By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 18 November 2016
Edit Thread
DanneSandin said:
curl-6 said:

Two years ago, I would have agreed. But honestly, Nintendo's "don't release til it's flawless" strategy is obsolete in this day and age.

Just put the fucking thing out and patch it like everyone else does. A few minor framerate drops or bugs are not worth months of delay.

I don't think I can actually say something more that hasn't been said already, can't add much to the conversation at this point. I'd rather see companies take their responsabilities seriously and ship better games. And I'd like to see gamers take THEIR responsabilities more seriously as well; don't buy broken games! But Companies are companies and will do anything for a profit and gamers are gamers, and therefore stupid. I rather wait a little while for a better game than not being able to play it when I buy it. Yes, Skyrim has sold extremely well, but most of those sales probably didn't come from the first week or two after launch (although, I imagine the game did perfectly well at release). Had I bought a PS3 version of the game, I'd probably be mad as hell since it was a bug fest, and it took like half a year of patches for Bethesda to fix it (or was it a year?); they even delayed DLC's on PS3 to fix all the bugs in the original game. I'd be twice as mad at that point. I don't think NIntendo's strategy is flwed, it's gamers thinking that's flawed accepting behavior like this.

But I do agree that Nintendo shouldn't come out and set a date for a game they know probably will get delayed. Just say, "It's done when it's done"

 

Volterra_90 said:
curl-6 said:

It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year?

Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection.

Sure, but I believe it's something that has to change. And I think it's fairly easy. Just give a release date when they're 100% sure they're gonna make it (Nintendo was bloody awful with this regarding Zelda), and that date would be when the game is properly polished and tested. Bugs would exist, and glitches, and some framerate issues. It's almost impossible not to have them. But, for example, the first time I played Skyrim, one NPC decided to go through one wall like a ghost, one dragon buried itseld into the ground, my horse started to fly... in 2 hours of playtime. Never touched that game again. It's a real deal breaker for me. I'm not sure what's the BOTW status right now, but if it's that bad, please, delay it. And learn to give proper release dates, Nintendo. They're only pissing off people, and that's really understandable.

 

Wyrdness said:
curl-6 said:

It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year?

Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection.

Except these aren't minor bugs these are full on performance and game breaking issues that are now starting to be called out by both critics and consumers, Skyrim on 360 and PS3 is the reason a number of people say that they wait a few months for the issues to be sorted before buying Bethesda games, I'll tell you again go speak to the PS4 and X1 owners who right now are livid because their copy of the remaster doesn't work. This gen alone more games have been called out for such problems with the most recent being Mafia 3 while before it we had the likes of Watch Dogs and even heavy hitters like Assassin's Creed have declined as a result of it, in fact funny enough a lot of AAA titles you're on about decline notably each year in sales.

Want an example of why delays are better than just pushing the game out the door look no further than FFXIV, the game was a disaster at launch that hurt SE's reputation, they had to redo the whole game as result, quality control is one thing that his going down the drain in the industry so sorry I'll say it again anyone advocating such practices shuld sit down and think because it's going to back fire hard.

If consumers are so "livid", why do they keep buying such games in droves? If it was really such a deal breaker, these games would flop. But they don't, because most consumers don't consider minor bugs and performance issues to be a big problem. 

Releasing a game on time with slight imperfections at least gives consumers the option of getting it at launch or waiting for updates, but a delay removes that choice and forces everyone to wait.

The idea of waiting until a game is flawless is not viable in an age where games are this complex, it leads to ridiculously drawn out productions that not only keep fans waiting, but reduces software output and leads to droughts.

If the Zelda team had kept to a sensible timeframe and finished Breath of the Wild in 2015, for example, we could be looking at a new Switch Zelda game in 2018. By 2021, we could've gotten three Zelda games instead of one or two.