http://forums.midway.com/all_things_stranglehold/b10788/27380440/p1/?30
It seems that Stranglehold is delayed to Sept 30.
Anyone else tired of Midway's BS?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I'm relaxed, but I just don't like the fact that it was August 27th, then Sept 5th, now the 30th. They could at least give us some official system requirements.mo0ksi
Sure that's a bummer, but come on. Midway is a big developer/publisher, and the troubling trend with the big houses for years now has been the opposite problem: pushing games into the marketplace prematurely to satisfy business schedules. That's BS, if BS is what you're concerned about.
And it goes for information, too. You suggest that simply releasing system requirements might make it easier on fans... but wouldn't you rather it be accurate information?
Arguments like these make me wonder if the gaming world would be better if gamers didn't have access to any of this information--if every game that was released was a total surpise. Instead, we've got guys like you who (no offense) encourage publishers to prioritize schedules over production.
Take a look at the few good publishers/developers that are around now adays. ALot of them have fallen into the lets make a quick buck.
Midway, Epic, Crytek, GSC Gameworld, Valve, Vivendi, Monolith, Gearbox Software, Kaos Studios, Eidos Interactive, Petroglyph (guys who made C n C i think...), Io Interactive (hitman series),Ubisoft (some may argue that they are not but i have been happy with there products)....Im sure there are more that care to make a great game.
Shoot Crysis has been in development for 4 years and it shows. Before that it was Far Cry which was graphically and and in other areas ahead of most games out there.
Stalker was in development for 6 years and it shows. Its a great game and sure it had some minor glitches but they patched it and fixed alot of it.
If you want quality then you have to wait plain in simple. I'd rather patiently wait for a new game then play these 1 year wonders that get maybe 2 patches and don't work worth a darn.
Like EA all they care about is a buck after medal of honor and bf 1942 there games went tocrap
Infinity ward was good but then they decided to make a crap engine and look how bad there games have become.
So quit yourwhining about howgamedevsdelay stuff. It happens. I wouldn't want a buggy piece of crap game to play with.
Actually, a moderator on their forums stated that no such announcement of a Sept. 30th release date has been announced.
IGN is the only place that changed their released date in the game's profile.
Gamestop, Amazon and here at GameSpot the release date for PC is still saying Sept. 5th as the release date.
I don't think anyone really knows at this point.
It's extremely frustrating, especially for a game that was supposedly made primarily for/on PC (which makes this all-the-more confusing) that the PC version would be continually delayed like this, but it seems they're intent on treating PC gamers as "second-rate" and giving no demo and no information.
Not much we can do about, unfortunately.
For the Record, Every single Call of Duty game developed by infinity Ward have been amazing. It was all the knock-offs and side-developers that game the series somewhat of a mixed reputation.Take a look at the few good publishers/developers that are around now adays. ALot of them have fallen into the lets make a quick buck.
Midway, Epic, Crytek, GSC Gameworld, Valve, Vivendi, Monolith, Gearbox Software, Kaos Studios, Eidos Interactive, Petroglyph (guys who made C n C i think...), Io Interactive (hitman series),Ubisoft (some may argue that they are not but i have been happy with there products)....Im sure there are more that care to make a great game.
Shoot Crysis has been in development for 4 years and it shows. Before that it was Far Cry which was graphically and and in other areas ahead of most games out there.
Stalker was in development for 6 years and it shows. Its a great game and sure it had some minor glitches but they patched it and fixed alot of it.
If you want quality then you have to wait plain in simple. I'd rather patiently wait for a new game then play these 1 year wonders that get maybe 2 patches and don't work worth a darn.
Like EA all they care about is a buck after medal of honor and bf 1942 there games went tocrap
Infinity ward was good but then they decided to make a crap engine and look how bad there games have become.
So quit yourwhining about howgamedevsdelay stuff. It happens. I wouldn't want a buggy piece of crap game to play with.
Zippo_Fire
[QUOTE="Zippo_Fire"]For the Record, Every single Call of Duty game developed by infinity Ward have been amazing. It was all the knock-offs and side-developers that game the series somewhat of a mixed reputation.They really weren't amazing. CoD2 no matter what people say was just a sprayfight. CoD2 was more of an arcade WW2 game.Take a look at the few good publishers/developers that are around now adays. ALot of them have fallen into the lets make a quick buck.
Midway, Epic, Crytek, GSC Gameworld, Valve, Vivendi, Monolith, Gearbox Software, Kaos Studios, Eidos Interactive, Petroglyph (guys who made C n C i think...), Io Interactive (hitman series),Ubisoft (some may argue that they are not but i have been happy with there products)....Im sure there are more that care to make a great game.
Shoot Crysis has been in development for 4 years and it shows. Before that it was Far Cry which was graphically and and in other areas ahead of most games out there.
Stalker was in development for 6 years and it shows. Its a great game and sure it had some minor glitches but they patched it and fixed alot of it.
If you want quality then you have to wait plain in simple. I'd rather patiently wait for a new game then play these 1 year wonders that get maybe 2 patches and don't work worth a darn.
Like EA all they care about is a buck after medal of honor and bf 1942 there games went tocrap
Infinity ward was good but then they decided to make a crap engine and look how bad there games have become.
So quit yourwhining about howgamedevsdelay stuff. It happens. I wouldn't want a buggy piece of crap game to play with.
bobstos
[QUOTE="mo0ksi"]I'm relaxed, but I just don't like the fact that it was August 27th, then Sept 5th, now the 30th. They could at least give us some official system requirements.lokstah
Sure that's a bummer, but come on. Midway is a big developer/publisher, and the troubling trend with the big houses for years now has been the opposite problem: pushing games into the marketplace prematurely to satisfy business schedules. That's BS, if BS is what you're concerned about.
And it goes for information, too. You suggest that simply releasing system requirements might make it easier on fans... but wouldn't you rather it be accurate information?
Arguments like these make me wonder if the gaming world would be better if gamers didn't have access to any of this information--if every game that was released was a total surpise. Instead, we've got guys like you who (no offense) encourage publishers to prioritize schedules over production.
agreed.
Actually, I think these developers should be like the music and movie industries(not the invasion of privacy,DRM way), in that they dont open unfinished/developing games and information to the public.
I don't think anybody's really complaining that the game was delayed "per say", it's the way the delay is being handled. They say one date then move it back right at the last second, and then move it back again. They should of just kept it at "fall" to begin w/.jrhawk42
Agreed.
While the wait is certainly a killer, it's how they're going about things that is really the problem. So it's not that people want devs/publishers to prioritize the speed of a game's release over it's quality, but that they at least stop with all the "back-and-forth" and pushing release dates at the last minute, as stated above. That's been happening far too often, and with Stranglehold in particular, it's been ludicrous how many "last-minute" push-backs they've had with this title, particularly for PC (obviously).
For the Record, Every single Call of Duty game developed by infinity Ward have been amazing. It was all the knock-offs and side-developers that game the series somewhat of a mixed reputation.bobstos
*points finger*
Objection!
Infinity ward made the patches that borked multiplayer!
I bid you adieu!
[QUOTE="jrhawk42"]I don't think anybody's really complaining that the game was delayed "per say", it's the way the delay is being handled. They say one date then move it back right at the last second, and then move it back again. They should of just kept it at "fall" to begin w/.ObscureTerror
Agreed.
While the wait is certainly a killer, it's how they're going about things that is really the problem. So it's not that people want devs/publishers to prioritize the speed of a game's release over it's quality, but that they at least stop with all the "back-and-forth" and pushing release dates at the last minute, as stated above. That's been happening far too often, and with Stranglehold in particular, it's been ludicrous how many "last-minute" push-backs they've had with this title, particularly for PC (obviously).
Well, I can see how that might be annoying... but at the end of the day, tactful or not, the delays happen for the same reason: the gaming press, game companies, and gamers themselves, are all accomplices in creating a climate where games sell through ravenous use of heavy marketing blitzes. Gamers who consume this sort of info like hungry wolves encourage companies to push, push, push the information they want to hear--and the company will cut as close to the wire as they need to. If they fail to keep a date, it's likely there was an 11th hour struggle at Midway to get that deadline met.
Call it "ludicrous," sure... but it's a strange comment to make in a world where the much more prevalent problem is rushed, buggy software releases.
Spend less time obssessing over marketing fodder, and these ordinary business maneuvers will be less agonizing.
[QUOTE="ObscureTerror"][QUOTE="jrhawk42"]I don't think anybody's really complaining that the game was delayed "per say", it's the way the delay is being handled. They say one date then move it back right at the last second, and then move it back again. They should of just kept it at "fall" to begin w/.lokstah
Agreed.
While the wait is certainly a killer, it's how they're going about things that is really the problem. So it's not that people want devs/publishers to prioritize the speed of a game's release over it's quality, but that they at least stop with all the "back-and-forth" and pushing release dates at the last minute, as stated above. That's been happening far too often, and with Stranglehold in particular, it's been ludicrous how many "last-minute" push-backs they've had with this title, particularly for PC (obviously).
Well, I can see how that might be annoying... but at the end of the day, tactful or not, the delays happen for the same reason: the gaming press, game companies, and gamers themselves, are all accomplices in creating a climate where games sell through ravenous use of heavy marketing blitzes. Gamers who consume this sort of info like hungry wolves encourage companies to push, push, push the information they want to hear--and the company will cut as close to the wire as they need to. If they fail to keep a date, it's likely there was an 11th hour struggle at Midway to get that deadline met.
Call it "ludicrous," sure... but it's a strange comment to make in a world where the much more prevalent problem is rushed, buggy software releases.
Spend less time obssessing over marketing fodder, and these ordinary business maneuvers will be less agonizing.
Actually, that theory is more than flawed.
If you were correct, we'd have just about everything "AAA" title already in our hands.
Devs/publishers don't rush to get out games just because people are impatient. No one is forcing them or could force them to make that decision.
Secondly, statements are not issued unduly for the same reason you state. No company, ever, has issued a statement of a release date just because people were clamoring over the game.
If it ever comes down to someone fighting to meet a deadline, that's a deadline that's been set by the publisher.
I've worked in the music industry for almost twenty years, so I know what I'm talking about.
No amount of public "ranting" could ever push a publisher to release something earlier than they're able and/or willing, so stating that the public has that kind of "power" and could somehow "potentially "cause" a company to release a game etc. before it's due time, is ludicrous.
Yes, they might feel "pressured", but the bottom line is that it's a personal and business decision, and if a company is swayed by the "pressure" of public opinion, that's their own fault and irresponsibility.
It doesn't happen in the world of business amongst responsible publishers, distributors etc.
The very few times that someone might have ever made that mistake: 1) it certainly wasn't made public that, "Hey, we felt rushed so blasted it out to get it done." and 2) if a company is that irresponsible, then that's of they're own doing.
Strength of mind and good business ethic is what dictates not being stupid enough to rush out a product. The court of public opinion has no play in that, unless they let it, so stop making statements to the effect that people voicing their opinions over what is happening with a game's release has anything to do with what the industry is doing.
Except for those who are attempting to pump out as much as possible, as soon as possible because they are in it only to attempt to make money, there is no company who, in it's right-mind, would ever release a garbage product just because people were "impatient" etc.
I'm not defending myself, because I have patience, and I'm not defending those who are impatient, it's just simple fact and I have the experience to back it up.
Not everything released that's "buggy" is because it was rushed-out due to "public pressure". Some companies just make garbage, while others might have just not had the experience to put something together exactly perfect, while sometimes it's just the old adage of "**** happens", period.
[QUOTE="lokstah"][QUOTE="ObscureTerror"][QUOTE="jrhawk42"]I don't think anybody's really complaining that the game was delayed "per say", it's the way the delay is being handled. They say one date then move it back right at the last second, and then move it back again. They should of just kept it at "fall" to begin w/.ObscureTerror
Agreed.
While the wait is certainly a killer, it's how they're going about things that is really the problem. So it's not that people want devs/publishers to prioritize the speed of a game's release over it's quality, but that they at least stop with all the "back-and-forth" and pushing release dates at the last minute, as stated above. That's been happening far too often, and with Stranglehold in particular, it's been ludicrous how many "last-minute" push-backs they've had with this title, particularly for PC (obviously).
Well, I can see how that might be annoying... but at the end of the day, tactful or not, the delays happen for the same reason: the gaming press, game companies, and gamers themselves, are all accomplices in creating a climate where games sell through ravenous use of heavy marketing blitzes. Gamers who consume this sort of info like hungry wolves encourage companies to push, push, push the information they want to hear--and the company will cut as close to the wire as they need to. If they fail to keep a date, it's likely there was an 11th hour struggle at Midway to get that deadline met.
Call it "ludicrous," sure... but it's a strange comment to make in a world where the much more prevalent problem is rushed, buggy software releases.
Spend less time obssessing over marketing fodder, and these ordinary business maneuvers will be less agonizing.
Actually, that theory is more than flawed.
If you were correct, we'd have just about everything "AAA" title already in our hands.
Devs/publishers don't rush to get out games just because people are impatient. No one is forcing them or could force them to make that decision.
Secondly, statements are not issued unduly for the same reason you state. No company, ever, has issued a statement of a release date just because people were clamoring over the game.
If it ever comes down to someone fighting to meet a deadline, that's a deadline that's been set by the publisher.
I've worked in the music industry for almost twenty years, so I know what I'm talking about.
No amount of public "ranting" could ever push a publisher to release something earlier than they're able and/or willing, so stating that the public has that kind of "power" and could somehow "potentially "cause" a company to release a game etc. before it's due time, is ludicrous.
Yes, they might feel "pressured", but the bottom line is that it's a personal and business decision, and if a company is swayed by the "pressure" of public opinion, that's their own fault and irresponsibility.
It doesn't happen in the world of business amongst responsible publishers, distributors etc.
The very few times that someone might have ever made that mistake: 1) it certainly wasn't made public that, "Hey, we felt rushed so blasted it out to get it done." and 2) if a company is that irresponsible, then that's of they're own doing.
Strength of mind and good business ethic is what dictates not being stupid enough to rush out a product. The court of public opinion has no play in that, unless they let it, so stop making statements to the effect that people voicing their opinions over what is happening with a game's release has anything to do with what the industry is doing.
Except for those who are attempting to pump out as much as possible, as soon as possible because they are in it only to attempt to make money, there is no company who, in it's right-mind, would ever release a garbage product just because people were "impatient" etc.
I'm not defending myself, because I have patience, and I'm not defending those who are impatient, it's just simple fact and I have the experience to back it up.
Not everything released that's "buggy" is because it was rushed-out due to "public pressure". Some companies just make garbage, while others might have just not had the experience to put something together exactly perfect, while sometimes it's just the old adage of "**** happens", period.
You make a few valid points, but I'd counter by saying that your point is based on a misreading of mine (and thus flawed), and that the crux of my point stands.
The parallels that exist between the music publishing industry and the gaming industry are a little tenuous. Sure, there's a fundamental similarity in the development, marketing, and ultimate release of product, but my comment referrs to a particular culture of game industry / game press / game fan interaction. Mind you, I'm NOT suggesting that it's fans beating their fists for a July 28th release date which results in publisher/developer pressure to complete the game in advance of July 28th.
I'm suggesting that the common expectation of release dates in the first place--release dates combined with detailed schedule updates, together with demos, screenshots, test footage, and endless descriptions of game features and promises--represents a dynamic between gamer, the press, and publishers which isn't helpful. It's not gamers beating their fists for July 28th that I'm pointing to--and it's not that publishers needed to set a July 28th date (undoubtedly the result of market research and financial schedules combined)--it's the gamer culture which has come to demand and rely upon this info which causes gamer agony.
The real causes for buggy or crappy releases, I'm sure you and I would agree, has to do with a variety of factors in any given case--one of them, without a doubt, stems from publishers attempting to impose schedules on development teams that those teams are incapable of meeting. In light of that, there is considerable irony in the TC's original complaint. Again--I can sympathize to a degree with the annoyance of ever-shifting release dates--but there are bigger, more ironic fish to fry.
[QUOTE="ObscureTerror"][QUOTE="lokstah"][QUOTE="ObscureTerror"][QUOTE="jrhawk42"]I don't think anybody's really complaining that the game was delayed "per say", it's the way the delay is being handled. They say one date then move it back right at the last second, and then move it back again. They should of just kept it at "fall" to begin w/.lokstah
Agreed.
While the wait is certainly a killer, it's how they're going about things that is really the problem. So it's not that people want devs/publishers to prioritize the speed of a game's release over it's quality, but that they at least stop with all the "back-and-forth" and pushing release dates at the last minute, as stated above. That's been happening far too often, and with Stranglehold in particular, it's been ludicrous how many "last-minute" push-backs they've had with this title, particularly for PC (obviously).
Well, I can see how that might be annoying... but at the end of the day, tactful or not, the delays happen for the same reason: the gaming press, game companies, and gamers themselves, are all accomplices in creating a climate where games sell through ravenous use of heavy marketing blitzes. Gamers who consume this sort of info like hungry wolves encourage companies to push, push, push the information they want to hear--and the company will cut as close to the wire as they need to. If they fail to keep a date, it's likely there was an 11th hour struggle at Midway to get that deadline met.
Call it "ludicrous," sure... but it's a strange comment to make in a world where the much more prevalent problem is rushed, buggy software releases.
Spend less time obssessing over marketing fodder, and these ordinary business maneuvers will be less agonizing.
Actually, that theory is more than flawed.
If you were correct, we'd have just about everything "AAA" title already in our hands.
Devs/publishers don't rush to get out games just because people are impatient. No one is forcing them or could force them to make that decision.
Secondly, statements are not issued unduly for the same reason you state. No company, ever, has issued a statement of a release date just because people were clamoring over the game.
If it ever comes down to someone fighting to meet a deadline, that's a deadline that's been set by the publisher.
I've worked in the music industry for almost twenty years, so I know what I'm talking about.
No amount of public "ranting" could ever push a publisher to release something earlier than they're able and/or willing, so stating that the public has that kind of "power" and could somehow "potentially "cause" a company to release a game etc. before it's due time, is ludicrous.
Yes, they might feel "pressured", but the bottom line is that it's a personal and business decision, and if a company is swayed by the "pressure" of public opinion, that's their own fault and irresponsibility.
It doesn't happen in the world of business amongst responsible publishers, distributors etc.
The very few times that someone might have ever made that mistake: 1) it certainly wasn't made public that, "Hey, we felt rushed so blasted it out to get it done." and 2) if a company is that irresponsible, then that's of they're own doing.
Strength of mind and good business ethic is what dictates not being stupid enough to rush out a product. The court of public opinion has no play in that, unless they let it, so stop making statements to the effect that people voicing their opinions over what is happening with a game's release has anything to do with what the industry is doing.
Except for those who are attempting to pump out as much as possible, as soon as possible because they are in it only to attempt to make money, there is no company who, in it's right-mind, would ever release a garbage product just because people were "impatient" etc.
I'm not defending myself, because I have patience, and I'm not defending those who are impatient, it's just simple fact and I have the experience to back it up.
Not everything released that's "buggy" is because it was rushed-out due to "public pressure". Some companies just make garbage, while others might have just not had the experience to put something together exactly perfect, while sometimes it's just the old adage of "**** happens", period.
You make a few valid points, but I'd counter by saying that your point is based on a misreading of mine (and thus flawed), and that the crux of my point stands.
The parallels that exist between the music publishing industry and the gaming industry are a little tenuous. Sure, there's a fundamental similarity in the development, marketing, and ultimate release of product, but my comment referrs to a particular culture of game industry / game press / game fan interaction. Mind you, I'm NOT suggesting that it's fans beating their fists for a July 28th release date which results in publisher/developer pressure to complete the game in advance of July 28th.
I'm suggesting that the common expectation of release dates in the first place--release dates combined with detailed schedule updates, together with demos, screenshots, test footage, and endless descriptions of game features and promises--represents a dynamic between gamer, the press, and publishers which isn't helpful. It's not gamers beating their fists for July 28th that I'm pointing to--and it's not that publishers needed to set a July 28th date (undoubtedly the result of market research and financial schedules combined)--it's the gamer culture which has come to demand and rely upon this info which causes gamer agony.
The real causes for buggy or crappy releases, I'm sure you and I would agree, has to do with a variety of factors in any given case--one of them, without a doubt, stems from publishers attempting to impose schedules on development teams that those teams are incapable of meeting. In light of that, there is considerable irony in the TC's original complaint. Again--I can sympathize to a degree with the annoyance of ever-shifting release dates--but there are bigger, more ironic fish to fry.
Certainly, I would agree... but, my point still holds that publishers, of any form of media, have to learn to take their time and do what's best for the given media they're releasing. They cant let themselves "cave" to pressure, which then just ends up making them pressure developers, which in-turn can lead to shoddy releases. Absolutely.
The "common expectation" you mention in reference to the gaming industry (essentially) is true, and I do agree that it has effected the ways publishers handle things, but again... it's their responsibility to make the personal choice to either make decisions out of that pressure or not.
Let gamers "beat their fists" all they want. It's their own "agony", as you put it, they'll have to deal with if they cant be patient.
But, when publishers get all kinds of flaky and back-and-forth due to that "underlying pressure" that's there because they know the impatience of many in the gaming community, then that's their mistake.
I'm sure you would agree with that ;)
But like I said, hell... many publishers these days are pushing devs, not even because of the gaming community or any known "expectations" of the gaming community, but simply to rake-in the cash, and pump-out garbage, focusing on quanity instead of quality.
We're actually on the same page here, just making different points from different perspectives.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment