| twesterm said: You're confusing a lot of things here. First off, they are not like Team Ico. The money for Team Ico games comes from Sony, the publisher. They have room to wait until it's perfect because Sony lets them. With Valve, they supply their own money so they can take as long as they want, it's their choice, not a publishers. It has nothing to do with keeping a schedule. That was the point Sony gives them all the money they need As for speed, I don't know what you're talking. The Last Guardian has been in developer for a *long* time, at least five years. So yeah... I was talking about Naughty Dog there, Naughty Dog don't need the extra time that is how they are different from Valve. When you say iteration, I don't think you really know what the term means in context to schedules. You're talking about milestones, and major milestones at that. Alpha, beta, and gold are milestones, not interations. When people talk iterative development, they're generally talking about quick 2 week turnaround things. They team finds a set of features, works on it, and makes iterations at various points until it's where they want it. I know what iteration means, http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/04/23/the-design-philosophy-at-naughty-dog-an-interview-with-uncharted-2s-co-lead-designer-richard-lemarchand/ For going gold, that is the point it is released to the manufacter. That's what the term means so unless it's a download only game, going gold only a week before release is pretty impossible. What you're talking about is working on the game up until release, which even Team Ico will probably be doing (there's always more bugs). Maybe I remeber that wrong but I seem to remember Dice saying it hadn't gone gold 3 weeks out from launch and that EA were going to be pulling out all the stops to get stock in time. But maybe that was fevor dream as i can't seem to find the story now, maybe it was one of those forum rumours that go arround... Finally, none of that has much to do with the real issue-- not all developers has the luxury of infinite budgets that Valve has. Any studio that isn't using its own money, and that's nearly all of them, must stick to a schedule. Yes, some are better than the others but that has zero to do with the business plan. But you don't need to have an infinite budget to make a "good" game that offers a legit consumer more than a pirate. In fact some publishers like Ubisoft spend extra money to inconveniance consumers. If small indie teams can make games consumers are willing to buy on a shoe string why can't multinational developers? |
Anyway this is getting really off topic now
@TheVoxelman on twitter
