Marky Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 dont know if its been asked or not but im dying to know and im sure im not alone or refer me to a link? pleeeease? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtweasle Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 IIRC at or about the time the game begins shipping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 of course. lol but i was hoping for a date Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LutraMage Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 GM The answer to your question is that no one will say anything about a date either for the Demo or the actual product release. Whilst BF is clearly in a league of its own when it comes to software development, innovation and customer communication on its games (the contributions on this site from the developer, playtesters and BF Reps has been excellent), it pretty much sucks when it comes to meeting its own delivery targets and customer communication on distribution of those games. Sad, but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Microsoft announced that Vista, the windows upgrade, will not ship this year as originally planned. Software development is not easy and BF has wisely tried not to give a firm date, other than saying it will ship in late March or April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Yup, and we're in very good company of countless other developers and publishers out there The main difference with us is that we will never push out a product out the door just for the sake of meeting some date. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 thats true. Silent Hunter 3 was delayed almost a year before it finally came out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 was just hoping for an estimate. i cant wait to play even the demo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I'm backing BF on this one. We're still having a blast playing SC Stick to your guns Moonie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 TO add, LOOK AT Masters of Orion III Need I say more. I'd rather not see SC2 if it had the issues that game had. Civilization Multiplayer 3 wasn't even Multiplayer. If SC2 is as good as SC1 then it was worth 3 or 4 years for a release. If it's better than it's worth whatever time it took. I think that maybe Battlefront was unaware how long and how indepth it was going to be and announced a little earlier than they may had they known how massive a project it was going to be. So that shows it must be detailed and very nice... They took the extra time and they kept us informed throughout. Just as a big company would to add: Big companies do not error? Bahhh I disproved that above, MultiMillion selling Companies mess up all the time. Ages of Empires II is better than III Empire Earth I is better than II See the continued trend? If SC2 is better than SC1 praise Battlefront! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 indeed. i cant find my SC cd however so im stuck with da demo i cant wait to play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 it pretty much sucks when it comes to meeting its own delivery targets and customer communication on distribution of those games. Sad, but true.That is the case of 99% of all games. Having being in a few betas now I know why, programing is not an exact science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Originally posted by GeneralMark: thats true. Silent Hunter 3 was delayed almost a year before it finally came out And it still wasn't finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 Bottom line, if the game sux, release date(s), demos, whatever don't mean squat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MullinsR Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 I like your sig GM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 ty but we all know the game wont suck rambo its hubert freakin cater! have faith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LutraMage Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 The main difference with us is that we will never push out a product out the door just for the sake of meeting some date. I don't get this Moon - why does the fact that BF is not going to "push out a product out the door just for the sake of meeting some date" mean that BF is incapable of providing a date at all? You've been telling us for two years that the delays are to ensure the product is perfect out of the box (and we love that) but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to plan and stick to a deadline you set yourselves - that's just being professional and I thought BF was setting out its stall to be better than other developers, not just less efficient? Besides, I hope you guys know the risk you're taking building up the expectations of no 'patch' needs on this product. Given the delays and the explanation that this is to ensure it works out of the box I sure hope for BF's sake that you can really deliver on that - and let me be clear, I don't doubt that you can and will deliver (the snippets we've seen look awesome) I just think your approach is providing a big hostage to fortune out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 LutraMage you REALLY have no idea about the video game world. NO ONE can predict when it will be ready and 99% of companies out there CAN NOT stick to a date when they give one. They never said it will be NO patch. Hubert has made it clear he will continue to support his product as the game is released. It will be going from a dozen PCs to thousands, new issues will be discovered but the goal is to have the game functional and enjoyable from the start, not live in frustration until it is properly patched. Patches will only improve on a great product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 I confess, I'm pissed, the flesh is overcoming my Legendary spirit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 I don't get this Moon - why does the fact that BF is not going to "push out a product out the door just for the sake of meeting some date" mean that BF is incapable of providing a date at all? You've been telling us for two years that the delays are to ensure the product is perfect out of the box (and we love that) but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to plan and stick to a deadline you set yourselves - that's just being professional and I thought BF was setting out its stall to be better than other developers, not just less efficient? LutraMage, let's just be clear here that Battlefront is the publisher and I am the sole developer. Yes, it is true that we communicate timeline info but at the end of the day if you really need to point fingers feel free to point them at me since I am the only one missing apparent deadlines, not Battlefront. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Nah, Hubert is cool, Camp Rambo always backs HC, he's the source of my patches & requests. I just don't want MadMoon grabbing a bunch of interest on the pre-orders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don't Shoot Me Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Same as in other businesses. The book publisher is at the mercy of the author. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Anybody watch the end of the two March Madness late games!!!!!! Unbelievable. Texas hits at the buzzer for a winner. And UCLA gets a miracle to beat out Gonzaga! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don't Shoot Me Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 Originally posted by Liam: TO add, LOOK AT Masters of Orion III Need I say more. I'd rather not see SC2 if it had the issues that game had. Spot on Liam. MOO3 was a disaster but actually more time would not have helped. They fundamentally ignored all the good UI and design decisions that made the MOO series a classic. In fact, they destroyed the MOO franchise. Atari did do a project review about a year before release in which they should have killed the project. The game was in deep trouble at the time, overly complex and consumed with trivia that slowed the game terribly. Atari made their second mistake in not only going forward but keeping mostly the same team that got them into the mess in the first place. The team fundamentally didn't understand abstraction for playability's sake. They didn't at all see it as a problem that there was next to no visual feedback of progress until beta testing hit. By then the financial pressure was such that it was really too late to go back to the drawing board again. They had to push it out. Unlike MOO3, SC2 is a good enhancement of an existing design. Extra time does help here. Hubert understands the balance between abrstraction and playability quite well. And unlike the MOO3 team, he actually did the prior incarnation and so understands the meaning of his franchise better than anyone. I actually think this is going to be a classic in the genre, tough to beat for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted March 24, 2006 Author Share Posted March 24, 2006 Originally posted by Don't Shoot Me: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Liam: TO add, LOOK AT Masters of Orion III Need I say more. I'd rather not see SC2 if it had the issues that game had. Spot on Liam. MOO3 was a disaster but actually more time would not have helped. They fundamentally ignored all the good UI and design decisions that made the MOO series a classic. In fact, they destroyed the MOO franchise. Atari did do a project review about a year before release in which they should have killed the project. The game was in deep trouble at the time, overly complex and consumed with trivia that slowed the game terribly. Atari made their second mistake in not only going forward but keeping mostly the same team that got them into the mess in the first place. The team fundamentally didn't understand abstraction for playability's sake. They didn't at all see it as a problem that there was next to no visual feedback of progress until beta testing hit. By then the financial pressure was such that it was really too late to go back to the drawing board again. They had to push it out. Unlike MOO3, SC2 is a good enhancement of an existing design. Extra time does help here. Hubert understands the balance between abrstraction and playability quite well. And unlike the MOO3 team, he actually did the prior incarnation and so understands the meaning of his franchise better than anyone. I actually think this is going to be a classic in the genre, tough to beat for a long time. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts