Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Bungie's next game
  • Subject: Bungie's next game
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Bungie's next game

Dating Age

For those looking to vent, get proper advice, or give it to those in need.


Posted by: The Kangol Kid
And how much does a publisher influence release dates, content, etc? I'm sure they would need to be happy about the product going out as well.

Release dates would be entirely up to the publisher. If the game had to be delayed then I guess they would discuss how much more time the developer needs and the publisher would set a new date.

  • 09.21.2011 6:22 PM PDT

Rock Chalk Real Talk
Minnesotan, currently going to school at KU.


@Geegs30

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of game companies "delay" the release of their games and state that they're taking extra time to perfect certain things. In reality I'm sure they were planning on releasing it at that later date anyways, and just want to seem more "devoted."

  • 09.21.2011 6:37 PM PDT

Remembering 20 years of the best developing around.
Good luck, guys you always have my support.

I will admit that Bungie did release the game rather quickly and with a few bugs, but they made up for it by sending out awesome free stuff that ranged from new game features - flaming helmet- an awesome app for its fans to keep updated on the go. And besides, give 'em a break it's their last game for an extended period of time, so until their next game I can't wait to see what they have in store for the community!

  • 09.21.2011 6:46 PM PDT

Dating Age

For those looking to vent, get proper advice, or give it to those in need.


Posted by: Geegs30
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of game companies "delay" the release of their games and state that they're taking extra time to perfect certain things. In reality I'm sure they were planning on releasing it at that later date anyways, and just want to seem more "devoted."

I don't think so. Think about all the PR resources put in to getting that date out only to have it delayed. It's something publishers would rather not do.

  • 09.21.2011 6:52 PM PDT

Posted by: Vgnut117
Posted by: The Kangol Kid
And how much does a publisher influence release dates, content, etc? I'm sure they would need to be happy about the product going out as well.

Release dates would be entirely up to the publisher. If the game had to be delayed then I guess they would discuss how much more time the developer needs and the publisher would set a new date.

I'm sure the publisher contacts the developer and finds out when the game realistically can be released. The developing process can be rushed/relaxed by the exact date the publisher decides. A publisher that doesn't let the developer finish a good game is a crappy publisher.

  • 09.21.2011 6:59 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: Geegs30
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of game companies "delay" the release of their games and state that they're taking extra time to perfect certain things. In reality I'm sure they were planning on releasing it at that later date anyways, and just want to seem more "devoted."
That is the stupidest PR stunt I've ever heard of and any game dev. that does that shouldn't be making video games due to their lack of brain cells.

  • 09.21.2011 6:59 PM PDT

We were somewhere around Barstow...

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
That is the stupidest PR stunt I've ever heard of and any game dev. that does that shouldn't be making video games due to their lack of brain cells.

How? I'm willing to bet Half Life 3 is going to go well. Also, it's quite clear Reach was rushed. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that. Not that it was half-assed, just merely 90% finished. That's fine except for the fact it took a year to patch. Any other dev would've had it fixed in the immediate hours after release.

  • 09.21.2011 7:34 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: ArmourElite
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
That is the stupidest PR stunt I've ever heard of and any game dev. that does that shouldn't be making video games due to their lack of brain cells.

How? I'm willing to bet Half Life 3 is going to go well. Also, it's quite clear Reach was rushed. There's plenty of evidence to suggest that. Not that it was half-assed, just merely 90% finished. That's fine except for the fact it took a year to patch. Any other dev would've had it fixed in the immediate hours after release.
You're telling me you think Valve is pushing back the release date of Half Life 3 so they look more devoted?

  • 09.21.2011 7:41 PM PDT

We were somewhere around Barstow...

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Yes. So you're telling me a dev wouldn't intentionally delay a game therefore increasing hype, therefore increasing revenue? Please.

  • 09.21.2011 7:45 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: ArmourElite
Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Yes. So you're telling me a dev wouldn't intentionally delay a game therefore increasing hype, therefore increasing revenue? Please.
That's not what the discussion is about. It's about whether or not a game dev. would push back the release of a game so that they appear more devoted to the game and so that the fans will think more highly of them. I doubt this ever happens, nor that it is the case in the release of HL:3. Though the Half Life series is very popular, and very well made... zombies make you the moneez.

  • 09.21.2011 7:49 PM PDT

We were somewhere around Barstow...

Well fair enough yes, I'd doubt a dev would do that either. It didn't work with DNF anyway! What I'm saying is they might intentionally delay finished products to garner hype. Who would bet against Activion already having the next two or three CoD titles practically finished?

Whether or not the fans perceive the dev to be devoted is irrelevant. They will always be judged on the final product. However, it is impotant to note if they are more interested in cash monies or actual respect and admiration from the community.

  • 09.21.2011 7:54 PM PDT

Have A Nice Day!

Commander, CammCam's Queensguard; Sapphire Mod; 34th Seat, Table of Avalon(Exiled);Captain, HAND

yolo? -blam!- that! YOLTOSS!! You Only Live Twice or Some -blam!-

I'm sure that at the very least the programmers are devoted to putting out the best product. No one creating a game is thinking, "I hope this one turns out to be the next E.T" (at least, I sure as hell hope they are not thinking that) I imagine bad games come from design flaws, shortened production timeframe, or less skilled dev teams. I can't really think of anything that would be considered bad that a few more weeks in production could help.

  • 09.21.2011 9:39 PM PDT

Posted by: MLG Armor King
no offense 'stosh', but I don't think you're funny
Posted by: stosh
No offense, but I don't think you're the armor 'king'.
Map Spotlight - Hydra XXIII
Best. Thread. Ever.
Staff Member of Mythical Group


Posted by: The Kangol Kid
I'm sure that at the very least the programmers are devoted to putting out the best product. No one creating a game is thinking, "I hope this one turns out to be the next E.T" (at least, I sure as hell hope they are not thinking that) I imagine bad games come from design flaws, shortened production timeframe, or less skilled dev teams. I can't really think of anything that would be considered bad that a few more weeks in production could help.
Well of course no one thinks that. And I'm in mo way saying Reach is bad. I just felt that there were (and still are) problems with the game I've never really experienced in past Halos, and coming from Bungie, I expected a more... Finished product.

I suppose you could argue Halo 2, but then again Halo 2 plays as a game should, minus a few glitches.

  • 09.21.2011 9:51 PM PDT

Have A Nice Day!

Commander, CammCam's Queensguard; Sapphire Mod; 34th Seat, Table of Avalon(Exiled);Captain, HAND

yolo? -blam!- that! YOLTOSS!! You Only Live Twice or Some -blam!-

Funny thing though superduper, you're starting post is exactly how I felt about Halo 3. Campaign felt rushed and too many issues with MM (which have been exhausted in that thread; see BR spray, melee, hitscan)

I think the real issue is trying to expand upon proven formulas. This normally involves new techniques, new ideas, new code etc. The problem with new ideas, they are not perfect. They could have delayed Reach until this year and might have had some of the same issues you feel plague the game(I also feel the same) Overall, I still rank Reach very highly for an FPS simply because there is not one that will not have the same or similar issues. Halo 2 wasn't perfect by any means, I think a lot of us view it that way because there really was nothing that could compete with it at the time. This is all my opinion of course and essentially I'm just trying to justify why I should like Reach, instead of admitting that I don't really care for it's faults.

  • 09.21.2011 10:07 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3