Why do gaming companies put out incomplete games during launch and then patch it up later?

[Rabbitearsblog]

So I noticed lately that a lot of gaming companies have been putting out incomplete or rushed games out during the launch of the game and then they later on do patches on the game.  I was wondering, why don't the developers just patch up the game during development?  The problem I find with releasing an incomplete game during launch is that even though the game sometimes will get a patch afterwards, the reputation of the game has been tarnished because of its reception during launch and it could run the risk of many people not wanting to replay the game because of its reputation, despite the fact that it's getting a patch.  What do you all think about this?  Do you think it's a good idea to release a broken game during launch and then patch it up later?

[GX -The Spindash-]

Short answer: Because business.

Longer answer: Because delaying a game from its announcement causes a lot of business complications.

First, there's a lot of logistics requires to get a game out the door: getting retailers to buy it so they can sell to consumers, printing the discs, assembling the packaging, shipping, etc.... This usually means you're in a contract agreement with retailers to provide the game at a set date.

Then you get into marketing. Heavy marketing of AAA games are very expensive and very planned. When you have to change the date, that screws with your messaging, and requires you to change your marketing videos/images/store displays/etc...

THEN you have the miscellaneous licensing stuff, like "here's our promotional Mt. Dew and Doritos agreement, we're going to need a game on the shelf or else our marketing partner is going to be pissed."

THEN in certain circumstances companies plan around a specific time, such as Q4, to promote holiday sales, when your audience is most primed to pay attention to your product and make a purchase.

[Rabbitearsblog]

29 minutes ago, GX Echidna said:

Short answer: Because business.

Longer answer: Because delaying a game from its announcement causes a lot of business complications.

First, there's a lot of logistics requires to get a game out the door: getting retailers to buy it so they can sell to consumers, printing the discs, assembling the packaging, shipping, etc.... This usually means you're in a contract agreement with retailers to provide the game at a set date.

Then you get into marketing. Heavy marketing of AAA games are very expensive and very planned. When you have to change the date, that screws with your messaging, and requires you to change your marketing videos/images/store displays/etc...

THEN you have the miscellaneous licensing stuff, like "here's our promotional Mt. Dew and Doritos agreement, we're going to need a game on the shelf or else our marketing partner is going to be pissed."

THEN in certain circumstances companies plan around a specific time, such as Q4, to promote holiday sales, when your audience is most primed to pay attention to your product and make a purchase.

I guess delaying a game is out of the question if all of these factors do come into play.  However, I do wonder why the upper management don't just ask the developers about how much time they need to finish the game before they set a date for the game's release.

[GX -The Spindash-]

3 hours ago, Rabbitearsblog said:

However, I do wonder why the upper management don't just ask the developers about how much time they need to finish the game before they set a date for the game's release.

Sometimes if you're high enough in a studio, you can help set deadlines, but software development is work built on constantly building solutions to problems, and it can be very difficult to really predict (especially when your project takes two or more years, during which time hardware, publisher direction, or broad cultural interests can change things). From a financial perspective, it seems crazy to let a project go longer than it absolutely, absolutely has to, unless a delay is either completely necessary or will yield higher returns later. "Time is Money" is very real, and the longer a project takes, the longer the publisher is waiting to actually get their financial investment back. Thus you have financials linked to development milestones, and consequences in the system's structure such as crunch.

[Rabbitearsblog]

5 minutes ago, GX Echidna said:

Sometimes if you're high enough in a studio, you can help set deadlines, but software development is work built on constantly building solutions to problems, and it can be very difficult to really predict (especially when your project takes two or more years, during which time hardware, publisher direction, or broad cultural interests can change things). From a financial perspective, it seems crazy to let a project go longer than it absolutely, absolutely has to, unless a delay is either completely necessary or will yield higher returns later. "Time is Money" is very real, and the longer a project takes, the longer the publisher is waiting to actually get their financial investment back. Thus you have financials linked to development milestones, and consequences in the system's structure such as crunch.

That does make sense.  I usually don't understand much about game developments because I'm no game developer.  But it's interesting to see how game developments work and what kind of sacrifices must be made to have a game come out on time.

[Talia the Wolf]

To see what they need to work on. It is important to get feedback from the people that was playing the game in order to make it better.

[Rabbitearsblog]

3 hours ago, Talia the Wolf said:

To see what they need to work on. It is important to get feedback from the people that was playing the game in order to make it better.

I think my concern with that is will some gaming companies take the feedback in consideration and actually improve on the games based on customer feedback?

[Salamander]

To a certain extent, 'twas ever thus; so many classic games are filled with bugs and flaws, and never could be fixed.  In some ways, the fact that games can be patched now has made this effect more obvious; but it is a general truth that almost everything takes longer than you think it will.  Meanwhile, money still needs to be made.  Not many companies have the luxury of working on a game until they are quite sure it is done, and only then setting a release window.

It's lack of resources, basically.  These days I give pretty much every indie game a month or so to update based on all the bugs which only emerged post-release because they didn't have the testers or time to exhaustively debug a game.  Conversely, it might seem outlandish to look at modern AAA games and suggest they lack resources, but the simple fact is that since the jump to HD then games require simply phenomenal quantities of development resources, and it's hardly surprising if something falls short.

...I will say, though: Some incomlete releases do feel more cynical than others.

[Rabbitearsblog]

11 minutes ago, Salamander said:

To a certain extent, 'twas ever thus; so many classic games are filled with bugs and flaws, and never could be fixed.  In some ways, the fact that games can be patched now has made this effect more obvious; but it is a general truth that almost everything takes longer than you think it will.  Meanwhile, money still needs to be made.  Not many companies have the luxury of working on a game until they are quite sure it is done, and only then setting a release window.

It's lack of resources, basically.  These days I give pretty much every indie game a month or so to update based on all the bugs which only emerged post-release because they didn't have the testers or time to exhaustively debug a game.  Conversely, it might seem outlandish to look at modern AAA games and suggest they lack resources, but the simple fact is that since the jump to HD then games require simply phenomenal quantities of development resources, and it's hardly surprising if something falls short.

...I will say, though: Some incomlete releases do feel more cynical than others.

That's pretty interesting.  I wonder if the gaming industry will get to a point where they can improve on the HD mechanics for the games?

[Talia the Wolf]

On 11/14/2022 at 12:53 AM, Rabbitearsblog said:

I think my concern with that is will some gaming companies take the feedback in consideration and actually improve on the games based on customer feedback?

I hope so. If they don't then that would be pretty pathetic in my opinion. I don't see the point in them going through all that trouble just to not do nothing to help improve the game. Then in my opinion, there would be no point in launching it early if they're not going to fix it and make it better.

[Rabbitearsblog]

1 hour ago, Talia the Wolf said:

I hope so. If they don't then that would be pretty pathetic in my opinion. I don't see the point in them going through all that trouble just to not do nothing to help improve the game. Then in my opinion, there would be no point in launching it early if they're not going to fix it and make it better.

I agree.  There's no point in letting the customers give out feedback on their games if they aren't going to improve the games like they promised they would do.

[Talia the Wolf]

On 11/15/2022 at 10:24 PM, Rabbitearsblog said:

I agree.  There's no point in letting the customers give out feedback on their games if they aren't going to improve the games like they promised they would do.

Yep, that would be really idiotic in my opinion. It would be pointless to go trough all that trouble if they weren't going to do that. So yeah, if they don't fix it like they promised then that would be completely on them and it would make me not want to buy anymore games by them. Things have to be so frustrating and complicated nowadays.

[Rabbitearsblog]

2 hours ago, Talia the Wolf said:

Yep, that would be really idiotic in my opinion. It would be pointless to go trough all that trouble if they weren't going to do that. So yeah, if they don't fix it like they promised then that would be completely on them and it would make me not want to buy anymore games by them. Things have to be so frustrating and complicated nowadays.

Exactly.  It can't be so hard to try to improve on the gameplay and yet, they seem to find excuses to not improve the gameplay.

[Talia the Wolf]

On 11/17/2022 at 10:07 PM, Rabbitearsblog said:

Exactly.  It can't be so hard to try to improve on the gameplay and yet, they seem to find excuses to not improve the gameplay.

Hahahahaha! Yeah. That sounds about right. That would just make me really mad. I don't like that!