Flexible deadline for a more refined game?

[DarthAdamRG]

I would like the dealine to be flexible regardless, more like, 2014 and leave it at that, or just TBC.

[septembervirgin]

I think I'll be able to wait past April 2014 for this game. After all, I'll be getting a Beta key.

[exodiark]

As long as it's not Valve flexible, then yes

[working man hole]

No rushing please, a few months of waiting more are not a problem.

[The Sharmat]

Development time is quality. So long as the game is delivered, I'm happy waiting three years. Though I doubt they could afford to develop it for that long.

[Entropious]

Sorry, but should I wish for a game to be released in 2016, I'd make a donation to Blizzard.

[Kyzariel]

Indeed, I agree with the general idea that the developers should be free to take as reasonable as possible margin of error - with an estimate (Spring-Summer 2014) to put things into perspective. In my opinion, it should be more important that Project Eternity should be a fully fledged game capable of standing alongside the best RPGs of yesteryears than to meet a particular deadline.

[timobkg]

Yes and No - A clear cutoff date stops feature creep otherwise we'd be waiting longer then Half Life 3 for this to turn up. It's great they will have the funding to make the game bigger and better with each dollar they get. But its also important they finish before the funding dries up paying for everything. Last thing I would want to see is the game being sold to a developer just so they could finish or bringing out the hat for another whip around.

Yes, exactly this. I'm happy to wait until it's ready, but no one wants to see a repeat of Duke Nukem Forever.

[Shardwinter]

I agree with the majority that delays are acceptable if it increases the quality of the final product. Hell, I almost hope they extend the deadline by a few months for some additional QA and release an (almost) bug free product, if only to clear their name after their most recent games.

[Kilroy_Was_Here]

I think it's too early to know if the April 2014 (which itself is only given as an estimate) is realistic or not.

 

Either the engine they choose to use can be easily coded to make the game, or it can't.

 

Either lots of crippling/crashing/annoying bugs will pop up late in the development process, or they won't.

 

Either all the content they want to include is ready/balanced/playtested as the release date approaches, or it isn't.

 

Probably the first real indication we will have about the state of the game is when the donor beta starts and we start to hear what shape the game is in.

[Pangur]

Yes, the deadline should be flexible. Doesn't matter if the game reaches 3 million or 5 or 10, they should take their time. Actually I also think April 2014 is a bit too soon, but Kilroy_Was_Here is right, it's too early to tell.

All in all, I don't mind waiting 2-3 years for this game.

[Majek]

Since the date is just an estimate , the deadline already is flexible. I think they'll release the game when it's polished enough. It may be April 2014 but it also can be a few months later. But not 2015, they won't take that long.

Edited September 20, 2012 by Majek

[HansKrSG]

If I have to wait to 2014, a fem months more wont matter, I cannot afford waiting at the edge of my seat anyway. Finish the product, even if it takes longer time than prospected.

[Jarmo]

Cut content or features if that's what it takes to get the game out in reasonable time.

 

Just make sure that whatever is in the game when shipped, is relatively bug free and in working order,

delay if necessary to make sure of that.

 

If there's money to spend, try to save enough of it for after release fixes and patches.

Maybe add the cut features, if everything goes just perfectly, in a way it never does.

 

I'll much rather take a more limited working game, than a less polished game with a lot more features and areas.

[True_Spike]

The game can come out late 2015 for all I care, I just want it to be everything it was promised. And you guys pretty much promised the best RPG to date only 5 days into the project.

Edited September 21, 2012 by True_Spike

[Redwulf]

I believe that the deadline should be flexible even if they don't get a penny more as of now if that means a better game. However, there are limits to how far it should be stretched, say six months maximum in my opinion. If the game is still bad after going that far over, spending more time on it won't fix it. Not that I think it will be bad, it should own, after all it already owns my wallet now.

[dan107]

Bioware used to make great games. Then it started hitting deadlines. Enough said.

[Entropious]

There's no point anticipating a game when all you're allowed to do is...anticipate it.

[Paul D]

I think take the time that is needed to ensure a quality product. It is the old project management pyramid:

 

$

/ \

T _ Q

 

$ - Money, T - Time, Q - Quality

 

You can have any two, and lets assume we want a quality product. This means:

• You can have a quality product, cheaply, but it will take a very long time.
  
• You can have a quality product, quickly, but it will cost a fortune.