walsufnir said:
pokoko said:
It was more of a question, as I don't play any of the annual franchises, but I'm pretty sure the last Battlefield had some awful bugs at launch.
All he's really saying here is that trying to force complex development into an absolute release date is bad. If you're setting a date for a major release even before you start development then all kinds of bad things can happen. Look at all the work that has to be done on an Assassin's Creed game, yet there is no way in hell they'd back off of that holiday release window. He's saying that Marketing isn't asking Development when they'll be finished, he's saying that Marketing is telling development when they'll be finished. It's a situation that has the potential to impact game quality.
|
I know what he is saying but I don't see many "victims" because of that. Unity was definitely a bad example but other games weren't ready, too, by release and were not annual.
At least I agree that devs should get a little bit more freedom but it's their work and nobody is asking me if I want more time in my job to finish because the schedule is ridiculous - I don't get it anyway.
|
Being a victim doesn't necessarily mean a broken games full of bugs. Tight release schedule forces the developer to re-use the same asset and tricks without further improvement to the experience in general, and that can happen in many different ways. The whole thing hurts the progress of the industry in general, which is why it is "hated".
