The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I know a lot of us on the forums get really annoyed when a game that we really want to play, gets delayed. Now, a lot of the time the people behind the game try and use the excuse that they are making the game better or are simply adding the final touches. But, time is a valuable thing. And, by the time that the game has been spit polished, everything in the gaming world would have advanced and we would be expecting even more. So, if they hadn’t tried to make the game as good as it could be and released it when it was at a decent standard, the game may have succeeded more than what it did.
This post is mainly about the timing of releases, whether it is right to delay a game or release it when it was supposed to hit the shelves. Now, usually the release date is set at a reasonable time, allowing for the game to take a bit longer than expected before it is produced. But, games usually run over their dates, no matter how many times people had said when it would be released. For my first example of taking longer to release a game than necessary, I will use The Getaway.
For four years, two on the PlayStation and two on the PS2, The Getaway was being made by Team Soho. The Getaway was set to be the first full-bodied game to be along the lines of Grand Theft Auto, but in 3 dimensions. So, we have all heard of GTA 3, obviously the third release in the well-known series. But, guess what, it was in 3D and on a more powerful console, allowing for smoother graphics. So, what am I trying to point out here? Well, two years after GTA 3, The Getaway finally went gold, but that was after another release in the GTA series. But why had The Getaway taken so long to be released? Well, the answer is that the PlayStation started to become extinct when The Getaway was meant to be released, at that time for the PSX.
What I’m trying to say here is, if Team Soho hadn’t have tried to make The Getaway be in every household, the game could have done a lot better than what it did, when it was released late last year. If they had released The Getaway for the PlayStation, it may not have only been a hit, but it might have kept the PSX alive for a bit longer. But, as it was, The Getaway was always in GTA’s shadow. Trying to get past what the GTA series had already done. So they hadn’t only delayed the game the first time, but because of GTA 3, they had to take even longer trying to make the game better.
Now, looking to the future. Since almost the dawn of gaming, Solid Snake was part of the best memories on a console. He was an idol to some. No, I’m being serious. Metal Gear Solid was one of the biggest titles to date on any console, and made the PlayStation a household name. So, naturally, when the PS2 came along so did Snake and his biggest game yet. Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. This was the most hyped game ever to be released, to that date. But, as the game came, it soon went. It wasn’t as great as what it was hoped to have been. All it’s great reviews seemed to have just got caught up in the hype, although it was hard to say the game wasn’t good. It just wasn’t brilliant, which we all were expecting it to be. My point is, Metal Gear Solid: Substance is nearly around the corner, but so is a little title called Splinter Cell.
The biggest seller on the X-Box since the blockbuster title Halo, Splinter Cell shocked us in all aspects of gaming. Not only did it shock us when it challenged MGS as the king of stealth, but I was more shocked to hear that it was going multi-platform. Now, Substance is approaching, but have Konami overseen Splinter Cell. 01/03/03. The release date for Splinter Cell, it’s very near. And, it’s the same date as Substances’ releases date. So, Substance does have its name to back it up, but it is going to be very similar to Sons of Liberty. Substance has the same storyline as MGS 2, but you can play as different characters as well as taking on over 200 VR missions. But Splinter Cell is a new game, and we’ve all heard how good it is from all the fan boys down at Microsoft HQ. So, Substance didn’t have that much to have added to it, although Splinter Cell needed to be made from scratch. I think this is another case of time wasting.
Konami are a well respected company, but if Kojima’s men had pulled their socks out, Substance might have managed to creep in front of Splinter Cell and do a lot better than what it will eventually do. There’s no doubt about whether Substance will be huge, but it could have been bigger. Plus, we’ve also heard that this will be the last we see from Kojima, so leaving on such a landmark title can’t do any harm to Konami at all.
So, if you’re a games developer and are reading this post, set a release date and stick to it. If you come along and tell us that you need extra time to make the game better, and it turns out to be cack, you’re going to get a lot more stick than if you’d released it when you fist said you would.
This topic wasn’t meant to be all that interesting, come on; I was talking about time after all. But I feel that I have raised a few very important issues from the gaming world, and I hope to see release dates from now on not change as many times as Michael Jackson’s face has in the past few years.
Thanks for reading,
Ben.
This post is mainly about the timing of releases, whether it is right to delay a game or release it when it was supposed to hit the shelves. Now, usually the release date is set at a reasonable time, allowing for the game to take a bit longer than expected before it is produced. But, games usually run over their dates, no matter how many times people had said when it would be released. For my first example of taking longer to release a game than necessary, I will use The Getaway.
For four years, two on the PlayStation and two on the PS2, The Getaway was being made by Team Soho. The Getaway was set to be the first full-bodied game to be along the lines of Grand Theft Auto, but in 3 dimensions. So, we have all heard of GTA 3, obviously the third release in the well-known series. But, guess what, it was in 3D and on a more powerful console, allowing for smoother graphics. So, what am I trying to point out here? Well, two years after GTA 3, The Getaway finally went gold, but that was after another release in the GTA series. But why had The Getaway taken so long to be released? Well, the answer is that the PlayStation started to become extinct when The Getaway was meant to be released, at that time for the PSX.
What I’m trying to say here is, if Team Soho hadn’t have tried to make The Getaway be in every household, the game could have done a lot better than what it did, when it was released late last year. If they had released The Getaway for the PlayStation, it may not have only been a hit, but it might have kept the PSX alive for a bit longer. But, as it was, The Getaway was always in GTA’s shadow. Trying to get past what the GTA series had already done. So they hadn’t only delayed the game the first time, but because of GTA 3, they had to take even longer trying to make the game better.
Now, looking to the future. Since almost the dawn of gaming, Solid Snake was part of the best memories on a console. He was an idol to some. No, I’m being serious. Metal Gear Solid was one of the biggest titles to date on any console, and made the PlayStation a household name. So, naturally, when the PS2 came along so did Snake and his biggest game yet. Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. This was the most hyped game ever to be released, to that date. But, as the game came, it soon went. It wasn’t as great as what it was hoped to have been. All it’s great reviews seemed to have just got caught up in the hype, although it was hard to say the game wasn’t good. It just wasn’t brilliant, which we all were expecting it to be. My point is, Metal Gear Solid: Substance is nearly around the corner, but so is a little title called Splinter Cell.
The biggest seller on the X-Box since the blockbuster title Halo, Splinter Cell shocked us in all aspects of gaming. Not only did it shock us when it challenged MGS as the king of stealth, but I was more shocked to hear that it was going multi-platform. Now, Substance is approaching, but have Konami overseen Splinter Cell. 01/03/03. The release date for Splinter Cell, it’s very near. And, it’s the same date as Substances’ releases date. So, Substance does have its name to back it up, but it is going to be very similar to Sons of Liberty. Substance has the same storyline as MGS 2, but you can play as different characters as well as taking on over 200 VR missions. But Splinter Cell is a new game, and we’ve all heard how good it is from all the fan boys down at Microsoft HQ. So, Substance didn’t have that much to have added to it, although Splinter Cell needed to be made from scratch. I think this is another case of time wasting.
Konami are a well respected company, but if Kojima’s men had pulled their socks out, Substance might have managed to creep in front of Splinter Cell and do a lot better than what it will eventually do. There’s no doubt about whether Substance will be huge, but it could have been bigger. Plus, we’ve also heard that this will be the last we see from Kojima, so leaving on such a landmark title can’t do any harm to Konami at all.
So, if you’re a games developer and are reading this post, set a release date and stick to it. If you come along and tell us that you need extra time to make the game better, and it turns out to be cack, you’re going to get a lot more stick than if you’d released it when you fist said you would.
This topic wasn’t meant to be all that interesting, come on; I was talking about time after all. But I feel that I have raised a few very important issues from the gaming world, and I hope to see release dates from now on not change as many times as Michael Jackson’s face has in the past few years.
Thanks for reading,
Ben.
Substance is too much like Sons Of Liberty , too expensive and too late.
Yes - most people on this forum have played it which is why they can have valid opinions on the game - ie the cut scenes are far too long, the gameplay is too short etc.
I for one don't want to play over the same again and again albeit with a different character, once Iv'e played a game like MGS then that's it - unlike things like Footie games where you can always pop in and have another game.
As for the Getaway - maybe they should have spent a bit less time on trying to make the graphics super wowie (great term) and got the thing released much sooner. It definately lost a lot of sales due to the popularity of Vice City and is still losing out in the post Christmas sales.
On another of melons points - I think if games publishers did stick religiously to the original date and the game was cack it would seriously damage their reputation for any future titles. What amazes me also is that publishers have this extra time though and still publish games that are so obviously going to be destined straight for the bargain bins .
I for one don't want to play over the same again and again albeit with a different character, once Iv'e played a game like MGS then that's it - unlike things like Footie games where you can always pop in and have another game.
As for the Getaway - maybe they should have spent a bit less time on trying to make the graphics super wowie (great term) and got the thing released much sooner. It definately lost a lot of sales due to the popularity of Vice City and is still losing out in the post Christmas sales.
On another of melons points - I think if games publishers did stick religiously to the original date and the game was cack it would seriously damage their reputation for any future titles. What amazes me also is that publishers have this extra time though and still publish games that are so obviously going to be destined straight for the bargain bins .
I'm wondering if any of these people who constantly diss MGS2 (only on this forum mind) ever actually PLAYED it. You know, crank the difficulty up to the harder levels and try to get through it without being seen? As for saying you don't see the point in getting the tags, well.. getting the tags is a puzzle that requires logic and skill. If you don't want to do that then why are you playing a game?
Hey, you learn something new everyday. I didn't know that the publishers gave the developers a date, i thought that the developers would have given the publishers a rough date, and then work around that. You covered most of the things that i didn't say really. It would be better if there weren't any release dates, but as you said, then there wouldn't be any urgency in making the game. This could be for the good, but it could also go very wrong. It would be good because those little mistakes could be overcome, and the developers wouldn't have to rush the final parts of the game if they are running short on time. But if they don't have to make the game before a certain time, they might not make the game at all, and the game may be abolished, although it might have had amazing potential.
MGS2 was a really big let down for me, after loving the original title. I took it back very soon, which now i do regret. I couldn't see any point in collecting the dog tags in the end. Yes, you did get some good outcomes, but getting them wasn't fun at all. I am a bit tempted to get Substance. but then i'm affraid that i will be let down the same as i was before. i can't see any reward in playing a game that sounds the same as the game i didn't like, all i'd be doing is playing with different characters. Something i would like to unlock on the new game is past footage of Snakes' history. I didn't own any of the other MGS games, i've never even heard alot about them, and i don't think many people actually have. So unlocking some cut-scenes, although they may be long, will help to inform us of what's going on.
MGS2 was a really big let down for me, after loving the original title. I took it back very soon, which now i do regret. I couldn't see any point in collecting the dog tags in the end. Yes, you did get some good outcomes, but getting them wasn't fun at all. I am a bit tempted to get Substance. but then i'm affraid that i will be let down the same as i was before. i can't see any reward in playing a game that sounds the same as the game i didn't like, all i'd be doing is playing with different characters. Something i would like to unlock on the new game is past footage of Snakes' history. I didn't own any of the other MGS games, i've never even heard alot about them, and i don't think many people actually have. So unlocking some cut-scenes, although they may be long, will help to inform us of what's going on.
I'm not 100% on this, but I think the way it works is that the publishers set the release date and then make the developers work to that?
Maybe they should do away with publishers altogether, and make it easier for devcos to publish their own works, in a similar way that the music industry seems to be going.
In an ideal world, all developers could say 'It'll be ready when it's ready' and we would then have to just sit and wait. But then there's always the risk that without deadlines games would never get released as developers continued to strive for perfection to beat games that have been released in the meantime by rivals. A paradox, but I think you get my drift.
At least this way we would have got MGS: Substance first in one go rather than to have to fork out £40 for the first game then £40 a year later for the completed version that should have been released in the first place.
Perhaps if MGS: Sons of Liberty had been released on the XBox, Substance would have been offered as a free of charge patch?
Maybe they should do away with publishers altogether, and make it easier for devcos to publish their own works, in a similar way that the music industry seems to be going.
In an ideal world, all developers could say 'It'll be ready when it's ready' and we would then have to just sit and wait. But then there's always the risk that without deadlines games would never get released as developers continued to strive for perfection to beat games that have been released in the meantime by rivals. A paradox, but I think you get my drift.
At least this way we would have got MGS: Substance first in one go rather than to have to fork out £40 for the first game then £40 a year later for the completed version that should have been released in the first place.
Perhaps if MGS: Sons of Liberty had been released on the XBox, Substance would have been offered as a free of charge patch?
I know a lot of us on the forums get really annoyed when a game that we really want to play, gets delayed. Now, a lot of the time the people behind the game try and use the excuse that they are making the game better or are simply adding the final touches. But, time is a valuable thing. And, by the time that the game has been spit polished, everything in the gaming world would have advanced and we would be expecting even more. So, if they hadn’t tried to make the game as good as it could be and released it when it was at a decent standard, the game may have succeeded more than what it did.
This post is mainly about the timing of releases, whether it is right to delay a game or release it when it was supposed to hit the shelves. Now, usually the release date is set at a reasonable time, allowing for the game to take a bit longer than expected before it is produced. But, games usually run over their dates, no matter how many times people had said when it would be released. For my first example of taking longer to release a game than necessary, I will use The Getaway.
For four years, two on the PlayStation and two on the PS2, The Getaway was being made by Team Soho. The Getaway was set to be the first full-bodied game to be along the lines of Grand Theft Auto, but in 3 dimensions. So, we have all heard of GTA 3, obviously the third release in the well-known series. But, guess what, it was in 3D and on a more powerful console, allowing for smoother graphics. So, what am I trying to point out here? Well, two years after GTA 3, The Getaway finally went gold, but that was after another release in the GTA series. But why had The Getaway taken so long to be released? Well, the answer is that the PlayStation started to become extinct when The Getaway was meant to be released, at that time for the PSX.
What I’m trying to say here is, if Team Soho hadn’t have tried to make The Getaway be in every household, the game could have done a lot better than what it did, when it was released late last year. If they had released The Getaway for the PlayStation, it may not have only been a hit, but it might have kept the PSX alive for a bit longer. But, as it was, The Getaway was always in GTA’s shadow. Trying to get past what the GTA series had already done. So they hadn’t only delayed the game the first time, but because of GTA 3, they had to take even longer trying to make the game better.
Now, looking to the future. Since almost the dawn of gaming, Solid Snake was part of the best memories on a console. He was an idol to some. No, I’m being serious. Metal Gear Solid was one of the biggest titles to date on any console, and made the PlayStation a household name. So, naturally, when the PS2 came along so did Snake and his biggest game yet. Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. This was the most hyped game ever to be released, to that date. But, as the game came, it soon went. It wasn’t as great as what it was hoped to have been. All it’s great reviews seemed to have just got caught up in the hype, although it was hard to say the game wasn’t good. It just wasn’t brilliant, which we all were expecting it to be. My point is, Metal Gear Solid: Substance is nearly around the corner, but so is a little title called Splinter Cell.
The biggest seller on the X-Box since the blockbuster title Halo, Splinter Cell shocked us in all aspects of gaming. Not only did it shock us when it challenged MGS as the king of stealth, but I was more shocked to hear that it was going multi-platform. Now, Substance is approaching, but have Konami overseen Splinter Cell. 01/03/03. The release date for Splinter Cell, it’s very near. And, it’s the same date as Substances’ releases date. So, Substance does have its name to back it up, but it is going to be very similar to Sons of Liberty. Substance has the same storyline as MGS 2, but you can play as different characters as well as taking on over 200 VR missions. But Splinter Cell is a new game, and we’ve all heard how good it is from all the fan boys down at Microsoft HQ. So, Substance didn’t have that much to have added to it, although Splinter Cell needed to be made from scratch. I think this is another case of time wasting.
Konami are a well respected company, but if Kojima’s men had pulled their socks out, Substance might have managed to creep in front of Splinter Cell and do a lot better than what it will eventually do. There’s no doubt about whether Substance will be huge, but it could have been bigger. Plus, we’ve also heard that this will be the last we see from Kojima, so leaving on such a landmark title can’t do any harm to Konami at all.
So, if you’re a games developer and are reading this post, set a release date and stick to it. If you come along and tell us that you need extra time to make the game better, and it turns out to be cack, you’re going to get a lot more stick than if you’d released it when you fist said you would.
This topic wasn’t meant to be all that interesting, come on; I was talking about time after all. But I feel that I have raised a few very important issues from the gaming world, and I hope to see release dates from now on not change as many times as Michael Jackson’s face has in the past few years.
Thanks for reading,
Ben.
This post is mainly about the timing of releases, whether it is right to delay a game or release it when it was supposed to hit the shelves. Now, usually the release date is set at a reasonable time, allowing for the game to take a bit longer than expected before it is produced. But, games usually run over their dates, no matter how many times people had said when it would be released. For my first example of taking longer to release a game than necessary, I will use The Getaway.
For four years, two on the PlayStation and two on the PS2, The Getaway was being made by Team Soho. The Getaway was set to be the first full-bodied game to be along the lines of Grand Theft Auto, but in 3 dimensions. So, we have all heard of GTA 3, obviously the third release in the well-known series. But, guess what, it was in 3D and on a more powerful console, allowing for smoother graphics. So, what am I trying to point out here? Well, two years after GTA 3, The Getaway finally went gold, but that was after another release in the GTA series. But why had The Getaway taken so long to be released? Well, the answer is that the PlayStation started to become extinct when The Getaway was meant to be released, at that time for the PSX.
What I’m trying to say here is, if Team Soho hadn’t have tried to make The Getaway be in every household, the game could have done a lot better than what it did, when it was released late last year. If they had released The Getaway for the PlayStation, it may not have only been a hit, but it might have kept the PSX alive for a bit longer. But, as it was, The Getaway was always in GTA’s shadow. Trying to get past what the GTA series had already done. So they hadn’t only delayed the game the first time, but because of GTA 3, they had to take even longer trying to make the game better.
Now, looking to the future. Since almost the dawn of gaming, Solid Snake was part of the best memories on a console. He was an idol to some. No, I’m being serious. Metal Gear Solid was one of the biggest titles to date on any console, and made the PlayStation a household name. So, naturally, when the PS2 came along so did Snake and his biggest game yet. Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. This was the most hyped game ever to be released, to that date. But, as the game came, it soon went. It wasn’t as great as what it was hoped to have been. All it’s great reviews seemed to have just got caught up in the hype, although it was hard to say the game wasn’t good. It just wasn’t brilliant, which we all were expecting it to be. My point is, Metal Gear Solid: Substance is nearly around the corner, but so is a little title called Splinter Cell.
The biggest seller on the X-Box since the blockbuster title Halo, Splinter Cell shocked us in all aspects of gaming. Not only did it shock us when it challenged MGS as the king of stealth, but I was more shocked to hear that it was going multi-platform. Now, Substance is approaching, but have Konami overseen Splinter Cell. 01/03/03. The release date for Splinter Cell, it’s very near. And, it’s the same date as Substances’ releases date. So, Substance does have its name to back it up, but it is going to be very similar to Sons of Liberty. Substance has the same storyline as MGS 2, but you can play as different characters as well as taking on over 200 VR missions. But Splinter Cell is a new game, and we’ve all heard how good it is from all the fan boys down at Microsoft HQ. So, Substance didn’t have that much to have added to it, although Splinter Cell needed to be made from scratch. I think this is another case of time wasting.
Konami are a well respected company, but if Kojima’s men had pulled their socks out, Substance might have managed to creep in front of Splinter Cell and do a lot better than what it will eventually do. There’s no doubt about whether Substance will be huge, but it could have been bigger. Plus, we’ve also heard that this will be the last we see from Kojima, so leaving on such a landmark title can’t do any harm to Konami at all.
So, if you’re a games developer and are reading this post, set a release date and stick to it. If you come along and tell us that you need extra time to make the game better, and it turns out to be cack, you’re going to get a lot more stick than if you’d released it when you fist said you would.
This topic wasn’t meant to be all that interesting, come on; I was talking about time after all. But I feel that I have raised a few very important issues from the gaming world, and I hope to see release dates from now on not change as many times as Michael Jackson’s face has in the past few years.
Thanks for reading,
Ben.