Wyrdness said: curl-6 said: Nintendo's rampant, out-of-control delays are a worse habit than games releasing slightly imperfect and being swiftly updated. At least other companies get their games out in a reasonable timeframe. Except the games released today are more than slightly imperfect the experience is damage to hell in a number of cases ask console players of Skyrim SE how they feel about the past week and a half when Bethesda's patch caused the game to crash when loading the game on all platforms rendering it unplayable, PC players had to patch the game themselves. Many of them are literally saying would take a delay to not experience forking out money to go through that as they're livid especially after the debacle of the original Skyrim release and Fallout 4's problems that it's began to hurt their rep with their player base and fans you can even go to Bethesda's support forums to see examples of what I mean. Sorry but anyone advocating such practice needs to sit down and think because it's horrid to go through, Dishonoured 2 PC players are going through it now and this is after having a day 1 patch as well. The majority of people would rather have a polished game in their hands than go through that and Nintendo wouldn't want to have to continue working on and patching the game after it's released as it impacts resources for future projects. Sorry but delays are better than that nonsense, it's not even a debate at all.

It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year?

Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection.

curl-6 said: Miyamotoo said: Offcourse, look at Wii U decisions.. Well for now I really don't see any reason to criticize Nintendo about Switch or some later moves, they are currently look very promising to me. If Zelda isn't really launch title for Switch they definitely have good reason for that and they can't finish all they planed with this Zelda until March, but that doesnt mean they are stupid, its easily biggest game they ever worked on, we know they want games to polished and without bugs and espacily 3D Zelda titles. So I would understand if Zelda isnt Switch launch title even I would be disappointment because I expecting game on Switch launch and I would need to wait more for game. You criticize things they've done in the past, but I have never, ever seen you say anything critical about their current or future plans, and not just now regarding Switch, but in the entire time you've been on this forum. You are free to prove me wrong, but I think you would defend absolutely anything Nintendo did, until it was in the past.

Like I wrote, for now I really don't see any reason to criticize Nintendo about Switch or some later moves, they are currently look very promising to me. And I criticize mostly their past moves because for them I can be sure they are bad moves, also fact is that I am interested much more in positive staffs and news than in negative overall.

curl-6 said: It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year? Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection.

This, let consumers judge whether or not the game is a high quality release in spite of the technical issues ... 

Let it also be known that deadlines are important for the game's reputation too since delays mean that the game itself will be judged with higher expectations ... 

People also need to stop berating a games technical issues other than Nintendo's since they don't exactly have a near spotless record when Zelda: OoT had tons of bugs despite being the highest scored game among critics, SMG 1 & 2 had more than an handful of their own, Rare classics (PD and 007) published by Nintendo were guilty of letting dozens of bugs go through shipped, Zelda: TP had a few quirks with a couple game breaking bugs to boot, and hell Donkey Kong 64 remains unbootable without the expansion pak due to a bug so the myth that Nintendo games are good because of their extremely refined nature is needs to go since it doesn't serve anything more than an excuse for Nintendo to not deliver excellence within a reasonable timeframe ... 

curl-6 said: DanneSandin said: While I hate the delays, I'm loving the ambition behind it! What I'm hearing is this; less bugs (hello Bethesda), a great game, a challenging game, great localization and the best Zelda there ever was (maybe). If I get all of that by simply waiting a few more months, I'm OK with that. I'd rather have a complete game than having a ton of patches trying to make it playable. Two years ago, I would have agreed. But honestly, Nintendo's "don't release til it's flawless" strategy is obsolete in this day and age. Just put the fucking thing out and patch it like everyone else does. A few minor framerate drops or bugs are not worth months of delay.

I don't think I can actually say something more that hasn't been said already, can't add much to the conversation at this point. I'd rather see companies take their responsabilities seriously and ship better games. And I'd like to see gamers take THEIR responsabilities more seriously as well; don't buy broken games! But Companies are companies and will do anything for a profit and gamers are gamers, and therefore stupid. I rather wait a little while for a better game than not being able to play it when I buy it. Yes, Skyrim has sold extremely well, but most of those sales probably didn't come from the first week or two after launch (although, I imagine the game did perfectly well at release). Had I bought a PS3 version of the game, I'd probably be mad as hell since it was a bug fest, and it took like half a year of patches for Bethesda to fix it (or was it a year?); they even delayed DLC's on PS3 to fix all the bugs in the original game. I'd be twice as mad at that point. I don't think NIntendo's strategy is flwed, it's gamers thinking that's flawed accepting behavior like this.

But I do agree that Nintendo shouldn't come out and set a date for a game they know probably will get delayed. Just say, "It's done when it's done"

curl-6 said: It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year? Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection.

Except these aren't minor bugs these are full on performance and game breaking issues that are now starting to be called out by both critics and consumers, Skyrim on 360 and PS3 is the reason a number of people say that they wait a few months for the issues to be sorted before buying Bethesda games, I'll tell you again go speak to the PS4 and X1 owners who right now are livid because their copy of the remaster doesn't work. This gen alone more games have been called out for such problems with the most recent being Mafia 3 while before it we had the likes of Watch Dogs and even heavy hitters like Assassin's Creed have declined as a result of it, in fact funny enough a lot of AAA titles you're on about decline notably each year in sales.

Want an example of why delays are better than just pushing the game out the door look no further than FFXIV, the game was a disaster at launch that hurt SE's reputation, they had to redo the whole game as result, quality control is one thing that his going down the drain in the industry so sorry I'll say it again anyone advocating such practices shuld sit down and think because it's going to back fire hard.

fatslob-:O said: curl-6 said: It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year? Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection. This, let consumers judge whether or not the game is a high quality release in spite of the technical issues ...  Let it also be known that deadlines are important for the game's reputation too since delays mean that the game itself will be judged with higher expectations ...  People also need to stop berating a games technical issues other than Nintendo's since they don't exactly have a near spotless record when Zelda: OoT had tons of bugs despite being the highest scored game among critics, SMG 1 & 2 had more than an handful of their own, Rare classics (PD and 007) published by Nintendo were guilty of letting dozens of bugs go through shipped, Zelda: TP had a few quirks with a couple game breaking bugs to boot, and hell Donkey Kong 64 remains unbootable without the expansion pak due to a bug so the myth that Nintendo games are good because of their extremely refined nature is needs to go since it doesn't serve anything more than an excuse for Nintendo to not deliver excellence within a reasonable timeframe ...

TP and SS had gamebreaking bugs. So I agree.

TBH This could be a huge Holiday game for the Switch so it would make sense for Nintendo to push it back especially since they could possibly have a3D Mario, Open World Zelda at launch or close to launch they don't need all the big games right out the gate.

OP- Got rid of the recent thread section since it isn't relevant. I'll also be updating the OP with some of her latest rumors like Zelda not launching with the slim etc. Later this week or today if I get the chance.

curl-6 said: Wyrdness said: Except the games released today are more than slightly imperfect the experience is damage to hell in a number of cases ask console players of Skyrim SE how they feel about the past week and a half when Bethesda's patch caused the game to crash when loading the game on all platforms rendering it unplayable, PC players had to patch the game themselves. Many of them are literally saying would take a delay to not experience forking out money to go through that as they're livid especially after the debacle of the original Skyrim release and Fallout 4's problems that it's began to hurt their rep with their player base and fans you can even go to Bethesda's support forums to see examples of what I mean. Sorry but anyone advocating such practice needs to sit down and think because it's horrid to go through, Dishonoured 2 PC players are going through it now and this is after having a day 1 patch as well. The majority of people would rather have a polished game in their hands than go through that and Nintendo wouldn't want to have to continue working on and patching the game after it's released as it impacts resources for future projects. Sorry but delays are better than that nonsense, it's not even a debate at all. It is debateable, because I disagree entirely. People may complain about Skyrim's bugs, but it sold over 15 million on PS3/360 alone and is beloved by gamers and critics. If gamers were really so against games being released imperfect, why do AAA games released this way sell multiple millions year after year? Minor bugs and framerate issues are clearly not dealbreakers for the majority of gamers. Games these days have become so bloated and huge that if devs waited until they were flawless, they would never release. There comes a point where actually getting the product to consumers needs to take priority over a developer's neverending pursuit of unreachable perfection.

Sure, but I believe it's something that has to change. And I think it's fairly easy. Just give a release date when they're 100% sure they're gonna make it (Nintendo was bloody awful with this regarding Zelda), and that date would be when the game is properly polished and tested. Bugs would exist, and glitches, and some framerate issues. It's almost impossible not to have them. But, for example, the first time I played Skyrim, one NPC decided to go through one wall like a ghost, one dragon buried itseld into the ground, my horse started to fly... in 2 hours of playtime. Never touched that game again. It's a real deal breaker for me. I'm not sure what's the BOTW status right now, but if it's that bad, please, delay it. And learn to give proper release dates, Nintendo. They're only pissing off people, and that's really understandable.

jason1637 said: TBH This could be a huge Holiday game for the Switch so it would make sense for Nintendo to push it back especially since they could possibly have a3D Mario, Open World Zelda at launch or close to launch they don't need all the big games right out the gate. OP- Got rid of the recent thread section since it isn't relevant. I'll also be updating the OP with some of her latest rumors like Zelda not launching with the slim etc. Later this week or today if I get the chance.

Yes! If Pokemon goes to late 2017, then there's hope Zelda is a May title!

Pavolink said: jason1637 said: TBH This could be a huge Holiday game for the Switch so it would make sense for Nintendo to push it back especially since they could possibly have a3D Mario, Open World Zelda at launch or close to launch they don't need all the big games right out the gate. OP- Got rid of the recent thread section since it isn't relevant. I'll also be updating the OP with some of her latest rumors like Zelda not launching with the slim etc. Later this week or today if I get the chance. Yes! If Pokemon goes to late 2017, then there's hope Zelda is a May title!

If Zelda is May and Pokemon November there is still a big gap. Maybe we ould get a new Retro game.