GTA IV Delay Not All Bad News [Archive]

fitbabits

08-04-2007, 02:32 PM

I mentioned something similar to one of my colleagues at work when the news about GTA IV's delay broke, and I'll be damned if Computer & Video Games (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=169526) didn't go and take the words right out of my mouth.

If you can overlook the fact that we might not being playing it for another six months, there's plenty of good news behind Rockstar's shocker GTA IV delay.

For one, it's (hopefully) guaranteed to be a more polished and complete product by the time it's out for release. Secondly you now have a chance to enjoy all these Christmas releases, which might've previously been lost in the GTA carnage...
Check out the full article for seven games that will no longer have to worry about performing under the shadow of the GTA IV behemoth!

The Great Gatsby

08-04-2007, 02:35 PM

No Metroid, Mario, and Smash? Retarded CVG people.

UnderHero5

08-04-2007, 02:40 PM

Wow, could they get any more obvious with this "news".
"It will be worked on more, and you can play other games!"
No shit! :D

absolut taco

08-04-2007, 02:43 PM

If life hands you lemons, you make Whiskey Sour.

Johan

08-04-2007, 02:45 PM

I'm not sure why a delay would really bother people, considering nobody else will be playing the game earlier than you can, anyways...

sometimes, the anticipation is more enjoyable than the end result, as well.

Sandman

08-04-2007, 02:46 PM

Those games would have been big even with GTA releasing this holiday.

Jack B

08-04-2007, 02:53 PM

vivafletcher

08-04-2007, 02:58 PM

I wonder if there might be a bigger opportunity for more price cuts, since the guaranteed seller known as GTA won't be there. Or maybe that's wishful thinking, but if the companies needed a huge Christmas, and were depending on it...they might panic a bit.

alleycatsphinx

08-04-2007, 03:08 PM

360 will be a skeleton crew of artists and designers while everyone is dumped onto the PS3 till it's ready to ship.

civil_dead

08-04-2007, 03:32 PM

Somehow, I wanted my bedroom set in good condition on Friday. waiting 6 more months isn't good news, IMO. You have to be a pretty damn big fanboy of Broyhill to call your wife and try and convince her it's good news... ;)
That's when you get creative and use the kitchen counter, bathroom sink, swingset in the backyard...

Sorry, couldn't resist. I seem to cheapen threads.

51|RandoM

08-04-2007, 03:43 PM

The Radical Cleric

08-04-2007, 03:45 PM

Those games would have been big even with GTA releasing this holiday.

Quoted for truth. I couldn't agree more.

pseudopseudo

08-04-2007, 04:02 PM

Couldn't you say the same thing about every delayed game? What about the good news we've had with Duke Nuken Forever for the last 10 years? These delays are great!

It's like when you order a bedroom set. You wait for 6 weeks and then 1 week before you get it the sales guy calls and say's, "Hey, have I got some great news for you. That bedroom set you ordered was going to arrive on Friday, but it was looking pretty crappy, so we decided to send it back and it will now arrive in 6 months. Isn't that great news!!!".

Somehow, I wanted my bedroom set in good condition on Friday. waiting 6 more months isn't good news, IMO. You have to be a pretty damn big fanboy of Broyhill to call your wife and try and convince her it's good news... ;)

That's not really that good of a comparison. In that scenario, usually you've already paid for your furniture. Of course you're going to get pissed if it doesn't get there when it should.

In this case, no one's paid one thin dime, unless you preordered (and preorders haven't even been taken yet, have they?). So I guess I don't see why people get all upset.

DaXIthR

08-04-2007, 04:38 PM

Pretty shitty article taking the obvious to a new level of obviousness.

The thread discussing the GTA delay here covered everything said here and then some.

Dag-Sabot

08-04-2007, 04:55 PM

After all, the delay was nothing but good news for the ps3.

Jack B

08-04-2007, 04:55 PM

That's not really that good of a comparison. In that scenario, usually you've already paid for your furniture. Of course you're going to get pissed if it doesn't get there when it should.

In this case, no one's paid one thin dime, unless you preordered (and preorders haven't even been taken yet, have they?). So I guess I don't see why people get all upset.

Ok, maybe it is good news then. Wow, if we're lucky they'll delay it again in March for 6 more months. And if we're really really really lucky they'll keep delaying every 6 months for the next 10 years like Duke Nuken Forever...

Nope, it's still bad news, no matter how you spin it whether you've paid for it in advance or not. :D

Yellowman

08-04-2007, 05:10 PM

You spin news right round baby right round like a badly encoded mp3 yeah

Gorvi

08-04-2007, 05:11 PM

51|RandoM

08-04-2007, 05:20 PM

I was happy to see the delay personally. Hopefully it'll come out around May so that there will be something great to play around that normally dry time of year. We really didn't need another AAA game this fall, there's more than enough coming out already.

I'm pretty sure that if they released GTA IV today that you would still be able to buy it in May... and the May after that... and the May after that.

This is Rockstar, not Atlus.

Devilturnip

08-04-2007, 05:20 PM

It's good news because retarded publishers insist on backloading the year with heavy hitting AAA titles. This year is arguable worse than most in that regard, and the more these titles are spread out by delays, the more of them I'll actually buy. I don't have the money to drop on 14 games in the span of two months, and I certainly don't have the time to play them all. Go ahead and cry me a river how your game of choice isn't coming out right now. You'll be able to play it eventually, and in the meantime maybe you'll pick up a title or two that you otherwise would have overlooked.

Gorvi

08-04-2007, 05:21 PM

I'm pretty sure that if they released GTA IV today that you would still be able to buy it in May... and the May after that... and the May after that.

This is Rockstar, not Atlus.
Well, yeah, that's true. But more likely than not, I would have already played it by then if it were released earlier.

51|RandoM

08-04-2007, 05:30 PM

Well, yeah, that's true. But more likely than not, I would have already played it by then if it were released earlier.

But that wasn't the point you were trying to make.

You were saying it is good to put it off for awhile because you already have plenty of games to purchase. Simply put, you can postpone your purchase without it requiring the game to be delayed, so you can't really use that as a reason for the game delay to be a "good thing."

Gorvi

08-04-2007, 05:33 PM

But that wasn't the point you were trying to make.

You were saying it is good to put it off for awhile because you already have plenty of games to purchase. Simply put, you can postpone your purchase without it requiring the game to be delayed, so you can't really use that as a reason for the game delay to be a "good thing."
Ok, better stated : It's one less game that I feel compelled to purchase this year in a crowded market, and it's one that I can look forward to playing and discussing mid next year. Better? ;)

51|RandoM

08-04-2007, 06:09 PM

Ok, better stated : It's one less game that I feel compelled to purchase this year in a crowded market, and it's one that I can look forward to playing and discussing mid next year. Better? ;)

Yeah, that works. It isn't so much that it is good that the game is delayed as it is bad that you don't have enough self control when it comes to your gaming habits.

:D:D:D:D:D

Gorvi

08-04-2007, 06:10 PM

Yeah, that works. It isn't so much that it is good that the game is delayed as it is bad that you don't have enough self control when it comes to your gaming habits.

:D:D:D:D:D
Hey, I won't deny that. :)

Deadend

08-04-2007, 06:44 PM

Maybe if GTA IV releases late spring/early summer and sells fucktons, it will cause game companies to quit trying to overload the fall with games. Now that would be good news.

Rafer

08-04-2007, 07:22 PM

Maybe if GTA IV releases late spring/early summer and sells fucktons, it will cause game companies to quit trying to overload the fall with games. Now that would be good news.

It's like the movie industry, for decades they thought the fall was the only good time for movies and summers were a waste, then Jaws and Star Wars came along and they realized the summer was indeed a good time for movies. Then this year Ghost Rider opened huge in February and some producers said now they'll try releasing big budget films earlier in the year. Space stuff out, movie producers aren't idiots but it's taken them decades to figure that out.

KJAX

08-04-2007, 07:23 PM

Couldn't you say the same thing about every delayed game? What about the good news we've had with Duke Nuken Forever for the last 10 years? These delays are great!

Speaking of DNF, I do believe the game will be released within the next 3 years. I have no doubt it could be released sooner but that would require an outside studio like Human Head to take over development.

And yes, I call this the "Prey" factor. And how long was it in development hell?

Spigot

08-04-2007, 08:11 PM

The funny thing is, GTA IV this fall was already a non-issue for me. I just don't have the time to play something that big with all of the other games. As Random said, it's not like we'll have a hard time finding this.

And as for not selling next-gen consoles, we do have some little games like Halo 3 coming out this fall. I'm sure that might move one or two units.

pseudopseudo

08-05-2007, 03:57 AM

Ok, maybe it is good news then. Wow, if we're lucky they'll delay it again in March for 6 more months. And if we're really really really lucky they'll keep delaying every 6 months for the next 10 years like Duke Nuken Forever...

Nope, it's still bad news, no matter how you spin it whether you've paid for it in advance or not. :D

*LOL* That's not the point I was trying to make either.

I'm not saying that it's good news necessarily, I was just saying that the comparison was off. I don't think it's good *or* bad news, myself.

Given, I probably won't have the time or money to play GTA IV until everyone else has had their fill, so I guess I don't care as much. :D

mrnoj

08-05-2007, 04:25 AM

Space stuff out, movie producers aren't idiots but it's taken them decades to figure that out.

Wait, hold the presses... they're not?

Releasing a big game in the late Winter or even Spring might help some big gaming companies to figure out what Rafer was talking about... people play games all year round. :eek: Crazy isn't it? A big Spring release would be great, kids are home all summer long, releasing something that's kid/teen friendly around that time of year would do really well. But who am I to talk... I'm just another gamer.

JCtheMC

08-05-2007, 06:51 AM

One problem everyone is going to have to deal with is the fact that GTA will sell a fuckton of 360's and PS3's. I can imagine a lot of consumers delaying their purchase of a console to december or even 2008 because of this news. Right now, every developer wants as much consoles out there as possible, and GTA's delay is holding back sales.

51|RandoM

08-05-2007, 09:41 AM

Maybe if GTA IV releases late spring/early summer and sells fucktons, it will cause game companies to quit trying to overload the fall with games. Now that would be good news.

You're blaming the wrong people.

You know the number one group of people to blame for the fall/winter deluge of games? The consumers.

Ever hear of Black Friday or Christmas?

They're releasing the games during that time for the simple reason that that is when the most people are out there spending the most money.

Take summer on the other hand, no over-commercialized religious holidays, and plenty of nice weather so we don't stay inside all day playing couch potato.

Your Good Twin

08-05-2007, 10:09 AM

And in our other top stories, scientists have released two new reports today saying cakes are delicious and bullets hurt when entering the body at high speeds. Stay tuned for details.

Sir Kodiak

08-05-2007, 10:59 AM

There's only one games on that list that I'm actually glad to see get less competition: Bioshock. I feel that putting that much time into art direction and atmosphere is something that we'll either get to see more of or less of depending on how well Bioshock does. I think it would have done well anyways, but I want everyone on the planet to buy a copy. All the others, even if I'm interested in playing them, I feel like I could be the only person to buy them and I'd still enjoy them. The others may not get a sequel if they do really badly, but I feel like Bioshock has a whole type of game resting on its shoulders. Of course, some of this may be coming from my being something of an Irrational Games fan. It also may come from my not doing a lot of multiplayer online against people I don't know, so I'm not too worried about whether, for example, there'll be a lot of other people playing Army of Two; I know who I'll be playing that with, and it's going to be split-screen.

I do feel like some of those games didn't really need the help. If the reviews hold up, Assassin's Creed and Heavenly Sword should have been massive anyways, particularly with the push Sony is giving Heavenly Sword as an exclusive system-seller. At least the website was clever enough to not put Halo 3 on the list ;)

Probably the biggest change for me with the GTA IV delay is that I was currently wavering on what would be my post-finals obsession: GTA IV or Mass Effect, and this settles that.

Jack B

08-05-2007, 12:45 PM

*LOL* That's not the point I was trying to make either.

I'm not saying that it's good news necessarily, I was just saying that the comparison was off. I don't think it's good *or* bad news, myself.

Given, I probably won't have the time or money to play GTA IV until everyone else has had their fill, so I guess I don't care as much. :D

Yeah, I understand. It's true with furniture you do typically pay in advance and with a software game you "may" pre-order, but most don't pay as much of a deposit...

However, it's the same basic idea. You expect something to be of a certain quality delivered on a certain date. I don't understand the logic of saying, "oh, good. The quality was going to suck, so I'm happy now...".

I'd rather it ship on time with the expected quality and you, the consumer decide if you want to buy it 6 months or 10 years later. Duke Nukem fans don't have much choice and neither do GTA IV fans. Rockstar took the choice away with the delay.

KingGorilla

08-05-2007, 12:48 PM

I do not think that there is one reason for the "delay." I think we all know that the largest one is the sluggish adoption of next gen hardware. Rockstar and Take 2 need to sell 10 million copies of GTA(and that is not an exaggeration). So much of the publisher is wrapped up on their flagship's success. They would need an absolutely unheard of attach rate right now to get the numbers that they expect/need.

Although my favorite false theory is that the delay is because they want to launch a Wii, PS3, and 360 version all at once.

Spigot

08-05-2007, 08:24 PM

I'd rather it ship on time with the expected quality and you, the consumer decide if you want to buy it 6 months or 10 years later. Duke Nukem fans don't have much choice and neither do GTA IV fans. Rockstar took the choice away with the delay.I can't disagree more. I'd much rather they delay a game to fix it than release it with bugs and other elements of a rushed game. Why do you think Blizzard games are so polished? Because they don't try to hit a particular release date. I do get disappointed when a game I'm looking forward to gets delayed but I've played enough half-finished games over the years that I'm much more patient and willing to wait on a game.

Now, if the 360 version is done and the PS3 one needs further tweaking, it would be nice if they'd release the 360 version and tell PS3 owners that they'll just have to wait. Or vice versa. Holding up all of the various versions of the game because one platform's coding is tricky/taking longer/whatever is annoying. But if the game proper isn't finished yet, just take the time to get it polished and then release it.

None~

08-05-2007, 08:56 PM

*opinion*
Personally I feel that this will make the game much more worthy of the consumers purchase. As said before the more time the spent to get all the bugs out the better. I still remember the bug vice city that would piss me off to the point of breaking a controller or two. This game is going to sell like a yeti that had 12 condoms of coke pop in his stomach. It’s going to be crazy. And I don’t see this delay hurting anything but console sales (at that is only temporary) I am no R* fan by any means but this is still one of my top 10 games to pick up.. I would also like to say that R* might be making the right choice of one spreading out of releases, making the game *perfect*, adding more features. If there are only a few things that are wrong they can use the rest of the time to polish the game up. Oh and lastly I must blame the PS3's 30 FPS lock on this !!:) Joking but it seems like Frame rate is a problem facing the big black beast.

MitchyD

08-06-2007, 02:18 AM

No Metroid, Mario, and Smash? Retarded CVG people.

Who would have thought that they wouldn't include Wii games when GTA IV isn't coming out for Wii... HOW FOOLISH.

I did this same article about the same time, the same way, at GameStooge.com...

Jack B

08-06-2007, 08:14 AM

I can't disagree more. I'd much rather they delay a game to fix it than release it with bugs and other elements of a rushed game. Why do you think Blizzard games are so polished? Because they don't try to hit a particular release date. I do get disappointed when a game I'm looking forward to gets delayed but I've played enough half-finished games over the years that I'm much more patient and willing to wait on a game.

A couple people seem to be missing the "expected quality" part of my comments...

I keep saying it's a disappointment to delay a game, because the "expectation is the have a quality product ship on time". How would your scenario apply to what I'm saying? Once you get "the expected quality" part of my message wrong all the rest of your reply is like a Rossana Rossana Danna monolougue. It just doesn't apply to what I said. And for the record, I do agree it's better to delay it and get it right, but that has little to do with the disappointment from the fact they didn't get it right when they said they would... ;)

Of course I'd rather see a quality product, but the expectation is that's what you'll get on the expected ship date. A delay to make it a quality product is a disappointment. It was supposed to be that on the ship date, not a date 6 months or 10 years in the future. That's the disappointment.

I 'll post my original post again below, for reference. I bolded the "expected quality" part.

Originally Posted by Jack B
I'd rather it ship on time with the expected quality and you, the consumer decide if you want to buy it 6 months or 10 years later. Duke Nukem fans don't have much choice and neither do GTA IV fans. Rockstar took the choice away with the delay.

Here's another version with using furniture to get the point across. I bolded the same "expectation of good condition" part.

Originally Posted by Jack B
Somehow, I wanted my bedroom set in good condition on Friday. waiting 6 more months isn't good news, IMO. You have to be a pretty damn big fanboy of Broyhill to call your wife and try and convince her it's good news...

Spigot

08-06-2007, 08:50 AM

A couple people seem to be missing the "expected quality" part of my comments...

I keep saying it's a disappointment to delay a game, because the "expectation is the have a quality product ship on time". How would your scenario apply to what I'm saying? Once you get "the expected quality" part of my message wrong all the rest of your reply is like a Rossana Rossana Danna monolougue. It just doesn't apply to what I said. And for the record, I do agree it's better to delay it and get it right, but that has little to do with the disappointment from the fact they didn't get it right when they said they would... ;)

Of course I'd rather see a quality product, but the expectation is that's what you'll get on the expected ship date. A delay to make it a quality product is a disappointment. It was supposed to be that on the ship date, not a date 6 months or 10 years in the future. That's the disappointment.Well, duh. Of course everyone would love a perfect product on the exact date they said it would ship. That's a given. I think the problem is that devs decide to announce a set-in-stone ship date far too early, thusly getting the hopes up of everyone.

People just need to get used to a bit of disappointment when their favourite games ends up being delayed. It's annoying, but it's a fact of life in the business. Maybe devs and publishers will finally get it through their heads that announcing a game (and a release date) when it's in the pre-pre-pre-Alpha stage isn't the best strategy in the long term. I'd rather they have the game almost finished and then set a release date. They'd have more than enough time (hopefully) to finish ironing out all of the bugs and still hit the release date.

I don't really think the furniture store analogy really works unless you're talking about custom made furniture, which again hits on the same thing. Of course you'd be disappointed when your custom built mahogany dinner table takes an extra 6 months to make due to the shortage of linseed oil to polish it properly, but when again it comes down to do you want it done now or do you want it done right? If it's not something you're having made custom for you, get your money back and go to the next store down the road and buy the floor model.

Spigot

08-06-2007, 08:58 AM

I'd rather it ship on time with the expected quality and you, the consumer decide if you want to buy it 6 months or 10 years later. Duke Nukem fans don't have much choice and neither do GTA IV fans. Rockstar took the choice away with the delay.And just to address your quote, what exactly are you saying here?

I just don't understand what the choice is that you feel has been denied fans. Is it that we, the consumers, should be the ones who decide if a game is good enough or not? If it's done or not? I think that has happened enough times in the past when games are released to hit a ship date at what one could argue is the expected quality only to fall far short of what fans expect.

I guess the crux of your arguement is that we, as fans, should never be disappointed. If that's it, well, I wish I could live in your utopian dream world :)

Jack B

08-06-2007, 10:01 AM

And just to address your quote, what exactly are you saying here?

I just don't understand what the choice is that you feel has been denied fans. Is it that we, the consumers, should be the ones who decide if a game is good enough or not? If it's done or not? I think that has happened enough times in the past when games are released to hit a ship date at what one could argue is the expected quality only to fall far short of what fans expect.

I guess the crux of your arguement is that we, as fans, should never be disappointed. If that's it, well, I wish I could live in your utopian dream world :)

Hmmm, this just doesn't seem that complicated. The choice is the same one Random spoke about earlier. If a game ships on time with the expected quality vs the same game with the same quality being shipped 6 months later then you have a choice of when to buy it during the next 6 months. If it doesn't ship you have no choice, you must wait 6 months to buy it.

What's so complicated about this? :confused:

Maybe you are thinking, that all games get better the longer it takes to ship. That's not exactly true. Rarely it seems does a game have all the features a developer wants. They are eventually just told by the publisher, "that's it, you're done, ship it". Delaying a product is more often done because they are having problems. It doesn't mean they decided to add features, it typically means, they can't even get the ones they promised or planned on working.

Jack B

08-06-2007, 10:06 AM

Well, duh. Of course everyone would love a perfect product on the exact date they said it would ship. That's a given. I think the problem is that devs decide to announce a set-in-stone ship date far too early, thusly getting the hopes up of everyone.

Ummm, I never said everyone expects a perfect product. They expect the game they were told about on the date they were told it would ship. Perfect isn't a normal expectation in this day and age.

As for your "duh" comment. I'd agree it is a "duh" of course it's a disappointment, but everytime a product is delayed a number of people invariably say, "Good, I'm glad it's delayed...". I'd say the majority of those comments are trying to spin something good out of bad news. That's why I posted about this is a disappointment.

If you say it's a "duh", then I say it should be disappointing to the vast vast majority of people. Simple enough concept...

Jack B

08-06-2007, 10:11 AM

Of course you'd be disappointed when your custom built mahogany dinner table takes an extra 6 months to make due to the shortage of linseed oil to polish it properly, but when again it comes down to do you want it done now or do you want it done right?

Good God. Is this a joke. Am I being Punked or on Candid Camera??? Spigot, I'm not mad or anything, but this is killing me... :D

I've already said, if the choice is ship now with shoddy quality or ship later and get it right, I'd take "get it right", but for God's sake that's not what I said.

Hear again is a previous comment explaining my position. This thread was Titled, "...Not all bad news". It isn't all bad, but it's a disappointment. No big deal, but I'll probably not comment next time. It's easier.

Originally Posted by Jack B
I'd rather it ship on time with the expected quality and you, the consumer decide if you want to buy it 6 months or 10 years later. Duke Nukem fans don't have much choice and neither do GTA IV fans. Rockstar took the choice away with the delay.

If it's of "expected quality" there is no reason to wait 6 months to "get it right", because it was supposed to "be right" on the ship date announced.

If it's not of "expected quality" and they need to get it right, that's a completely different question.

Spigot

08-06-2007, 10:21 AM

If it's of "expected quality" there is no reason to wait 6 months to "get it right", because it was supposed to "be right" on the ship date announced.

If it's not of "expected quality" and they need to get it right, that's a completely different question.

See, that's what I was having trouble understanding. Yes, if the game is as good as it's going to get and they just delay it for the sake of delaying it, then I agree. I'd rather they just release it when the game is done instead of delaying it for something like the fall rush or what have you.

Honestly, you just weren't being clear before. Expected quality isn't the clearest statement in the world. I guess I also assumed that there were actual technical and other issues that led to GTA IV being delayed, not that it was just done on a whim.

And as for the duh thing, I think the reason it was being spun positively here is because people are already complaining about how many good to great games are already coming out this fall. Having something like the monstrosity that GTA IV is coming out is just more strain on our wallet AND it could lead to something that isn't an established IP getting lost in the shuffle. Remember a few years ago when Beyond Good & Evil got lost in the deluge? I think that's why people were saying it's not all bad news.

Granted, they almost need to delay about 5 more of the games slated to come out this fall to ensure that nothing gets lost in the shuffle.

Jack B

08-06-2007, 10:43 AM

Honestly, you just weren't being clear before. Expected quality isn't the clearest statement in the world.

OK, if you want to say it was me being unclear and not you just not getting it, I guess that's your call, but what else would "expected quality" mean?

Spigot

08-06-2007, 11:12 AM

OK, if you want to say it was me being unclear and not you just not getting it, I guess that's your call, but what else would "expected quality" mean?That's the whole thing. What DOES expected quality mean?

I think you should have replaced 'of expected quality' with the word 'finished' or 'done'.

If it's finished there is no reason to wait 6 months to "get it right", because it was supposed to "be right" on the ship date announced.

If it's not finished and they need to get it right, that's a completely different question.See? Much clearer and I could have avoided 12 posts where you and I get more and more confused at each other :)

Semantic confusion for the lose!

Jack B

08-06-2007, 11:22 AM

That's the whole thing. What DOES expected quality mean?

I think you should have replaced 'of expected quality' with the word 'finished' or 'done'.

See? Much clearer and I could have avoided 12 posts where you and I get more and more confused at each other :)

Semantic confusion for the lose!

Clearer to you maybe, but it is not more clear. Expected quality is the quality you expect. Not that really that confusing.

I used expected quality, because publishers/developers always say it's done/finished when it ships, but the consumer is told/promised many things prior to ship date.

We get tons of posts after a product is done/finished from users screaming about it has bugs, it's not 1080p, they stripped out this feature and that feature. The publisher/developer won't admit it isn't done/finished, but the consumer complains it wasn't done/finished. It needed more work, bug fixes, etc.

Expected quality is the quality/features the consumer "expects" from the finished/done game based upon the publishers press releases, statements etc, prior to the ship date. That's what we expect on ship date, not an unfinished game, that was shipped anyway. Done/finished is often defined differently by publishers/developers than us, the consumer.

Hopefully, you see the distinction between done/finished and expected quality. Expected quality expresses my meaning better, IMO.

Spigot

08-06-2007, 11:34 AM

I think that a problem with the expected quality argument is that it ends up turning into the Fable syndrome. On the one hand, I (and many others) thought it was a perfectly fine game on its own. However, if you compared the finished product to the hyperbolic press releases and promises made by Molyneaux over the course of its development, then you were bound to be disappointed.

I think that if the game box or final feature list doesn't match up to what is actually in the game, then we as consumers have every right to complain. That's just misleading. However devs shouldn't be held hostage by feature creep. If they did that, they'd never release anything.

It seems that we're actually both arguing the same side of this debate only with different jargon. But now that I know what your definition of expected quality vs. finished/done means, I can decypher your other posts and it all is starting to make sense!

Jack B

08-06-2007, 11:46 AM

But now that I know what your definition of expected quality vs. finished/done means, I can decypher your other posts and it all is starting to make sense!

Sometimes, I like write posts like Daniel Brown writes books. You need the cypher. ;)

Glad once you figured out the cypher, it turns out I was actually making sense all along. :)

Zanzibar

08-06-2007, 12:53 PM

GTA IV delayed is bad news for the industry, at least those parts of it trying to put next-gen consoles into the market, and the companies trying to sell software for those platforms.

Potentially millions of 360 and PS3 hardware units that would've been sold due to the release of GTA IV will now not be sold in time for the holidays, which will make for lower sales all around when it comes to next gen software.

Everybody loses except for those in bed primarily with Nintendo.

I think Microsoft has the most to lose. If you consider that the GTA series is a true system-seller, there's an army of X360 AAA titles available this Christmas that would tilt the balance for those who haven't bought either system. By the time GTA comes out, the PS3 will have closed the distance, making it less of a no-brainer.