|  |  |  | 
			ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED ON 
			gameplayer.com.au 28/7/08
 
  IT 
			NEEDS MORE COWBELL...
 
 
 
  
			 
			
			Despite the games industry having grown up – it’s now not just some 
			cowboy-led, new-fangled, fly-by-night phenomenon that will likely go 
			bust before your toast has a chance to burn, which was the feeling 
			back in the ’80s – one thing has never changed. Games continually 
			miss their planned release dates, to the point where if a title 
			actually ships on its expected date it’s more the exception than the 
			norm.
 You’d like to think you’re on the right track in musing that if a 
			game’s delayed, it means things are being improved, right? That what 
			has been hyped as something truly kick-arse is going to be perfected 
			so much so as to sink slipper into buttock so deep that a search 
			party will need to be called upon to find it? However, look at some 
			recent games that have suffered the release date time warp – 
			Alone in the Dark, Haze, Too Human… all titles 
			that were hyped to death, had the marketing buzz happening so big 
			time that we were genuinely frothing at the cakeholes to get our 
			power gloves onto them, but they failed to deliver, spectacularly.
 
 So then, why all these delays?
 
 There are myriad reasons why a title will miss its projected street 
			date. Harking back to those early industry days back in the 1980s, 
			big name properties were licensed to be let loose in game form at 
			the hottest dollar-spinning times of year, so usually towards 
			December. Advertising for these titles would often be in the 
			public’s faces even before a line of code had been written, and 
			sometimes things just didn’t come together. The UK developer Ocean 
			(which was swallowed up by Gallic arch nemesis Infogrames in 1998) 
			were masters of this practice, in fact Commodore 64 owners never saw 
			the much-advertised Street Hawk, based on a short-lived TV 
			show and, perhaps appropriately, hawked like there was no tomorrow. 
			Basically, the game was crap and they couldn’t make it less crap in 
			time for it to be worth releasing, so it was scrapped. It should 
			also be noted that Ocean released some horrendous licensed howlers 
			into the world, so we tremble at the thought of how truly fetid 
			Street Hawk must actually have been for it to have been 
			abandoned completely.
 
 The marketing side of the games industry has matured considerably 
			since those days; however the same basic flaws in the process exist. 
			A title is planned, it’s locked into a publicity/advertising/hype 
			schedule, and the programmers beavering away at the thing are 
			expected to get it completed on time. As with many large projects, 
			however, unforeseen issues arise, especially as the technology 
			involved becomes more complex. A perfect example is the 
			much-anticipated Wipeout HD for the PS3. They promised full 
			HD, 60 FPS motion and, from what we’ve seen thus far, they 
			delivered. Yet after being due for release about now (after a few 
			delays, admittedly), the game has now been held-up indefinitely, 
			with reports – whether true or used as an excuse for something else 
			– that it’s failing epilepsy tests. That’s not one you’d usually see 
			coming, unless perhaps you were working on Ministry of Sound – 
			The Game.
 
 So, there are two main streams of thinking when it comes to 
			releasing games that have suffered delays. You can spend extra time 
			to get the thing right and hope to keep the hype wheels spinning 
			long enough to maintain demand, or you can just ‘publish and be 
			damned’. The latter phenomenon has become less common today, as too 
			many instances of the practice in the past saw companies hitting the 
			dole queues as their reputation plummeted. Still, the likes of 
			Haze and Too Human can make you wonder whether any 
			lessons have been learned at all.
 
 Then again, when you have a title based around a specific event - 
			like Beijing 2008 - you HAVE to get the thing out in time or it’s 
			basically pointless. Luckily the latest Olympics title doesn’t 
			completely suck, however it’s hardly sending reviewers into fits of 
			ecstasy. Sometimes near enough is good enough, especially when the 
			less savvy consumer will pluck the thing from shelves like mad once 
			Olympics fever truly sets in, regardless of quality.
 
 Meanwhile, if you have a well-established and previously successful 
			IP, you can get away with a lot more in the delay stakes, as there 
			will always be that massive Katamari-like ball of hope swelling 
			amongst gamers that this will be the greatest thing since pizza. 
			Look at Grand Theft Auto IV or Metal Gear Solid 4. 
			Their series’ have built a hell of a lot of goodwill over the years 
			from punters, so the implicit way things are done is that the 
			developers will take however long is needed to get things right, and 
			the fans will have faith that their patience will be rewarded. In 
			the case of these two titles, it worked. Other sequels don’t 
			necessarily fare so well (we’re looking at you, Driv3r and 
			Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness, as a mere two examples).
 
 One of the most masterful instances of this trading on expectation 
			recently involved Sony’s Gran Turismo series. The fifth 
			incarnation has been touted for the PS3 since the system’s birth, 
			yet is still but a distant speck on the horizon. So, how to keep the 
			anticipation up until the thing is (hopefully) finished? Release a 
			bigger than usual playable demo – and charge half the price of a 
			full game for it! It was a masterstroke of marketing, and we pretty 
			much all fell for it. The delay is masked as people play the demo 
			and are left wanting more and more, so interest in the title 
			actually spikes further upwards, while titbits such as inclusion of 
			the Top Gear test track in the final product are drip fed via 
			the media to keep the punters’ drool flowing.
 
 Worldwide ‘day and date’ releases are fine – nobody has a problem 
			when a game is released everywhere pretty much at the same time. But 
			what of delays that are only due to a marketing department’s 
			interference? Aussie gamers know this feeling with the alarmingly 
			over-hyped Rock Band. It’s been out overseas for almost a 
			year, yet all we have is a vague announcement of a release around 
			the same time the sequel is due to lob in the USA. Those who 
			couldn’t wait have imported it (ironically for much less than the 
			projected local RRP), while others have simple pledged allegiance to 
			its also-forthcoming competitor Guitar Hero World Tour out of 
			spite, as Australia’s not being treated like a hick backwater by 
			Activision, with their title due here around the same time as 
			everywhere else. These bullshit delays are the ones that really 
			raise the hackles of gamers.
 
 Ultimately though, how do we as fans end up feeling when a 
			highly-desired title is promised then delayed, often repeatedly? 
			Generally, as long as the product is good when it eventually lobs – 
			such as GTA4 and MGS 4 – then all will be forgiven in 
			a frenzy of total immersion. Release something sucky like Haze 
			though, and the knives will be that much sharper, due to increased 
			anticipation not being met. It’s a malaise that isn’t unique to the 
			games world though; it’s often a creative thing. Sometimes the 
			artistic side just cannot kowtow to a marketing schedule. Just ask 
			Quentin Tarantino about his WWII-inspired script Inglorious 
			Bastards, which he’s been trying to get airborne since 1997. Or 
			ask any Guns ‘n’ Roses fan about the album Chinese Democracy 
			- they’ve been working on the sucker since 1994! Come back Duke 
			Nuke ’em Forever (a game that’s been ‘coming soon’ since ’97), 
			all is forgiven!
 
 Is our apparently ready acceptance of increasingly common release 
			delays something that’s ultimately bad for gaming, though? Not if 
			these delays result in a better product – after all, missed release 
			dates have been a part of the deal since the games industry began. 
			It’s a balancing act for the games companies, who in general are 
			getting slicker at keeping those publicity wheels spinning as the 
			complexity of modern systems causes more and more production holdups 
			- after all, none of them want to intentionally release something 
			that’s going to be canned by all who venture near it. They know that 
			if one of their much-hyped, much-anticipated titles does eventuate 
			and fails to pass muster, they’ll feel it. The gaming community is 
			neither dumb nor short of memory.
 
			     
  |  |  
  
			 
 CLICK 
			THIS!
 
 
  
 CLICK 
			THIS!
 
 
 
   
			  
			  |  |  |  |