PDA

View Full Version : EBGames says MoO3 has slipped until...


Darkstar
13-01-2003, 15:28:07
According to EBGames:
We are writing to let you know that the publisher has set a new ship date for Master of Orion 3 of Feb 25, 2003.

While I am glad we have a firm date, I personally do not mind if it slips a bit more to insure that I will get a fun game that works as it is meant to. Take all the time you need, Quicksilver. We fans will survive the wait.

Nav
13-01-2003, 16:19:54
Maybe they can increase the resolution in that time as well. :mad:

Venom
13-01-2003, 16:31:02
I appreciate the effort of making a quality game, as not enough developers do that anymore, but just call off a release date and use the stupid 3drealms methodology of saying "When it's done"

Darkstar
13-01-2003, 16:36:05
Well, I go into a cone of silence when too much details of MoO3 is revealed, but... the impression I've built up from from I've read and heard is that QS thought they would be ready to go gold around Christmas, but came across a serious late game MP show stopper, and in making sure they've gotten it ironned out, have needed an additional 6 weeks of time. Everything before that was pretty much Managerial Time Lines decided in a vacuum... and stood up to the reality of the project that well.

I'm glad they are taking the time to give us a decent product. I just hope that QS isn't being forced to deliver a product 'regardless'. We've already waited a year on this product. What's another 3 months, if that's what they need?

Nav
13-01-2003, 16:40:29
At some point they will need to release or they will basically go bankrupt or run out of funding.

Darkstar
13-01-2003, 16:43:55
MoO is a classic line. It's like Civ. It's a guaranteed seller. So it would be worthwhile to fund it until completion, so long as you make sure they don't pull an ION on you.

The publisher shit-canned the original development team, didn't it? But they didn't cancel it. So that suggests to me that the publisher agrees with me.

And as long as the game is even OK, they will be able to recapture their development costs, and then profit (again, so long as they aren't pulling and ION). MoO2 is still making them money, today. Even without being offered on the PC platform. That's some long legs for a PC or Mac game.

Resource Consumer
13-01-2003, 16:48:54
Why not shove it out the door and then enhance it for the public later. It's a tried and trusted strategy.

Darkstar
13-01-2003, 16:56:02
Because you never 'enhance it' later, RC.

Was SMAC really enhanced? Civ? No. You have to do it right the first time, because there will not be a later to do it right.

I'm a government worker, and even I know that, despite it being the official business model of the US Government... "Slap something together and rush it out of the door, because we will do it right after we meet our deadline."

You will never get time later to do it right (because there is always something else waiting on your time). You have to do it right up front. If it wasn't for the fact that a game that goes 'unpatched' at release suffers in sales, we wouldn't ever get "patches". (Well, there is a few exceptions to that, but those exceptions are trusted names in the PC world.)

MDA
13-01-2003, 17:01:24
You forgot the <sarcasm> tag, RC.

Even that Feb. date is not 100% set in stone- there's no announcement from IG or QS regarding release. They've sworn not to say a thing until it goes gold. After all the complaining, I wouldn't be surprised if they waited a few days after it went, just to piss off the whiners that want broken MP.

I don't do MP, but I can wait anyway.

Darkstar
13-01-2003, 17:08:54
They'll leak they are going gold pretty quick. No worries. EBGames's claim is that IG has told them. But I've seen EB get liberal with 'release dates' and their sources.

And it makes no sense to ship a SP/MP game out with broken MP. Not when they know what the problem is, and what should fix it.

I'd guess this delay is really localization and such... final testing and prep for gold. They were supposed to have gotten the MP problem fixed pretty quickly, right? But they'd still have to revalidate that the whole thing works, or they could be looking at the worst disaster... a game that someone broke completely in their haste to fix half of it. Better not to ship the game then have that happen.

Nav
13-01-2003, 17:25:14
Originally posted by Darkstar
And it makes no sense to ship a SP/MP game out with broken MP. Not when they know what the problem is, and what should fix it. Even more unbelievable that Firaxis rushed out play the world.... :rolleyes:

Venom
13-01-2003, 17:51:41
Play the World, what a piece of shit.

Resource Consumer
13-01-2003, 18:00:27
Originally posted by MDA
You forgot the <sarcasm> tag, RC.



I know, it gets Darkstar going every time:D

Darkstar
13-01-2003, 18:42:41
Nav, that isn't a surprise.

RC, that's cause I'm so dense and literal. I need small clues to help me understand when text is being sarcastic or joking.

MDA
13-01-2003, 19:03:19
they're officially calling this time "final regression testing", which is exactly as Darkstar described - Just checking every permutation to be sure the bug fixes didn't break anything else.

Darkstar
13-01-2003, 19:21:33
Damn. Sometimes Darkstar is right. What is this world coming to?