--George H
It doesn't matter if they fix/repair it for months afterwards, as long as they beat their competition to market. Look at the recent gaming handhelds - Nintendo DS and Sony's PSP. Nintendo actually held back releasing theirs in Japan so they could launch considerably earlier in the U.S. to give people a chance to "wait until a friend gets it to see what it's like" but still before PSP comes out.
Personally, I think that's messed up thinking, but unfortunately that's the type of world we live in.
RCT3 would have sold had the waited and fixed it regardless. I know they wanted that Holiday push, but they still should have paid for a game.
I don't go and pay 20 Gs for a car just to have the doors, seatbelts, and windshield put in a couple weeks after I bought it, then the power doors, power windows, back seat, headlights, air bags in a couple months later...
Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog
Now all I have is a bitter taste in my mouth, and it isn't from Invy or Moosh either!
The hole in your car analogy: Cars come out every year, on a set schedule (and the same schedule as all their competition, I might add). In other words, the car companies know the deadline a whole year in advance. My intuition tells me that the team didn't know about the advance of the release date until the last minute (which is probably why patch 1 came out so fast - it was stuff they were already working on for it). Taking this further, in a sense, car companies DO put out a car, and then make changes later. They don't force you to go out and buy the new model, but it's a similar thing. No one forces you to download the patches, and the game IS functional without it. Yes, you may be missing features (not every car always came with a radio/casette/CD standard).
What about the bugs, you ask? How many times have you gotten a letter from a manufacturer about a factory recall? Not on the whole car, but on a specific part. You take it to a dealer-authorized mechanic who "applies the patch" - fixes the defect. Sounds a lot like the software.. they didn't have time to adequately test the gearshift, so they didn't find out it can slip into neutral while going down steep slopes in cold weather..
Taking the analogy even further, think of the consequences if they would have taken the extra month to test everything completely and released the new model year in October instead of September - a good portion of their potential customers would have bought a different car (because they were waiting for the new model year) not to mention the stock taking a hit because it looks like the company is being poorly run instead of realizing the opposite were true.
Edit: another thought - most of this is because of things that are different than RCT2. I wonder how much people would cry "incomplete game" if this were the first version of a new game? *** Edited 12/19/2004 6:24:54 AM UTC by dannerman***
Actually, you just validated my car analogy more. Atari/Frontier didn't end up pushing the game up (or did they just push it up a week? still not much of a difference), and the due date was known by fans of the game for ages, so if Frontier didn't know it, or the people that worked on it, then that's not Atari/publisher/shipper's problem, thats Frontier's.
So you are right, car makers know when something is coming out, and you can't tell me that the developer didn't know the game was going to be out for the Xmas rush. But with cars, you do sometimes get a recal to fix something, but not a week after the car was released, and not because the car simply dosen't run right. I could handle bug fixes later after the game was released for a bit and bugs were noted, but not immediately after the game was released. That isn't acceptable, and I don't understand why people are still making excuses for that.
As for your quote:
I wonder how much people would cry "incomplete game" if this were the first version of a new game?
Were that to have happend and this was indeed the first game, then people would have complained that new game X sucks, it would have dwindled like so many other coaster games/sims, and there wouldn't have been another, or at least not another one that sold millions. But we've come to expect high quality (barring the RCT2 expansions which weren't done by Chris Sawyer or Frontier) on each new game, yet we were let down on this one, after being led to believe this would be the end all RCT game.
We got jipped(sp?)
True, it's high-end and a lot of people can't play it. I'm talking about the people that CAN play it, it's fully functional. There's nothing in the game that is grayed out or disabled. There IS a lot of "missing" functionality that did exist in RCT2, however. I'll admit, it was annoying. I'll also admit I was a tad disappointed with the game. I'll even admit that I don't play it anywhere near as much as if it had significantly more development. However, I don't think the "unfinished game" claims are entirely true in and of themselves - only when you factor in the previous games.
Anyone up for RCT4? ;)
TeknoScorpion said:
Oh I agree, but the point is, they should have worried about pushing it back a few weeks were that to have ment a finished game.Now all I have is a bitter taste in my mouth, and it isn't from Invy or Moosh either!
OMG Clint, are you cheating on us? :o
I am finding that the game isn't holding my interest like RCT and RCT2 did - I get bored after half an hour of playing due to the various glitches and it sits in the box more than it does in the PC which I built especially so I could run RCT3 in the first place. Oh well, at least the case is funky lol
-Jim :)
*** Edited 12/19/2004 9:13:45 AM UTC by Invy***
You must be logged in to post