CGI-Quality said:
I hear what you're saying, but Ludicrous makes a point here. As gamers, we want more and more games, yes, but I can't imagine that releasing a crappy one is any better (and this comes from my moderate experience with working with my own projects). I'd rather a team kill it with fire than launch a turd and "patch" it along the way. |
I guess one point that I've been considering is whether or not a bad game releasing is a bad thing for gamers overall or a non-factor. If a game you never thought was interesting because of bad initial previews gets cancelled I'd argue that's a non-factor for you because you weren't going to get it and it wasn't going to affect your life one way or the other (though one could argue that if it released it could have ended up actually good and have a positive effect on your life). On the other hand, some people will see those same previews and think the game looks interesting or fun, and for them the cancellation is a bad thing.
Under your concept, should Recore or The Order exist? These have low reviewer scores and are generally considered by many to be "turds" but my point is that not everyone thinks so. So in my view I would agree with Normchacho: a cancelled game can be bad if you were looking forward to it, neutral if you weren't, but it's tough to envision it being good as a consumer unless you are assuming that whatever funds would be used for that will be put into something better, but that remains to be seen.
...









