The Possibility of a delayed (2015) release

[Monocled Gamer]

A further delay is not an issue for me, as long as the game delivers. A potential franchise is riding on this and they can't afford to release a buggy mess, particularly with the likes of RPS seemingly ready to jump on any of these issues.

 

Take your time, release a game that will be remembered and replayed for years.

[PrimeJunta]

Re delays... I work in software development myself and have a pretty good idea of the kinds of things that can go wrong and throw the schedule out of whack. Teams that manage to deliver consistently on budget and on schedule are much rarer than teams that occasionally see slippage. Sometimes it's not even the team's fault; all it takes sometimes is that one key person becomes unavailable at a critical time for whatever reason.

 

I.e., I have a quite a lot of understanding for schedule slippage. From where I'm at it's the end product that counts.

 

That said, repeated schedule slippage is usually indicative of something else wrong. P:E's hasn't slipped yet, unless you count the schedule they had in mind when starting the kickstarter, when the project was one-quarter the size of how it ended up (and I don't; it's impossible to make even a slightly accurate estimate if you don't know the project scope). So if it slips once, I won't even shrug. If it slips twice, I'll raise an eyebrow. From the third time I'll start to get worried.

 

Finally, one thing Obsidian has managed to do, historically, is deliver on schedule, even when the conditions are extremely unfavorable, and Josh has a really good track record managing these kinds of projects.

 

So I guess the short version is that I'm not worried at all.

[Stun]

Well, no major schedule slippage, but they have, on two occasions, canceled a scheduled update because they 'weren't ready' to show what they had planned to show.

 

Can anything be read/interpreted from that?

Edited May 18, 2014 by Stun

[Lephys]

Can anything be read/interpreted from that?

Armageddon, at the very least.

[Osvir]

Winter 2014 does mean "full release" right? Not "We will release Early Access 2014".. right? That might not be a death blow, but it will definitely be a "bummer" moment for me.

The wisest strategy, I think, is to release the Early Access a couple of months before Winter 2014. Just to get some of that feedback from fans prior to release. Early Access does show a trend of pushing release dates up though, lots of fan/user feedback does that to products, so even if Obsidian releases an Early Access before Winter 2014 that does not mean it will be completed Winter 2014 (due to fan feedback).

If, a big if, they decide to release an Early Access product in Winter 2014, yes, then we might even see a full release early-mid Spring 2015.

[Nonek]

I agree that $60 for a beta demo is of course distasteful and I am not familiar with early access on Steam, but can the game not be pre-ordered for that $60 and early access granted based on that pre-order, or is that not how the scheme works?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I seriously doubt there will be any delays with releasing the game when we've had multiple Obsidian employees including Feargus himself state the game will be released this year.

[DCParry]

Early access can be a double edged sword, but I have no strong feelings one way or another about it (I sometimes buy something like Endless Legends, something I would have bought anyways, just to show some support for the devs and then forget I have it until the release).

 

As for delays, I am of two minds here. Delay do the unavoidable conflicts, issues, emergencies is perfectly fine. These sorts of things may result in a relatively small delay and there is nothing the devs or anyone else can do about it. 

 

Now, delays because of feature bloat and the inability to manage your game properly is a horse of a different colour. This sort of behaviour seems to be plaguing many KS projects (although most of this comes from new/indie studios that are smaller and less experienced than Obsidian). It is like they get some money and go all spazzy monkey boy seizure and want to add in everything so the entire experience is actually never finished and the game is watered down and directionless. 

 

Now, I have no expectations that this will happen to Obsidian AT ALL. They are a great studio with a lot of experience and they have a solid design document and aren't going to delay because the Steam early access money has allowed to opportunity to provide anatomically correct models of all the background animals, but the game is going to be delayed a year in order to feel realize the vision they have for the appearance of sheep testicles. 

 

More time does not always equal better game.

[Mor]

I think that the OP is quick to jump to conclusions, but even if the game release was delayed, I'd no problem with that, no more than I had a problem with Obsidian partnership with Paradox. After all the reason why we are here is because of how traditional publishers limited creativity, and rushed out games on strict schedule. Which not the case here and I am not going to take the publishers stance to make it so. I waited so long I can wait little longer.

 

With that said, if I wasn't invested in PE, I would be ranting about Early access (and Kickstarters) from the top of the world. From purely customer point of view, they are nothing but worst case of "pre-order" schemes, where people pay more to get less, running their first impression for the chance of working as beta testers.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Mor

[Sensuki]

I actually didn't jump to any conclusions.

 

I stated some information about Steam Early Access, PE's development cycle, posed a question to the devs and said that I thought that a delay into 2015 is possible.

 

A few people have also misinterpreted the tone of the delay as "Delay because the game isn't ready" instead of "Delay because we got some more money", and since a game is literally "never finished", they could use that money for further polish - more monsters would get better animations, more bug fixes etc etc.

 

I asked whether the devs would spend the Steam Early Access money on the game, or piggy bank it for the expansion - a question that they probably don't know the answer to yet, so there will probably not be an answer.

 

Also regarding the schedule slippage, there have been (at least three) schedule slippages that I know about

 

#1 - The delay of the backer website slowed down the implementation of the Kickstarter reward tiers such as Backer Inns, Adventuring Parties, Items etc

 

#2 - The Narrative team came on a bit later than expected

 

#3 - I think it took them a while to get a VFX artist for the game

 

Nothing major of course, I'm sure they did some jumbling.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Sensuki

[Karkarov]

Well I didn't really touch on schedule in my earlier post (which seems be be a big focus for some) but I will be very very disappointed if it misses it's release goal.  It has been over a year, it will be near two years by December.  These are the same people who put out Icewind Dale 2 in 10 months.  They can meet their release goal, and I will extend that to say on the games where they failed to meet their release goal.... Reception was mixed at best.

 

More time does not always mean better product.  December 2014 is what a team of this size should reasonably need for this kind of game.

[Sensuki]

The other thing to consider is that in working out their deal with Paradox, they might have said that release by the end of the year produces the best sales numbers, so despite getting more money, they may wish to keep it anyway to maximize profit margins.

[PrimeJunta]

Well, no major schedule slippage, but they have, on two occasions, canceled a scheduled update because they 'weren't ready' to show what they had planned to show.

 

Can anything be read/interpreted from that?

In my opinion, no. Updates are PR, and if PR is led by the developers, then PR must take second-priority to development tasks. Normal turbulence will shift around second-priority tasks. They have been demonstrating constant tangible progress. That's what counts.

[Jarmo]

I'm not sure how Early Access usually works, but doesn't it usually give access to the game, not just to a (very) limited demo?

Or that's how I'd think it should be anyway. But take the cash by all means, if it's there to be got.

 

But I don't think Obsidian is going to delay just for **** and giggles, if a major reason pops up, maybe,

but even then I'd expect them to rather ship and then code frantically to have a day one patch.

 

They have a lot riding on this, delivering on schedule like professionals being one main thing.

Delivering a polished product is another, but I don't know if it's that much more important.

 

Then again, I see the "winter" release schedule being purposedly ambiguous enough,

so delivering in 2015, before spring, is still counted as a success. And I think they have budgeted that in.

Not to delay as such maybe, but to have ready funds for post launch patching.

[Gnostic]

Long Version

Of course they can delay the game to 2015 or even 2016. I am not EA or some big bad publisher that rush the release date that the final product is lackluster and disappointing.

 

I want to maximize the awesomeness of the game rather than maximize profit. Remember why we crowd fund games in the first place?

What is the point of being able to play the game if it is buggy or missing much core feature / polish?

 

They can do a steam early access or another kick starter if they really need funds to polish the game. I only want the end product to be amazing, and I don’t care if they are not being fair by selling the game at a cheaper price for non-backers.

 

What’s the point for being “Fair” to me if they do not have enough funds realize a new gamming history?

Maximize my gaming experience is and always is the priority, not profit nor so call “fairness to me”.

 

That said, they have to take care of their reputation and not follow the negative reputation of Wasteland 2 Early access nor Planetary Annihilation that come to steam that charge $90 for the alpha of the game, $60 for beta and $40 for the final game.

That will give then some money in the short term but may hurt their reputation in the long run.

 

I am a Torment à Wasteland 2 backer so my criticism of them should hold more weight. What they should do is release both the Deluxe Edition with a Basic Preorder edition which does not have the beta access.

They can put in some flowery language to sweeten the deal, like “Although the Wasteland 2 Preorder is enough have the full experience of the game, gamers can also get the deluxe edition to help in the development of the game and gain a little extra as a thank you from us.”

That way nobody have the right to criticize them for ripping gamers off for the beta, as both option is presented to them, I think the little visibility for the Basic Preorder edition in Inxile store cause the knee jerk reaction because the gamers think Inxile only sell the Deluxe edition and want to rip off gamers.

 

Also don’t think Steam Early Access is good for beta testing to find bugs, it is a PRESENTATION OF YOUR PRODUCT TO THE PUBLIC. Hence is should be a place for you to show your DEMO, you want your demo to be as little bugs as possible so not to give the public a chance to give negative review!!!!!!! Yes you may use Early Access to test the balance of the game, the flow of the game play, 1/10 or more of the story, but NEVER a place to iron out bugs. The public will not give you positive review if your DEMO crash now and then, have character stuck somewhere, dumb path finding and such.

 

Short Version:

Obsidian can take as long as they want to create the “Bestest” game in history.

Careful of how you sell it as Steam Early Access as it is a PRESENTATION OF YOUR PRODUCT TO THE PUBLIC.

[Osvir]

Oh the horror (Steam Early Access).

 

UnEpic is an Early Access game?? I own this title and I didn't realize! It was released 13-Jun-2013. That's... scary.

Xenonauts was released 31-May-2013. This is almost a year of Early Access now. 

The point I want to make is that Early Access can be degenerative in the long run during the period ("Is it ever going to be fully finished??" type of thoughts).

Xenonauts is nearing completion, or so it feels. It is still almost a year. It still has bugs and needs tinkering with.

Wasteland 2 and Starbound are in on their 6th month of Early Access. I don't know about Wasteland 2, how close it is to completion that is (I'm not up-to-date on that title), but Starbound feels like it is at least getting there.

 

One perk about being in the Early Access program is that no matter how long you're in there, I do think that when the game is finally released, it pops up to the front page of the Steam Client and "New Releases" as an "Out Now!" product and that should be a 2nd spike in sales (Early Access "Out Now!" sale spike and Full Release "Out Now!" spike). I recall one game that was on Early Access that this happened to when it was finished (Don't remember the name of it).

Another perk is what Ffordeson said about Wasteland 2, people were a bit "meh" about it at first, but are praising it more and more as time goes along. I feel the same thing about Divinity: Original Sin, when me and my friend first tried it out we were a bit "meh" about it, but it is constantly improving. And that is both a beautiful thing to see and very exciting thing to be a part of as well.

When these games do come out of Early Access, and they prove to be awesome, people who might've complained at one point will instead of have forgotten what it was, and instead see it for what it is. In that sense, there's no disadvantage to be in Early Access for a year. It is still a bit of a bummer though.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Osvir

[Quetzalcoatl]

Well I didn't really touch on schedule in my earlier post (which seems be be a big focus for some) but I will be very very disappointed if it misses it's release goal.  It has been over a year, it will be near two years by December.  These are the same people who put out Icewind Dale 2 in 10 months.

Icewind Dale 2 was developed using a pre-existing engine. It also had a limited scope compared to the Baldur's Gate games, being more focused on combat. RPG's take a lot more time to develop than other genres (Dragon Age Origins was apparently revealed at E3 2004 and didn't come out until 2009).  

Edited May 19, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl

[Gnostic]

Oh the horror (Steam Early Access).

 

UnEpic is an Early Access game?? I own this title and I didn't realize! It was released 13-Jun-2013. That's... scary.

 

Xenonauts was released 31-May-2013. This is almost a year of Early Access now. 

 

The point I want to make is that Early Access can be degenerative in the long run during the period ("Is it ever going to be fully finished??" type of thoughts).

 

Xenonauts is nearing completion, or so it feels. It is still almost a year. It still has bugs and needs tinkering with.

 

Wasteland 2 and Starbound are in on their 6th month of Early Access. I don't know about Wasteland 2, how close it is to completion that is (I'm not up-to-date on that title), but Starbound feels like it is at least getting there.

 

One perk about being in the Early Access program is that no matter how long you're in there, I do think that when the game is finally released, it pops up to the front page of the Steam Client and "New Releases" as an "Out Now!" product and that should be a 2nd spike in sales (Early Access "Out Now!" sale spike and Full Release "Out Now!" spike). I recall one game that was on Early Access that this happened to when it was finished (Don't remember the name of it).

 

Another perk is what Ffordeson said about Wasteland 2, people were a bit "meh" about it at first, but are praising it more and more as time goes along. I feel the same thing about Divinity: Original Sin, when me and my friend first tried it out we were a bit "meh" about it, but it is constantly improving. And that is both a beautiful thing to see and very exciting thing to be a part of as well.

 

When these games do come out of Early Access, and they prove to be awesome, people who might've complained at one point will instead of have forgotten what it was, and instead see it for what it is. In that sense, there's no disadvantage to be in Early Access for a year. It is still a bit of a bummer though.

I beg to differ regarding there is no disadvantage to be in the Early Access.

 

Steam Early Access is a presentation of your product to the public

 

Thus any flaws in your product is scrutinized and if you make one mistake too many you will get stuck with the negative review and require a uphill battle to restore your reputation. Even if you manage to clear your name in the end, you may lose some sales and your next kick starter may lose some backer.

 

That said Steam Early Access is not a place to use the public to help find bugs and iron them out. It should be a place for you to show your DEMO, you want your demo to be as little bugs as possible so not to give the public a chance to give negative review! Yes you may use Early Access to test the balance of the game, the flow of the game play, 1/10 or more of the story, but never a place to iron out bugs. The public will not give you positive review if your demo crash now and then, have character stuck somewhere, dumb path finding and such.

 

Think Steam Early Access as a place to release your full game, episode 1, and it will work in your advantage for you to get more positive review, sales and future backers.

[Messier-31]

Back in the good ol' days of gamin' there were no fancy-schmancy whatnot steam, or foam, or whadda ya call 'em realeses. And if this product wants to be a true successor to the Infinity Engine games, there should be none. Y'hear?

 

And from where, in the tarnation, tis' dayum accent suddenly came from?

[Jarmo]

One Early Access type of game that worked out fine was Mount&Blade,

it was being sold way unfinished in a kickstarter before kickstarter fashion.

 

And it remained unfinished for about forever.

And then it was finished and was awesome.

 

The difference is, you got it for cheap, cheaper than the finished one.

And then you got the updates as well.

 

Early Access system - pay a premium for a buggy mess.

I kind of don't understand the appeal at all. From a gamers point of view that is.

As a publisher it's an easy choice, milk the suckers dry.

[Sensuki]

My understanding is that the PE beta will have:

 

Final 2D paintovers & animations on the levels in the beta / demo - thus VG++ visual quality

Semi final to final main character animations

Semi final to final spell and ability FX and animations

Semi final GUI / Menus

Final voice overs for the voiced content (PC voice sets, CNPC voice sets, NPCs in the beta, incantations)

etc

 

The stuff that they'll want to get feedback on during the beta are

 

Bugs

Performance over a variety of hardware

Feedback on the systems / balance

Feedback on the presented content

General feedback

Allow players to get used to the ruleset before playing the game

Localization bugs / feedback

 

The reason for the limited beta is to avoid story spoilers to the general public (and beta testers themselves) which I think is good. It does however kind of limit the feedback that they get on the majority of areas and content, so they'll have to rely on their in-house beta testers and Paradox's beta testers initially. No different than a publisher title.

[Karkarov]

 

Well I didn't really touch on schedule in my earlier post (which seems be be a big focus for some) but I will be very very disappointed if it misses it's release goal.  It has been over a year, it will be near two years by December.  These are the same people who put out Icewind Dale 2 in 10 months.

Icewind Dale 2 was developed using a pre-existing engine. It also had a limited scope compared to the Baldur's Gate games, being more focused on combat. RPG's take a lot more time to develop than other genres (Dragon Age Origins was apparently revealed at E3 2004 and didn't come out until 2009).  

 

Are you saying Unity isn't a pre-existing engine?  I am aware of the scope downgrade and the fact that they were familiar with Infinity Engine and not Unity.  That's why I said December is enough time, again, that is a near two year dev cycle.  Two years is plenty of time for a team of their size with their experience level.  They aren't indy devs making a game for the first time or working in a genre they have never touched and unlike Dragon Age: Origins they aren't trying to make a AAA budget game with motion actors and all dialog spoken etc etc.  For as big a scope difference Icewind Dale 2 has to Eternity, Dragon Age: Origins has the same scope difference as well.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Karkarov

[PrimeJunta]

There's a big difference in abstraction level between Unity and Infinity Engine. Unity is more like an engine for making engines; the P:E engine is built on top of that. Obviously way easier than doing the whole thing from scratch, but definitely more work than what IWD2 had to do.

[Sarex]

There's a big difference in abstraction level between Unity and Infinity Engine. Unity is more like an engine for making engines; the P:E engine is built on top of that. Obviously way easier than doing the whole thing from scratch, but definitely more work than what IWD2 had to do.

 

That is your expert opinion is it?

[Quetzalcoatl]

 

 

Well I didn't really touch on schedule in my earlier post (which seems be be a big focus for some) but I will be very very disappointed if it misses it's release goal.  It has been over a year, it will be near two years by December.  These are the same people who put out Icewind Dale 2 in 10 months.

Icewind Dale 2 was developed using a pre-existing engine. It also had a limited scope compared to the Baldur's Gate games, being more focused on combat. RPG's take a lot more time to develop than other genres (Dragon Age Origins was apparently revealed at E3 2004 and didn't come out until 2009).  

 

Are you saying Unity isn't a pre-existing engine?  I am aware of the scope downgrade and the fact that they were familiar with Infinity Engine and not Unity.  That's why I said December is enough time, again, that is a near two year dev cycle.  Two years is plenty of time for a team of their size with their experience level.  They aren't indy devs making a game for the first time or working in a genre they have never touched and unlike Dragon Age: Origins they aren't trying to make a AAA budget game with motion actors and all dialog spoken etc etc.  For as big a scope difference Icewind Dale 2 has to Eternity, Dragon Age: Origins has the same scope difference as well.

Unity isn't a pre-existing engine in the same way that the Infinity Engine was. You still have to build a game from scratch using Unity's tools, whereas the Infinity Engine basically provided a skeleton for games to be built upon, hence why all the IE games are so similar and could be made in such a short amount of time. There's a reason why InXile licensed the Pillars of Eternity technology rather than develop that stuff themselves.  

 

As for Dragon Age: Origins, it was also made with a much bigger team, a team of hundreds perhaps (and no, it didn't have motion capture). Pillars has a team of maybe two dozen people.

 

By the way, they started in september 2012, so it will be more like 2 years and a quarter.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Quetzalcoatl