I vote waiting for perfection. I respect Yamauchi-san for not giving in to pressure from the media, from internet keyboard warriors, from fake fans, even from Sony itself (I'm sure they're breathing down his neck from day to day). I also respect Kojima-san (my father) for also taking his time, maxing out hardware, and calling the shots for whatever he wants. Ueda-san also gets my respect for taking years and years into his projects, not caring about how many sales he gets, and only caring about the quality of his storytelling.

Much respect to any and all developers who take their time.

What about you guys? Do you prefer waiting for perfection or the release and patch approach that most Western developers do?

I'll just use this quote first.

"A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever"

I agree with what Shiggy says...

Bloody hell, Blacksaber ninja'd me... -.-'

who is shiggy?

He's only the mastermind behind...

i prefer game devs that take their time. I personally hate dlc unless it is actual dlc like rdr undead nightmare. but some games even though it took a while to make still gets  apatch. example: halo reach- took 3 years but 1st couple of weeks were unbalanced for gameplay (even with beta). Im sure GT5 will also get some sort of patch. Online games usually always do one way or another.

I'll go with "None of the above"

I'll take the third option "We effective. Getting the job WELL done with the deadline"

I see "seeking perfection" as something negative. It can be counterproductive. It generates delay, and sometimes the chages are not worth the money, and time.

As an animator that I am, I had worked with tough deadlines, and a tigh budget that sometimes don't allow me to  go all the way with my work. But it is what it is. (just saying)

Of course, there are cases, and cases. I know we are talking about GT5. In the case of GT5 is understandable the delay, because is a highly anticipated game, and it will generate a lot of money.

And just for the record, I am no saying that people (companies) shouldn't move their deadline, and release dates if they have to ( take the FF 14 online as a example), I am just not with the whole being perfectionist.

ah, it's because you should say shiggy-san

ideal world, wait for perfection

I don't mind occasional obscure bugs that get patched, but what i really dislike are releases of games with huge, obvious flaws that should have been corrected early in the test cycle way before release, like the game-breaking, system freezing bugs that seem to be a feature of Bethesda games like Fallout3, Oblivion (any elderscrolls game for that matter)

that annoys the crap out of me, and what's so annoying to me for those games in particular is that I love playing them, and the majority of them are imo fantastic games but would be infinately better if they just siphoned some of that awesome energy into testing!

so as for the question, I'd say neither option and go with a reasonable compromise.