lets get teh Ball rolling, @Retro_Link mentioned about us trying to get regular roundtables going in this here new and shiny "General Gaming Discussion" board. Replies may then be complied in a roundtable feature article on the main site.

 

So here is the first N-E Forum Roundtable, replies will be taken up to lets say next Thrusday with the roundtable article (hopefully) going on the main site next weekend.

 

 

The questions at the end are just guides you don't have to answer them directly, you can if you wish or you can just give a general opinion of the topic.

 

__________________________________________

 

Delays in games releases have become less common in recent years as publishers and devs strive to make their set deadlines and release dates.

 

But every now and then a game with an expected and marketed release date fails to make that date and gets delayed.

 

Delays can be caused for various reasons as we have seen recently with the high profile delay of Rayman Legends on the Wii U in order for Ubisoft to port the previously Wii U exclusive to other platforms.

 

 

What do you think about delays?

Are you happy to wait to allow devs time to properly finish a game?

Do you think a delayed game can ultimately see sales suffer (when it is released) as a result of being delayed?

 

 

Post you opinions below and your comments may be featured on the main site Roundtable article.

Edited February 8, 2013 by Mokong

[Fused King]

When I look at myself, I couldn't care less if a game was delayed or not, because I'm forever set with my backlog.

 

I also think that delaying a game to give it that extra polish is indeed a good thing, because some games are just a pure work of art where the developers are trying to convey certain feelings/emotions/experiences to the player. This process works best if 'men in ties' don't continuously want things out the door as quick as possible.

 

I guess the bottom line for me is that I really lament the fact that it's a business and that terrible things can happen when we keep using the equation 'money = time'.

[Wii]

To quote Miyamoto: "A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad". Wise words Miyamoto-san. I'm very happy to let devs the time to finish a game properly though companies sometimes rush games out to make the Christmas market. Take Monolith Soft's new game "X", I'll happily wait as long as it takes for them to complete this game because I know it'll be worth the wait. You know it'll be released when it's as close to perfect as can be. Zelda and 3D Mario are another 2 examples.

 

However delaying a game that is pretty much close to gold, that the developers have bent over backwards to get it out the door and when the Wii U audience is crying out for games is not a good idea. There's no doubt this game will suffer because of its delay. It has soured peoples opinion of Ubisoft. When this game does release, hopefully there will be more games on the market for the Wii U and it'll be vying with these for market success. If it's facing up against 1st party Nintendo titles, we know who'll win. It'll also suffer competition from other platforms, e.g. GTA 5. This is smacking of deja vu. It's Origins all over again. It got creamed last time out and will likely happen again.

 

Then there's the marketing side of things. Will it meet with consumer burn out by the time it's released? I can see their point of view and reasons for doing this but will MH3U be delayed so? Somebody always has to take the first steps in a consoles lifetime and it can be rewarding. I never heard Ubisoft complain about Red Steels sales. A game can also drive console sales. Another example is Aliens: Colonial Marines. I don't see any mention of Wii U in their promotion of the game. Is the game being held back to wait for Wii U version to finish development? No. Will it have it's own advertisements on TV? I sincerely doubt it and sales will be down as a result of people not waiting and buying it on other platforms in the mean time.

[Grazza]

Delays anger people when they suspect there is an ulterior motive. There is nothing wrong with a game taking a long time to make (as with Nintendo's 3DS titles), but it becomes a problem when there are other reasons for the delay. Worst of all is when the delay is so a game can be made available on multiple formats with different capabilities and controllers. Though it is a fine game, I cannot shake the annoyance that Twilight Princess was delayed for the Wii and that the GameCube version does not have all the functionality it was once meant to, such as shield control. Withholding a finished game is an enormous insult as it is like saying to gamers "You're not allowed your version until the other ones are ready".

[Kaepora_Gaebora]

If the N64 taught me anything it's that patience is well rewarded as far as Nintendo is concerned. The wait for some of those games, specifically Rare games, was excruciating at times but always worth it. However back in those days there was no opportunity to download patches for games with bugs etc, so you had to get it right first time or not at all (unless you faced the shame of recalling stock to replace like wwf no mercy!)

Ultimately I would much rather wait for a product to be finished and ready to play rather than a broken shambles that sours the experience and you have to wait for downloads etc to compliment the game. Which makes me slightly worried about Nintendo, it didn't bother me at all as I knew in advance through this site, but an hour long download just to start using the advertised features on the Wii U seemed unlike them, I understand why, but why didn't they push the launch back instead of courting potentially bad press, which did turn out to be the case.

Also in the cube era me and my mates had a ritual, every Friday morning at 6th form we would head to our local GAME and pick up the latest release, religiously and regardless of reviews etc, a game a week! The glory days, which have long gone, less disposable income means I would rather have more space in between games to make the most out of each one, I bought eternal darkness and star fox adventures on the same day, so both suffered as a result! Which is why for example (just an example) I personally would be happy to see Lego city delayed IF needed, because I will be picking up Monster Hunter 3 on both platforms and want to invest as much time in that as possible before moving to my next game, which will be Lego city. However I understand people would want vice versa or cry uproar at that notion, but I hope you know what I mean.

 

Christ what was the topic?! Ah yes happy for delays for quality reasons, not happy for delays like Rayman reasons, which I believe will see sales suffer. Perfect dark was delayed from a November to the following June and was well worth the wait because of the extra polish. Jury is out on Ubisoft's big call

[The Peeps]

Surely the general consensus is that a game should be delayed if it isn't ready, rather than rush it out to meet an arbitrary deadline. Fans will understand, or at least accept the delay. It's not like it's a rare occurrence for video games to be delayed. I would much rather a game be delayed and finished properly than play a rushed and hashed together game.

 

If a game is truly finished though, it should be released as soon as it is!

[Londragon]

Gamers always have, and always will, play the waiting game. It's part of the anticipation building, frustration, then sheer elation of receiving a 'quality' product, that would not have reached that high standard if rushed. Too many developers these days feel they can rush out an unfinished product with many flaws and just release patch after patch. I prefer to wait for a product that is perfect from the outset with everything included as standard from the moment it's sold, to the moment I complete it. Gamers these days seem to be waiting for patches more than games.

[Guy]

Game delays for development issues are normal and to be expected.

 

A game being "delayed" due to a company having no faith in the console they're releasing their game on is a totally different matter. I use the term delayed in quotations because this isn't really a delay in the conventional sense - Ubisoft pulled Rayman Legends as an exclusive because the Wii U is performing horribly. They probably realised this shortly after getting the ZombiU numbers in and realised their error a little too late to escape the ire of fanboys across the globe.

 

While I agree the timing of the announcement couldn't have been be worse, Nintendo actually deserve more of the blame than Ubisoft.

 

Nintendo have failed to generate sufficient enthusiasm for Wii U outside of their usual circle of die-hard fans. Nobody wants one because most people have no reason to want one - who cares about amazing new hardware when all you have to play on it is a collection of rushed ports and a lazy rehash of the same inferior Mario game we've been playing for the last ten years?

 

"Oh, but Nintendoland!" protest the fans, neglecting the fact that Nintendoland should have been packed in with EVERY Wii U console free of charge as a system demo, just like Wii Sports.

 

"But what about ZombiU, Guy? You conveniently forgot all about that one, didn't you!" they scream triumphantly.

 

ZombiU's sales are probably one of the main reasons Rayman Legends isn't coming out in a few weeks. By releasing it as a bundle with the Wii U system, both Nintendo and Ubisoft were counting on it to be a main system seller. I'm sure ZombiU is a good game, but evidently not good enough to install anywhere near enough Wii U consoles in homes to make a Wii U exclusive Rayman Legends financially viable at this stage.

 

I'm sure the system will eventually present some remarkable software, but right now the Wii U is dead on the shelves.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Guy

[Jonnas]

Like people have said, a rushed game is no good. If a game is delayed for the sake of its quality, then by all means, do it. Release it when it's ready, don't let it become Sonic 2006.

 

The case with Rayman Legends is something else altogether, though. There are ulterior reasons as to why it's being delayed, and that's a much bigger pill to swallow.

We deal with that sort of thing all the time, though (we are European, after all. We've seen finished-game-delays plenty of times before), it may not be easy, but we've accepted that it has to happen from time to time.

 

But then there's the ultimately unacceptable: delaying the game when the release date is right around the corner. It's dangling a carrot on a stick for the fans that were anxious about the game. If you're setting and advertising a release date, stick with it. If you must delay, do it months from the release, not weeks.

The ulterior motives I mentioned are just salt on the wound, not the main problem.

 

(I won't comment on whether the Wii U needed that game or not. That issue has little to do with the topic of this Round Table.)

Edited February 10, 2013 by Jonnas

[Cube]

Release it when it's ready, don't let it become Sonic 2006.

 

I love how even the official "History of Sonic the Hedgehog" book had to say that it was unfinished when it was released.

 

But then there's the ultimately unacceptable: delaying the game when the release date is right around the corner. It's dangling a carrot on a stick for the fans that were anxious about the game. If you're setting and advertising a release date, stick with it. If you must delay, do it months from the release, not weeks.

 

If it's delayed for a couple of weeks, one likely likely reason is that something went wrong during the production of the discs.

[Jonnas]

If it's delayed for a couple of weeks, one likely likely reason is that something went wrong during the production of the discs.

 

Any delay close to release makes it clear that a finished game is being held off for exterior reasons. A couple of weeks is understandable, though. Still obnoxious, but with small delays least it's clear that only something minor went wrong.

[Rummy]

To quote Miyamoto: "A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad". Wise words Miyamoto-san. I'm very happy to let devs the time to finish a game properly though companies sometimes rush games out to make the Christmas market. Take Monolith Soft's new game "X", I'll happily wait as long as it takes for them to complete this game because I know it'll be worth the wait. You know it'll be released when it's as close to perfect as can be. Zelda and 3D Mario are another 2 examples.

 

Personally I'd disagree, as I thought Twilight Princess wasn't a good Zelda and it was delayed for ages. Essentially for the Wii launch imo. I think @Grazza's post is spot on. However as @Guy(and others) mentioned, there's different kinds of delays - is it because the game isn't ready or because of other reasons?

 

Personally, I know it's going to happen and whatnot etc, but I don't really like delays or think them acceptable too often. Game not ready in time? That's not my problem, you're in the business of developing games - get it done! Don't announce dates and games that aren't going to happen, it isn't like delays are brand new news to you. I think it shouldn't happen, and thus I'm always might suspicious when delays occur.

 

Going off tangent a little, I'd like it more now if games got closer universal/worldwide releases too. I know EU needs more translation etc, but for example the 3 month wait with a huge title like Brawl just irked me so much(despite my import copy) - I don't think it's fair to let it happen. I think in some ways my opinion is heightened by the evolution of the internet, the 'online world' and people being more aware of things faster - big game delays then risk you seeing spoilers, and can embitter some as they're not part of the experience whilst its happening. I know these sound pretty petty, but I think it shouldn't have to happen.

 

Re:Rayman Legends - that's a bang out of order delay, and imo a terrible move by them for Nintendo - why not just release the Wii U version as it's ready? Send the others along when they're done later - the wii u's already suffered similar with its enhanced ports, why can't it happen the other way around?

 

TO sum, essentially: Personally I don't think a game should be dated unless it can meet that obligation. I don't want vague Q1, Q2s etc that then slip to Q3, Q4 - I want Q1 that turns into a solid date in said Q1, or not at all. If you can see the end in sight, don't date it.

[Daft]

Projects should be planned competently enough for there to be no significant delays. That includes revealing the game at an appropriate time and announcing the launch date when the team is confident they can deliver. What I hate is vague but locked in release dates, like Wind Waker HD.

[Wii]

@Rummy Did you think Skyward Sword was a good Zelda?

[Rummy]

I didn't think it was the best, but I felt it was a bit more Zelda than TP - of course I might be biased by recency. I recall distinctly feeling post TP that it was a good game, rather good in fact, but just lacking in the Zelda charm of its predecessors. Skyward Sword at least captured that a bit better than TP imo.

[Mokong]

And your opinions are now on the front page

 

Cheers everyone for your replies

 

http://www.n-europe.com/features/roundtable-delays-in-gaming