August 24, 2007

The Delay Game
By Louis Bedigian

Let's spin the Wheel of Delays and see who we'll lose next.

It's no secret that several big-name games have recently been cut from the 2007 gaming season. There's a wonderful argument to these stories, one I'm sure you've heard before. "Developers need more time."

Wouldn't it be nice if we all had the luxury of saying those words and have them mean something?

"Sorry professor, I couldn't get my paper done in time for tonight's class. But I'll catch ya next semester, k?"

"I don't know what to tell you, Mr. CEO, the financial data just isn't ready yet. The stockholders will have to wait."

"Back to School sale? Bah, our retailer isn't prepared. Let's tell consumers we'll have the sale after Halloween. It's cool, they'll still be there."

Grand Theft Auto IV: Don't open until...when, exactly?

I am a firm believer in giving developers the time and resources to make the best games possible. I am not, however, in favor of last-minute delays at the time of the year when gamers' anticipation is at its highest. Last-minute delays are justifiable in some circumstances. Persona 3 had a shipping issue that kept it from landing on store shelves when promised. The holdup was no more than a few weeks.

However, when a publisher announces an eight-month delay two or three months before the game was scheduled to ship, you have to wonder: didn't they see it coming? Has there ever, in the history of game development, been a time when eight months' work could be completed in three months?

And in case you didn't know, there's an easy way to avoid disappointing consumers: don't announce a game, or at the very least a release date for your game, until you are certain you will have it ready to go by the promised release date.

But what about the argument that says a game shouldn't be released until it's ready? What about the times we've played games that felt like they were rushed to market? Do those experiences – and the times when delays have helped produce a better product – justify every delay our industry endures?

I could list a hundred lousy, over-delayed games. I could also point out that one of my favorite and most played games of the previous generation, Resident Evil 4, was announced three years before its release. To Capcom's credit, they kept the new game content (camera perspective, no zombies, etc.) secret until less than one year before shipping. And because they chose not to announce a release date until the game was nearly finished, they avoided disappointing gamers who would have expected to play it sooner.

Halo 3: The poster child of "When it's done, it's done."

But it doesn't matter how positive the outcome is for a game like Halo 3 (delayed many times) or – fingers crossed – Splinter Cell. What matters is that the majority of game delays do not actually create a better product, which makes the thought of any delay very hard to swallow. I suppose these awful, unnamed games would have been even worse without a delay. But if a game sucks, do you really think gamers care to measure its level of suckiness?

"Whoa, if this game hadn't been delayed six months, it would have really sucked. Now it only kind of sucks. Thank goodness for delays!"

The thing that troubles me most is that I am now fearful to continue anticipating the fall gaming season. Because – let's face it – aside from Halo 3, which is all but guaranteed to swarm retailers this September, we cannot be certain that any of the games we're dying to play will actually be playable this Christmas. There are safe bets: Rock Band, Assassin's Creed, Mario Galaxy. Still, when the Wheel of Delays is spun, you never know whose name is going to come up.

If I may make one request to our beloved industry: could someone break the wheel and detain its repairman until after the new year? Please?

Share | Digg This | Glink It

---