Long waiting time on games leads to disappointment?
I've seen several times that games that got announced years ahead are usually not that well received, which kind of makes me wonder if that's because people have been waiting so long for it that hardly anything can live up to their expectations. Perhaps it's because people are a bit spoiled these days but then again it could also be that sometimes games are just not as good as we hope they would be.
The longer you wait the worse a game becomes?
Well I wouldn't say that, especially since some games take the extra time to take care of the bugs and glitches in a game. Which is a good thing because it's not fun to play a game that is almost unplayable, I think Ubisoft knows that all too well with their Assassin's Creed Unity game. Metal Gear Solid V also took a long time to finally become available to players but it was worth the wait, it's a fantastic game and it's a lot of fun to play. So not every game is bad when you have to wait a long time until you're able to play it.
Delaying a game isn't always good news?
You could say that it's good that developers delay a game, they work out the bugs and glitches and make certain that you get a fun game without the frustration in it. Well that's not always true, sometimes games get delayed a lot and then when you're finally able to play it it's still a piece of shit. Well piece of shit is probably a bit harsh but when you ask PC gamers about Batman Arkham Knight then that's probably what you'll hear. It sucks when games don't live up to the reputation or just turn out to be bad, that makes you wonder how bad the game would be if they released it earlier or what they actually do with the extra time before releasing it because it still turned out to be a bad game.
A quick release after the announcement isn't always good either?
Fallout 4 was announced in June and the game launched in November, that's pretty quick and it made people very excited. I still have a hard time believing how fast it went and how much fun the game is, I still expect things not to work or things to go bad. Maybe that's the pessimist in me but so far the game is actually pretty good. Ok there are some glitches but nothing serious, it's definitely playable and a lot of fun to play. So maybe it's a good idea to announce games later, to keep the window between announcement and release as short as possible, that seemed to have worked well for Fallout 4 and I bet it would work well for other games. Because why would you get people excited for a game that will still take years before it can be released? Sure there's the hype and keeping people hooked on your game but that also means that a lot of people will keep a close eye on your game and the moment things turn out to be less good that means that they'll give you shit for that. I'm not saying that people don't do that with Fallout 4 but a lot of people are happy with the game, which is actually quite rare these days because most people have something to whine about these days.
The longer you wait the worse a game becomes?
Well I wouldn't say that, especially since some games take the extra time to take care of the bugs and glitches in a game. Which is a good thing because it's not fun to play a game that is almost unplayable, I think Ubisoft knows that all too well with their Assassin's Creed Unity game. Metal Gear Solid V also took a long time to finally become available to players but it was worth the wait, it's a fantastic game and it's a lot of fun to play. So not every game is bad when you have to wait a long time until you're able to play it.
Delaying a game isn't always good news?
You could say that it's good that developers delay a game, they work out the bugs and glitches and make certain that you get a fun game without the frustration in it. Well that's not always true, sometimes games get delayed a lot and then when you're finally able to play it it's still a piece of shit. Well piece of shit is probably a bit harsh but when you ask PC gamers about Batman Arkham Knight then that's probably what you'll hear. It sucks when games don't live up to the reputation or just turn out to be bad, that makes you wonder how bad the game would be if they released it earlier or what they actually do with the extra time before releasing it because it still turned out to be a bad game.
A quick release after the announcement isn't always good either?
Fallout 4 was announced in June and the game launched in November, that's pretty quick and it made people very excited. I still have a hard time believing how fast it went and how much fun the game is, I still expect things not to work or things to go bad. Maybe that's the pessimist in me but so far the game is actually pretty good. Ok there are some glitches but nothing serious, it's definitely playable and a lot of fun to play. So maybe it's a good idea to announce games later, to keep the window between announcement and release as short as possible, that seemed to have worked well for Fallout 4 and I bet it would work well for other games. Because why would you get people excited for a game that will still take years before it can be released? Sure there's the hype and keeping people hooked on your game but that also means that a lot of people will keep a close eye on your game and the moment things turn out to be less good that means that they'll give you shit for that. I'm not saying that people don't do that with Fallout 4 but a lot of people are happy with the game, which is actually quite rare these days because most people have something to whine about these days.
Reacties
Een reactie posten