Geist and Killer 7 delayed (GC)

[Everlost_MI]

Shacknews (http://www.shacknews.com/) has posted the following tidbit (http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/37232) regarding the delay of Geist and Killer 7 for the Gamecube.

GameCube fans received a double heaping of bad news today. Both Geist and Killer 7 will suffer short delays. Geist, originally set for release in June, will find its way onto shelves sometime in August. Killer 7, also set for June, is now set for a July 7 release. The decision to delay Killer 7 was a marketing move. Killer 7 on 7/7.

Fine, just don't delay the new Zelda title.

[kizke]

Geist and Killer 7 are why I'm looking forward to the summer.

Hell, I'm just looking forward to all the quality Gamecube stuff I've got to catch up on. RE4 for the third time through, Tales of Symphonia, finishing up Skies of Arcadia, maybe getting Baten Kaitos, and...mmm.

Come to think of it, the Gamecube really kicks ass.

[TrackZero]

No rush, it's the end of the systems lifespan anyways, may as well spread the titles out over the next year.

[Lon Lon Rabbit]

I was annoyed by this... I had Geist, Killer 7, And Fire Emblem US version for GC all preoreded (they were all due to release today, June 1st) and rushed home today to see if they'd shipped to find that every single one of them has had the date pushed back a bit... So no new games for me for a while now. I don't mind if they need delays, it was more the fact I'd been looking forward to three awesome new games, and every single one of them got delayed at such a last minute time.

[Talltale]

Oh no... delay the new Zelda as LONG as they want.. I want it perfect.

[Furious Wang]

Yes. I'm sure so many more people will buy Killer 7 because its coming out on 7/7.

"Well at first I was doubtful about buying it because of the odd gameplay...but now that its coming out on July 7th I just HAVE TO HAVE IT!"

It may have been less ridiculous if the original release date had been 7/7 but since the switch has come so late you just know the following scenario took place:

"Yeah man, you're right - this is some good shit! Now, anyone got any ideas on how we can actually sell this pool of rhino vomit we call Killer 7? No one? Yeah I guess you're right. There's no way we're going to be able to sell this game. Wait! I just got an idea. Why don't we sell the game on July 7th? You know - 7/7! Get it ? Killer 7? 7/7? NO WAIT! WHY DON'T WE DELAY IT UNTIL 2007?!?!!? Then we can release it at on 7/7/7 at 7am - NO 8:17am because that would be 7:77am OH GOD! NO HERE IS WHAT WE DO! We take all the copies of the game, put them in a time capsule, bury that bitch deep underground - say 777 feet- then we make 7 maps that lead to 77 degrees longitude, by 77 degrees lattitude - the burial spot, you with me?- then we set the time capsule for release on 7777AD! Man I am so fucked up right now I am seeing some shit!"

[EvilBob46]

May I ask why you call the game "rhino vomit?" Is it the style or am I missing some negative previews.

[SMES]

this pool of rhino vomit"

The rest of your acid-induced speculation not withstanding, why is it rhyno vomit? Even if the game is mediocre, I'd rather see companies trying to make different games like this than another version of Madden. Maybe we don't see eye to eye on this but I like innovation, whether successful or not.

[dr_wily]

shit at this rate i thought we werent seeing any gc games till the fall. I'm exited now.

[Furious Wang]

I like *progressive* innovation. Not regressive. That's what this is. A bunch of elite artists (inflection on the i) who sat around and asked the question: "Do we really need to be able to move freely in a first person game? I don't think so."

Well I do. And I think their whole premise is bullshit.

Gaming should be about freedom not restriction to fit these guys minimalist view of video game design.

I'm calling it now - 6.5 from every reviewer.

"Innovative, but just not any fun to play."

But even that's not true. People like to throw the "innovative" label on anything that's weird just because its different. Weird does not mean innovative.

[mister_slim]

I like *progressive* innovation. Not regressive. That's what this is. A bunch of elite artists (inflection on the i) who sat around and asked the question: "Do we really need to be able to move freely in a first person game? I don't think so."

Well I do. And I think their whole premise is bullshit.

Gaming should be about freedom not restriction to fit these guys minimalist view of video game design.

I'm calling it now - 6.5 from every reviewer.

"Innovative, but just not any fun to play."

But even that's not true. People like to throw the "innovative" label on anything that's weird just because its different. Weird does not mean innovative.
Could you shut up? You display your ignorance more frequently than anyone else on this site, which is a considerable accomplishment, but not something to be proud of.

[Furious Wang]

OK, misster slim. I'll bet you 10$ this game won't be any fun to play and will get poor reviews.

Care to put your money where your mouth is? I am.

[mister_slim]

OK, misster slim. I'll bet you 10$ this game won't be any fun to play and will get poor reviews.

Care to put your money where your mouth is? I am.
Whose 'not any fun to play' are we talking about? Yours or mine?

I don't care what your opinion of the game is. I just don't want to hear you making up shit to justify that opinion. Capcom gave a guy the freedom to make a game on his terms and set the Resident Evil people to try and make it fun. And they came up with something different. And for some reason you tried to create a straw man argument against the game without having played it or apparently read much about it. And in another thread you're asking why developers ever use a third-person perspective. Why should your opinion carry any weight?