your mother said:
If they take three years to make a game that should take less than half that time, and you attribute it to QA, then wouldn't that mean they could still make the same game in much less time, albeit without QA? Wouldn't this appply to ANY developer? Couldn't Sony just "come out" with God of War II in 12-16 months and just throw QA out the window? Of course they don't do that, because QA is an integral part of software development. So implying that Nintendo takes a long time developing games because of QA is a bad thing now? What is your point, really, apart from taking cheap shots at Nintendo? |
I think you took that completely the wrong way. He isn't saying QA is a bad thing, he's saying that they actually care about the quality, though it's not QA that delays it and fixes the gameplay, that goes to the level/game designers. QA just finds and reports bugs (though still incredibly important).
