[Loudninja]

SE has PR people whose job it is to interface with the media, so SE really should have commented in some way when contacted. Even if all they said was that they didn't have anything to say, it would have been better than not responding.

They don't have to comment on anything.

[Muffdraul]

It's not quite that simple. Oftentimes, the exact release date for a game can't be determined until a month or two before the game goes gold. If developers were to keep the entire project a secret up to that point, the design/development process would really suffer from the lack of external feedback. Developers take press/customer/focus group feedback throughout the development process and use it to improve the design of their game. If developers just created everything within their own closed box without any external feedback until release, you can bet that a lot of games would be out of touch with players' standards and expectations. Now obviously the situation with Versus is extreme and indeed ridiculous at this point, but in general, it is to the developer's benefit to have their project played and viewed by people external to them at various points throughout the development process.

It is that simple, plenty of developers announce the release date when they announce the game as standard practice. Very recent example is Assassin's Creed 3. Fine, maybe once in a while there's an exception that proves the rule. In this case, none of the caveats you bring up apply to FFvsXIII. The entire thing has been a six year exercise in PR mismanagement. It's literally a joke, has been for several years already.

[APZonerunner]

I will say Square Enix has been bizarre over this entire issue with their responses.

I asked them for comment on Friday - multiple branches - and was asked to wait - they'd look into it. I asked yesterday and was told no comment. I asked again today - after Wada's statement - and got "no comment" back again. When I linked to Wada's statement, they wouldn't comment on that either. So in that sense I agree with the Kotaku set; what's the PR message meant to be here?

Chances are PR have just been briefed by people higher up to 'no comment' everything related to Versus, but why not just be more open this once? Answer: Square Enix

[BlazingDarkness]

This is what actually pissed me off, the rumor I don't care about, it inspired SE to say something about the game at least, it fired up VersusGAF and we've had nothing to talk about for a long time, but to act like Kotaku are victims of SE's ineffective PR is disgusting.

I agree with your sentiment here, Schreier's post in particular is very childish, SE have no obligation at all to respond to Kotaku's inquiry

[Aeana]

They don't have to comment on anything.

They don't have to. I never said they did. In fact, I very clearly stated right in the post you quoted that saying "no comment" would have been better than simply not responding. Doing what they did resulted in what happened. Cause and effect.

I will say Square Enix has been bizarre over this entire issue, though. I asked them for comment again today - after Wada's statement - and got "no comment" back. When I linked to Wada's statement, they wouldn't comment on that either. So in that sense I agree with the Kotaku set; what's the PR message meant to be here?

That just underscores the problem with the PR departments at game companies. There often is no communication, so you get different branches saying different things.

[Seda]

SE has PR people whose job it is to interface with the media, so SE really should have commented in some way when contacted. Even if all they said was that they didn't have anything to say, it would have been better than not responding.

Well, they did respond once.

"When Kotaku contacted Square Enix about whether or not Final Fantasy Versus XIII was still in development, the game maker released the following statement: "We have no information on the status of Final Fantasy Versus XIII, but will be sure to update you as it becomes available." Keep in mind, I wasn't asking for an update per se, I simply asked if Square Enix was still making a game it had already announced six years ago. Square Enix did not reply to Kotaku's requests for clarification regarding whether Versus was still in development or not."

[Persona86]

SE has PR people whose job it is to interface with the media, so SE really should have commented in some way when contacted. Even if all they said was that they didn't have anything to say, it would have been better than not responding.

How many people do you think contacts them on rumours every day? I'm guessing a lot, and they're usual response is that they do not comment or speculate on rumours, which means it's a waste of time to try and ask them in the first place. They got lucky this time because the rumour grew too much.

[Jackben]

The more I read about how the rumor supposedly came about the less it makes sense.

Square Enix simply didn't deem the rumor worthy of respsonse. They don't need to equivocate.

[Inorigo]

She was quite passive about it, she just said her source heard very differently, and look how it all turned out. A rumor means it's from an unverified source, which is exactly what I said, a free pass from any journalistic standard. As for them making it up, if they made it up, or they reported someone making it up makes no difference to their value as a source for anything. They're either liars, or echoing liars, one might be more morally valuable, but it's equally valueless to readers.

Fair enough, but I think "they're liars or echoing liars" makes this situation out to be black or white, which it's clearly not. A few things in Kotaku's report could very well be true and SE didn't exactly put out a press release or even an official statement. There's a couple tweets from the CEO on his personal account. Remember, SE is capable of lying as well. That must be noted.

[BlazingDarkness]

SE has PR people whose job it is to interface with the media, so SE really should have commented in some way when contacted. Even if all they said was that they didn't have anything to say, it would have been better than not responding.

They did respond, with basically a blanket 'no comment' response.

[MrDenny]

I love how indignant the Kotaku people are acting on Twitter about how Square doesn't feel the need to immediately deny every rumor they make up.

Didn't mind their rumor, but really?
Just accept the rumor is false and apologize.
Don't like how they're spinning this back on SE.

[Hindle]

And how exactly has he done that? He's repeatedly said that he wants to talk about it but he can't due to Square holding back on info. So, unless you think that he's just lying about that (and there's no reason to think that he is), then what is he doing to damage their reputation?

His general approach to videogames. The way he designs characters has become a turn off for a western audience. He has never evolved as a designer and to be honest I dont think he has what it takes to make a modern RPG. FF needs a massive reboot starting from the ground up and he just isn't the guy to do it.

[APZonerunner]

That just underscores the problem with the PR departments at game companies. There often is no communication, so you get different branches saying different things.

This isn't my experience generally, though. SE has some of the best communications between Japanese and Western departments in PR terms, I've found. They've learned a lot from Eidos, too, where for the longest time US dev teams and releases (Crystal Dynamics, for instance) answered to an office based in the UK. A skill set is developed there that persisted through the buy out and assimilation of Eidos' assets, and SE has learned from it. Indeed, Crystal and such still answer to SE Europe, not SEA, afaik. The situation with Versus is, by my measurement, an outlier and different to the norm. One can't help but wonder if there's a particular reason or if there's just been a breakdown of communication.

[DCharlie]

I will say Square Enix has been bizarre over this entire issue, though. I asked them for comment again today - after Wada's statement - and got "no comment" back. When I linked to Wada's statement, they wouldn't comment on that either. So in that sense I agree with the Kotaku set; what's the PR message meant to be here?

Um - aren't they just doing a good PR job?

Versus had gone quiet - now internet forums are lit up again about it. Plus if they -do- have some brand new master plan for the game then bringing info up about it now possibly works in their favour.

How Shyamalantastic would it be if it turns out SE PR deliberately leaked out the news to Kotaku? lol.

[APZonerunner]

Um - aren't they just doing a good PR job? Versus had gone quiet - now internet forums are lit up again about it. Plus if they -do- have some brand new master plan for the game then bringing info up about it now possibly works in their favour. How Shyamalantastic would it be if it turns out SE PR deliberately leaked out the news to Kotaku? lol.

Well, I expected when Wada's off-the-cuff statement hit PR would be briefed to follow the line that he said and possibly even point to his tweet; stranger things have happened. But alas, no. Maybe it relates to Versus not being properly announced for the West. I'd love to know if JP PR are pointing to that statement.

[Projectjustice]

The game still isnt coming out.

[StuBurns]

Fair enough, but I think "they're liars or echoing liars" makes this situation out to be black or white, which it's clearly not. A few things in Kotaku's report could very well be true and SE didn't exactly put out a press release or even an official statement. There's a couple tweets from the CEO on his personal account. Remember, SE is capable of lying as well. That must be noted.

The single source for the story was either lying, or Wada is lying, very black and white. He/she comments on the morale of the team, there is no possible way they are legitimate if Versus had a regularly scheduled meeting recently. Black or white, right or wrong, true or false. It's a pretty pure dichotomy, whichever way you wish to articulate it.

[BlazingDarkness]

His general approach to videogames. The way he designs characters has become a turn off for a western audience. He has never evolved as a designer and to be honest I dont think he has what it takes to make a modern RPG. FF needs a massive reboot starting from the ground up and he just isn't the guy to do it.

It's not really the thread for it, but I'll just say that I disagree with you completely. I'd even go as far as to argue that Nomura's designs and input is what's most appealing to a western audience. And he's most certainly matured as a designer.

[boutdown]

The game still isnt coming out.

This is all I'm saying in my head while reading this thread.

[TheJollyCorner]

I will say Square Enix has been bizarre over this entire issue with their responses. I asked them for comment on Friday - multiple branches - and was asked to wait - they'd look into it. I asked yesterday and was told no comment. I asked again today - after Wada's statement - and got "no comment" back again. When I linked to Wada's statement, they wouldn't comment on that either. So in that sense I agree with the Kotaku set; what's the PR message meant to be here? Chances are PR have just been briefed by people higher up to 'no comment' everything related to Versus, but why not just be more open this once? Answer: Square Enix

Our Lord and Savior Sakaguchi-san would have none of this. NONE OF IT, I SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!~!@!@

I'm not an expert.

[Dragonzord]

I'm not one to defend Kotaku, but it's not like Square hasn't done a fucking awful job when it comes to this game. Why are some of you so happy to let them string you along like this? They may say it's not cancelled, but after as long as this has taken, it will never live up to the wait at this point.

[BlazingDarkness]

Well, I expected when Wada's off-the-cuff statement hit PR would be briefed to follow the line that he said and possibly even point to his tweet; stranger things have happened. But alas, no. Maybe it relates to Versus not being properly announced for the West. I'd love to know if JP PR are pointing to that statement.

Personally I think SE are being vague with responding to rumour simply because they don't want to draw attention to the game outside of a designated time, namely, TGS.

[SolidSnakex]

His general approach to videogames. The way he designs characters has become a turn off for a western audience. He has never evolved as a designer and to be honest I dont think he has what it takes to make a modern RPG. FF needs a massive reboot starting from the ground up and he just isn't the guy to do it.

Yet he's the one that created their last really successful franchise (Kingdom Hearts). And the games in which he has a hand in their development typically turn out to be good-very good games. But you want Square to get rid of him because some people don't like his character designs?

And i'm not sure why you bring him up when it comes to FF needing a massive reboot. What does he even have to do with that? He has never had a hand in the actual development of a mainline FF. He's generally just a character designer. And it's not like he selects himself to do the character designs for those games. They can easily go pick Naora, Yoshida or some other character designer if they want. You can't really expect him to say "No" when they tell him that they want him to do the designs for the game.

[DCharlie]

The single source for the story was either lying, or Wada is lying, very black and white. He/she comments on the morale of the team, there is no possible way they are legitimate if Versus had a regularly scheduled meeting recently. Black or white, right or wrong, true or false. It's a pretty pure dichotomy, whichever way you wish to articulate it.

I'm putting on my huge fakeotron-rumour-combination-helmet (deluxe edition) here but

*IF* FFVersus is now FF15 - then -everyone- got it wrong/fibbed but in small amounts : FFVersus -would- be cancelled, but it also would not.

Re: Morale - Believe me - regular scheduled meetings on a project running for 6 years? I'd be hoping SE have super reinforced glass in their building because that would drive anyone nuts. I know they are a necessity but... at some point....

anyways, i don't think anything is going to be truly clear until TGS.

[Jackben]

I will laugh if this isn't at TGS. and then cry

How can they not show something at TGS after this?

[Dragonzord]

How can they not show something at TGS after this?

Very easily.

[LongDongJunon]

How can they not show something at TGS after this?

Pretty easily I think.

Edit: Wooooooooo.

[kayos90]

Very easily.

Yeah. S-E has shown nothing to very little and held it off for some event at a later time. Or some other event. It's not the first time they've done this.

[Famassu]

That's good to know if true. I have to disagree about your second statement though. I think 2 games at once with 2 teams is a tried and tested development process that has worked very well for the majority of high profile Western developers. Concentrate on one title while doing the ground work on the second, release the first and then go into full production the the second, while beginning pre production on your next title. That allows a company to avoid development hell on one game because they announce it to early while juggling to many other projects.

Saying Square Enix should only have two games in development simultaneously is almost the same as saying Sony or Nintendo should only have two games in development simultaneously. Square Enix needs to release more than one game in a year.

Besides, they already DO what you want them to do. The production of their games advances exactly like that. They always have small teams begin projects and they'll move more people to finish the games that are the nearest to completion (i.e. the game is put into "full production", which FFVsXIII should have entered in ~Q3 2011). I'm getting tired of repeating this, so I'll put it this way (a rought timeline for Versus XIII's development I've pieced together from interview tidbits and comments, not saying this is 100% accurate but I've followed this game VERY closely, so I don't think this has too many errors):

Q2 2006: Versus XIII is announced. Development, however, is not begun for the next ~1,5 years because Nomura had just come off of Kingdom Hearts II's development so he was just in the beginning stages of planning for the game. He was also busy with numerous other projects and the KH team was put to work on different games.
2007: small tech team starts working on figuring out what they can do with the hardware they are working on, they do all kinds of tech demos that test the limits of what they can achieve with PS3 (they, at the very least, had world map & airship tests, and made the cutscene with Noctis & Stella at the party). Nomura & Co feel this is necessary before going on with the development of the game because they don't want to have to make any compromises to their plans for the game.
Early 2008: Crystal Tools are somewhat finished, so they begin working on the game
From mid-or-late 2008 to late 2009: the development team of Versus is put to help finish XIII, so development of Versus is put on hold for (over?) a year
From early 2010 to mid-2011: a relatively modest sized team is developing the game (I've gotten the impression it's been maybe in the range of 40-60 people, which is really small for a big-ass game like Versus XIII)
Mid 2010: we see the first glimpses of Versus XIII gameplay, very early (they didn't even have a somewhat ready command menu to show)
Sometime in Q3 2011: Nomura says they had recently entered "full production", meaning they build up the size of the team to just start churning out the content of the game, after having the basis of it all done. Oftentimes, for Square Enix games, this means the game is about 9-18 months away from release, depending on the platform & scope of the game (i.e. Type-0 was put into full production in early 2011 after 3rd Birthday's release, which the Type-0 team co-developed, 10 months before release)
September 2011: Nomura says the world of Versus XIII is at least somewhat complete and fully traversable, as he had just finished exploring it. However, it sounded like they still had to actually fill much of that world with content.

So, really, by the time we saw what we saw in the January 2011 trailer, Versus had been in development (outside a tech demo-y stage) for maybe 1,5 years or at most 2 years, with a relatively small team for the size of production it is and in this time they had made some pretty major design change decisions from their original plans for the game that set them back in development a bit (i.e. major changes to the overworld, decision to make/change a big part of story-advancing scenes at least somewhat interactive so that the player remains in control of the character instead of having to just sit there and watch them as cutscenes). So... really, the game has really been in development for about 3,5 years now (again, quite a lot of that with a small team and it hasn't been a 300 man team working on it all that time), and considering how big the game will seemingly be, how polished it will quite likely be and how great the audiovisual side of the game is, I don't think that's at all too unreasonable a development timeframe. Really, the only thing Square Enix has done wrong with the handling of Versus XIII is that they announced the game way too early. Had they not announced it in 2006 but maybe in 2011 with the 2011 trailer, people would probably just have assumed Nomura mostly worked on all of those Kingdom Hearts games and not be that whiny about how Square Enix is worthless for not getting one of their games out, when in fact Nomura has just wanted to be well prepared for the game's development instead of rushing into without having a full grasp of what they are working with.

Re: Morale - Believe me - regular scheduled meetings on a project running for 6 years? I'd be hoping SE have super reinforced glass in their building because that would drive anyone nuts. I know they are a necessity but... at some point....

No one has worked on this game for 6 years. Also, the last time Nomura spoke anything about the morale, it sounded like the morale was really GOOD. He said that the people around the office had a similar feeling that they had when they worked on Final Fantasy VII.

[BlazingDarkness]

The only reason Versus XIII would not be at TGS would be because they were to hold a separate event solely for the reveal at or around the same time

[Zoator]

It is that simple, plenty of developers announce the release date when they announce the game as standard practice. Very recent example is Assassin's Creed 3. Fine, maybe once in a while there's an exception that proves the rule. In this case, none of the caveats you bring up apply to FFvsXIII. The entire thing has been a six year exercise in PR mismanagement. It's literally a joke, has been for several years already.

Assassin's Creed 3 is a completely different case because it is just another iteration in a series that has established standards and mechanics. This is of course the case for most games of that nature (Call of Duty, Madden, etc.), as developers can mostly rely on their internal focus groups for feedback, and the development timeline is fairly predictable. However, for games that are actually trying to do something fundamentally different than what a company has done in the past (i.e. new systems, new mechanics, new worlds), it is much more difficult to predict the development timeline accurately, and much more important to receive external feedback in the process. How many big budget new IPs do you see revealed for the first time with a set release date?

Take a look at Blizzard, who obviously has an exceptional track record for releasing quality games (aside from the Diablo 3 debacle, which I would argue could have been avoided if they were more true to their usual methods). Blizzard almost always beta tests with consumers before release, and rarely, if ever, announces a release date prior to the beta launching. Because of this, they are able to incorporate the feedback they receive from players during the testing phases before committing to a launch. In Diablo 3's case, they severely restricted the portion of the game they were testing, and even cut a whole mode from the game in order to release it in a timely manner. If they received the feedback about the late game that they are getting now during the beta, we may have ended up with a better product at launch (as opposed to their mad scramble now to fix the issues through patches).

And yes, I am aware that Versus is an extreme and ridiculous case, as I mentioned in the second paragraph of the post that you quoted. That still doesn't mean that all games should be seen for the first time with a release date set in stone, unless you either want: A) products that haven't been optimized to players' standards, or B) a lot of delayed release dates :P.

[DCharlie]

Slight topic shift - I may not have been keeping up but what is the status of PS3 :

Last Remnant
FF14

are these still alive or did Square Enix officially cancel them?

I seem to recall something about FF14 being "almost finished" about a year ago

[Aeana]

Slight topic shift - I may not have been keeping up but what is the status of PS3 : Last Remnant FF14 are these still alive or did Square Enix officially cancel them? I seem to recall something about FF14 being "almost finished" about a year ago

Last Remnant PS3 is no longer alive.

FF14 PS3 will launch with/around FF14 2.0.

[Dragonzord]

The only reason Versus XIII would not be at TGS would be because they were to hold a separate event solely for the reveal at or around the same time

I think they'd have a lot of baseless faith in how much people still care about the game if they'd be willing to make an event for just one game.

[BlazingDarkness]

I think they'd have a lot of baseless faith in how much people still care about the game if they'd be willing to make an event for just one game.

I think your underestimating the amount of people that 'still care'

[DCharlie]

FF14 PS3 will launch with/around FF14 2.0.

thanks - i was about to edit in whether it was now tied to 2.0 - i'd imagine the reception to FF14 would have also played a part.

Last Remnant PS3 is no longer alive.

I guess my question is - did they officially say : This is canceled ? not that that particularly has any bearing but just curious

I think your underestimating the amount of people that 'still care'

so - how many people do you think care? I'm somewhat curious - i'm not a massive FF fan or , at least, haven't been for a while now so i'd actually be curious as to how excited people are outside of GAF. We are talking a 2-3million seller globally per platform?

[sublimit]

Some people here think we just discovered Kotaku yesterday and that we don't understand the difference between rumour and fact when the real issues here are the possibility of this being made up and the fact they posted a rumour from an untrusted source.

Their greediness for more hits made them risk whatever they have left from their credibility and they got ridiculed in the end.Well at least they got the hits they wanted so i guess it's not all bad for them.

[Aeana]

thanks - i was about to edit in whether it was now tied to 2.0 - i'd imagine the reception to FF14 would have also played a part. I guess my question is - did they officially say : This is canceled ? not that that particularly has any bearing but just curious

They never said flat-out that it's canceled, but Wada did comment during an investor's meeting something to the effect of "we have to consider profiability, and games that are released on another platform long after the original release don't often do well" or something like that, when asked about it.

[blowred]

maybe a reason for the delay is that they are going to release on more platforms like xbox or PC?

[BlazingDarkness]

so - how many people do you think care? I'm somewhat curious - i'm not a massive FF fan or , at least, haven't been for a while now so i'd actually be curious as to how excited people are outside of GAF. We are talking a 2-3million seller globally per platform?

Well, let's just put it this way, SE are holding an event basically to reveal the third installment of FFXIII, which I'd say we could all agree has somewhat limited expectations following the two previous games, both financially and critically - there is no reason to suggest Versus XIII wouldn't be given the same attention from SE, if not more.

As far as we're all aware, it's SE's last chance to have a big splash on this generation of home consoles

[Pranay_]

maybe a reason for the delay is that they are going to release on more platforms like xbox or PC?

Nope

[AB12]

Now lets start a rumor on when the game is going to be released so that SE can correct it.

[Zoe]

maybe a reason for the delay is that they are going to release on more platforms like xbox or PC?

Nomura said if that's going to happen, it won't be his team doing it. In other words, it shouldn't slow them down.

[randomkid]

I hope I answered your questions, though I get the feeling you don't really care what the answers are.

yo stephentotilo, thanks for checking in but it would be nice if you responded to more intelligent replies like stump's next time rather than wasting your efforts on posts like that.

also glad to see unnamed source teasing diminish, the only thing I really need to hear is some oblique advice from Aeana on whether it's a good idea for me to break down and order SMT1&2 from ebay or not, that's about it!

[Takao]

They never said flat-out that it's canceled, but Wada did comment during an investor's meeting something to the effect of "we have to consider profiability, and games that are released on another platform long after the original release don't often do well" or something like that, when asked about it.

Err, hasn't every 360 JRPG exclusive that has jumped ship to PS3 done better than the original release in Japan? Star Ocean 4 might not have, but that game had very poor word of mouth, where as Last Remnant was well regarded.

[jschreier]

I agree with your sentiment here, Schreier's post in particular is very childish, SE have no obligation at all to respond to Kotaku's inquiry

I don't recall saying Square Enix had an obligation to respond to Kotaku's inquiry. I just think it's fishy when a game company refuses to say "yes, we are still working on this game that we announced six years ago."

It's not like we asked them about the next Xbox, here. It's a game they've already announced. It is very weird that they'd say something like "we have no information on the status of Final Fantasy Versus XIII" instead of "yes, nothing has changed--we're still working on a game that we've already announced."

Just my personal opinion. (Hence why it was on my personal Twitter.)

[Aeana]

Err, hasn't every 360 JRPG exclusive that has jumped ship to PS3 done better than the original release in Japan? Star Ocean 4 might not have, but that game had very poor word of mouth, where as Last Remnant was well regarded.

"Although it's tough on the development side of things to say that you'll release a game on multiple platforms but end up not doing so, Square Enix has to think about profitability. If there's a gap in the release of multiple versions of a game, and if the first version didn't necessarily see such great success, they have to think that there won't be a change in performance on a new platform."

Talk to Wada.

[Skilletor]

I'm not one to defend Kotaku, but it's not like Square hasn't done a fucking awful job when it comes to this game. Why are some of you so happy to let them string you along like this? They may say it's not cancelled, but after as long as this has taken, it will never live up to the wait at this point.

Many of us don't quantify the amount of enjoyment we expect from something with the amount of time it takes for something to come out.

When it comes out, it comes out. I have plenty to do and play in the interim. My expectations don't change for the game just because it's taking longer to develop.

[SilverLunar]

so basically kotaku succeeded in luring wada to talk about the game...kotaku is good :p

Thats pretty much what i thought the whole purpose of the rumor was.

To me it is a good job form kotaku.

[Muffdraul]

Assassin's Creed 3 is a completely different case because it is just another iteration in a series that has established standards and mechanics. This is of course the case for most games of that nature (Call of Duty, Madden, etc.), as developers can mostly rely on their internal focus groups for feedback, and the development timeline is fairly predictable. However, for games that are actually trying to do something fundamentally different than what a company has done in the past (i.e. new systems, new mechanics, new worlds), it is much more difficult to predict the development timeline accurately, and much more important to receive external feedback in the process. How many big budget new IPs do you see revealed for the first time with a set release date? Take a look at Blizzard, who obviously has an exceptional track record for releasing quality games (aside from the Diablo 3 debacle, which I would argue could have been avoided if they were more true to their usual methods). Blizzard almost always beta tests with consumers before release, and rarely, if ever, announces a release date prior to the beta launching. Because of this, they are able to incorporate the feedback they receive from players during the testing phases before committing to a launch. In Diablo 3's case, they severely restricted the portion of the game they were testing, and even cut a whole mode from the game in order to release it in a timely manner. If they received the feedback about the late game that they are getting now during the beta, we may have ended up with a better product at launch (as opposed to their mad scramble now to fix the issues through patches). And yes, I am aware that Versus is an extreme and ridiculous case, as I mentioned in the second paragraph of the post that you quoted. That still doesn't mean that all games should be seen for the first time with a release date set in stone, unless you either want: A) products that haven't been optimized to players' standards, or B) a lot of delayed release dates :P.

You're a lot more lenient on this shit than I am. I think you're seriously overestimating the value of feedback that comes from the general public after a studio send a preview out into the wild. When they do pay attention, it's probably usually a mistake. e.g. I was right there with everyone else, braying like a jackass about how "lame" I thought the redesigned lead character of Infamous 2 looked. Insomniac listened to us, and the re-redesigned character in the final version was 10x worse, he looked like some kind of adult proto-fetus. They have QA depts. filled with people who are basically "average members of the public" who are brought in and put under NDA specifically to provide feedback. Public betas for online testing, sure, sure, obviously that's important. But overall in most cases, I really don't think it's as hard as you make it out to be to keep quiet until the game is close to being finished. They could do it, if they chose to manage the whole process better.