1313
Gabe Newell on why game delays are okay: 'Late is just for a little while. Suck is forever.'
(www.pcgamer.com)
this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2023
1313 points (98.1% liked)
Games
16800 readers
865 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Okay, so there's game delays that actually have helped some games. Then there's games that sit on Early Access for what seems like forever, wondering what the fuck are they doing, like 7 Days to Die.
I like and respect games that, take their time because they want a certain vision of a game to work itself out as intended. I don't like and respect games that need to rush for the holidays or need to rush for company appeasement.
Some of my favorite Early Access games, I'd actually rather just finish development and then start on a new release.
Take Nova Drift and Caves of Qud. Both games, I think, are in a state where I have gotten my money's worth out of them many times over. But they're still Early Access.
But, hey, as a player, who is going to complain about more stuff being provided for free?
At this point, my preference would be to say "Okay, you did a good job with the resources you had. Now, I would like to give you more money and you can hire more people and produce content at a higher rate, because I really like the stuff you make."
Or at least DLC or something. Like, I don't have a problem with blocky pixel art as a way of reducing dev costs. I think that many traditional roguelikes have benefited from just using text -- means that gameplay revisions are easier, and that one doesn't need an art team. I think that it's an effective tactic. But having seen how much art has added to, say, Cataclysm: Dark Days Ahead, I'd like to be able to purchase high-resolution art for Caves of Qud. I pay for tons of art in many, many games that I enjoy much less than Caves of Qud. Ditto for a number of other pixel-art indie releases that I like.
I'd like to see more content coming out at a higher rate, and that is gonna require funds.
Paradox does this. They have a deal where they make a game and if I like it, I can send them more money and they will make more game at a pretty good clip. Now, maybe not everyone wants to spend what some Paradox games run if you take into account all DLC -- okay -- but I'm not left in a situation where I want more of Game X but I'm unable to buy it.