Support NeoGAF

[StreetsofBeige]

You got some games on your watch list coming out soon. You cant wait to play them. Uh oh, there's rumour the game has some sketchy final QA. The game might need around another year of fixing up to be slick.

The game maker hasnt said anything about it, but it's about time they make a choice to go gold or delay the game to fix notable bugs and polish it up. Which one you prefer?

1. Release now and bring on the patches.

2. Release it later. Tidy it up boys. I can wait it out.

 

[Danjin44]

That depends how bad is the "sketchy" part, if anything like CP2077 then I rather wait but if its like texture issue in FF7R then I can still enjoy the game.

 

[Three]

I'd prefer a polished Beaver.
There is no reason why a game should be sketchy. If it's sketchy then I simply don't care about the game unless it's recommended to me.

 

[NahaNago]

Depends on the developer and game. Most games come out mostly okay so I guess I'll go with sketchy now.

 

[BlackTron]

I've developed an impressive degree of patience in games. Too many come out than you can get to anyway. We all have backlogs. Even if you buy a few games day one, there are 100 more that will begin to mature while you're playing it.

I tend to buy Nintendo games that I'm hyped for day one because I know that usually they ship a finished-ass game at the outset. Good to play while waiting for the patches, price cuts, dlc sales and complete editions of everything else.

 

[killatopak]

Polish it.


You know what they say about first impressions.

 

[Touch fuzZy. get BizZay]

Polished for life

 

[fatmarco]

I would rather polished but I would prefer if developers would be more upfront about the development issues they come into so we at least have a better understanding of why the games are being delayed.

If they were honest and explained why I think most people would be pretty understandable although I don't think I can say the same for their shareholders.

 

[Virt McPolygon]

Polished. Marketing departments are the worst.

 

[rofif]

Not waiting. It's not like patches ever 180 on a game.
If the game is good, I might want to replay it maybe year later. Then it's nice to see what has changed

 

[Team Andromeda]

That depends how bad is the "sketchy" part, if anything like CP2077 then I rather wait but if its like texture issue in FF7R then I can still enjoy the game.

Quite. I also don't think many developers actually release a game that they know isn't finished well bar SEGA (Daytona, Clockwork Knight, Sonic O6, Sonic Unleashed Ect). I really enjoyed many games that people who never owned or played like to rip about because some nob on YouTube tells them soI really enjoyed AC: Unity on its launch even with its bugs, the scope of that game many games have yet to match and playing in Co-OP online on Christmas Day was an ace laugh. I also enjoyed Mass Effect Andromeda too and many others.

 

[Shubh_C63]

I subscribed to patientgamers. Seriously its the best solo experience and win for your wallet.

You do miss out on the first few months hype talk.

 

[jigglet]

Depends on the game. Games with very defined scope and vision: polish first.

Games that have very complicated layers of gameplay systems and mechanics: polish later.

An example of this is R6 Siege. It's a super complicated game...with dozens of abilities interacting with each other and asymmetric gameplay, in addition to a variety of other complex sub-gameplay systems all mixed together. It could never have been polished day 1 as the core game was only "found" after a few years on the market. It was buggy, it was glitchy, but honestly I don't see how such a complicated and groundbreaking game could have been launched any other way. As we've seen over the years, even the smallest tweak to one of the mechanics can nearly bring the house of cards to the ground - how could you possibly perfect that on day 1? I've been playing for 6 years and sometimes I'm on it for up to 12+ hours a day, yet I'm still learning new mechanics to this day. It's such a deep beast of a game. There is no engine in world that would have been flexible enough to adapt to 6 years worth of gameplay changes and new gadgets without imploding. It's one of the few games I will defend for launching rough. It's the sort of game that could only have been stabilised and then refined AFTER it was released. How could an engine developer possibly anticipate the sheer variety of changes required? They simply couldn't have.

 

[GymWolf]

Polished later.

 

[AV]

I'm impatient in that I want a game the day it's out - but I want it to be out when it's ready.

Polish that turd up. I don't get paid to beta test your shit.

 

[German Hops]

I prefer polish, whether it's knobs or videogames.

 

[junguler]

waiting is always better

 

[CeeJay]

The urge you have to play the very latest game at release is simply the marketing team succeeding in their task. A good game is still a good game a year or more later and there is always something else to play. If you wait a year or so to play a game then you get all the benefits of everyone else's hindsight, all the bug fixes as well as getting it at a cheaper price.

I have avoided paying a fortune and avoided playing a lot of mediocre games that were all going to be GOTY before they released by following these simple rules.

 

[DGrayson]

Ill complain about a delayed game and Ill complain about bugs.

Im a bitch ass consumer like that!

 

[Umbasaborne]

Im fine with polished later, but its also on publishers to avoid announcing release dates until the game is actually ready or close to it. I hate it when a game gets two some times three delays. To me, that reeks of the publisher trying to grab pre orders instead of a game being given a realistic release time frame from the start. Cyberpunk for instance should have been a holiday 2021 game. But because they announced that initial april date, they got themselves stuck in 2020, and faced a lot of backlash because of the numerous delays.