Your bias is causing you to miss an entire point. The company pretending that product is right around the corner when in fact its years away. Yes this is deception and to throw up some lame excuse that it needs polishing is only accepted through bias and not logical thinking.
It is not bias, It is logical, tempered enthusiasm. There are certainly things about the development I don't like, but it isn't the apocalypse that you and some others claim. I'll admit that "polish" might be a stretch in terms of what's needed, but I cannot agree with your point that it is outright deception. I highly doubt it's "years" away. If things went from one mission in white-box, to all missions in grey-box 3 months later, mid year next year sounds like a reasonable time frame to me. I see you and the other doomsayers as illogical, jumping to conclusions with your assessments, or perhaps just simply parroting what you've read and heard.
The delay is disappointing, but not the end of the world. I can't completely defend the seemingly continuous missing of deadlines (at worst though I believe, it is just poor marketing), but I do understand that delays are inevitable, and I would rather them take extra time to ensure the final product is awesome, instead of releasing a polished turd (at deadline) such as that of EA and ActiBlizz. You do know people hate that, and are quite vocal about it when it happens.
However, What is more likely is that Chris decided not to pull resources off of the game development to produce a demo, in order to ensure and maximize the completion of the full game. He's said that they are finishing one mission (presumptive demo) to release quality, and the others will follow suite.
It's easy enough to make rought estimations on CIG's financial status when you have that much information available. Some of the doomsayers misuse those numbers, but making estimates is not idle speculation nor cognitive bias. It's math.
I was not aware that those financial documents existed. I stand corrected on that. Thank you for the information.
Anyone posting over 2500 times on a single topic in less than a year is either obsessed or employed :-)
Hell, i don't think i have that many posts on my account here in over 10 years lol
I remembered when I was so obsessed with gundam. Yet never would I consider replying to every single post about it.
I reckon its the later...
From Saul Alinsky’s "Rules for Radicals"
No. 5) "Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions." ,
No. 12) "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
Basically if all else fails, attack the person instead of their argument.
It isn't hitting just that there is a big difference from updating an alpha than having to delete it and download the whole thing again. That should worry everyone of us backers. I have never been involved with a company that couldn't setup a patching system. That is what keeps me wondering how good any of these developers are, or are allowed to do. Clearly everything has to come from Roberts before people can take a poop in this company. Yes am trying to be a little funny!
A game patcher wouldn't be their first priority when a SP campaign named SQ42 is that priority. Only this year there's finally visible progress on PU-specific releases and development (especially tech-wise).
It feels like it's something simple, until we get to see that to change Cryengine's default behaviors on both game loadings and patching (as the engine was never made to one MMO so it didn't need that), they did/are going to the core of the engine to make the new patcher possible, there's quite in-depth info on that on the Austin ATV (8:50 for the direct topic):
UHH, it should be a basic part of the game engine. Heck, A.Net even has a patent on their engine patching system - it is built INTO THE GAME. Basically, that is very stupid premise, that a patching system is not important. It is part and parcel of a game engine. If you can't patch it, it doesn't matter how nice the game is, if you have to download the whole thing over and over - it is just basic crap.
It isn't hitting just that there is a big difference from updating an alpha than having to delete it and download the whole thing again. That should worry everyone of us backers. I have never been involved with a company that couldn't setup a patching system. That is what keeps me wondering how good any of these developers are, or are allowed to do. Clearly everything has to come from Roberts before people can take a poop in this company. Yes am trying to be a little funny!
A game patcher wouldn't be their first priority when a SP campaign named SQ42 is that priority. Only this year there's finally visible progress on PU-specific releases and development (especially tech-wise).
It feels like it's something simple, until we get to see that to change Cryengine's default behaviors on both game loadings and patching (as the engine was never made to one MMO so it didn't need that), they did/are going to the core of the engine to make the new patcher possible, there's quite in-depth info on that on the Austin ATV (8:50 for the direct topic):
UHH, it should be a basic part of the game engine. Heck, A.Net even has a patent on their engine patching system - it is built INTO THE GAME. Basically, that is very stupid premise, that a patching system is not important. It is part and parcel of a game engine. If you can't patch it, it doesn't matter how nice the game is, if you have to download the whole thing over and over - it is just basic crap.
GW2 was smart enough to consider game patching before they built their engine and they are just about the only mmo that doesn't have to go down when there is new builds. They also never have downtime due to maintenance or any other bullcrap you get from all other mmo's.
It isn't hitting just that there is a big difference from updating an alpha than having to delete it and download the whole thing again. That should worry everyone of us backers. I have never been involved with a company that couldn't setup a patching system. That is what keeps me wondering how good any of these developers are, or are allowed to do. Clearly everything has to come from Roberts before people can take a poop in this company. Yes am trying to be a little funny!
A game patcher wouldn't be their first priority when a SP campaign named SQ42 is that priority. Only this year there's finally visible progress on PU-specific releases and development (especially tech-wise).
It feels like it's something simple, until we get to see that to change Cryengine's default behaviors on both game loadings and patching (as the engine was never made to one MMO so it didn't need that), they did/are going to the core of the engine to make the new patcher possible, there's quite in-depth info on that on the Austin ATV (8:50 for the direct topic):
UHH, it should be a basic part of the game engine. Heck, A.Net even has a patent on their engine patching system - it is built INTO THE GAME. Basically, that is very stupid premise, that a patching system is not important. It is part and parcel of a game engine. If you can't patch it, it doesn't matter how nice the game is, if you have to download the whole thing over and over - it is just basic crap.
GW2 was smart enough to consider game patching before they built their engine and they are just about the only mmo that doesn't have to go down when there is new builds. They also never have downtime due to maintenance or any other bullcrap you get from all other mmo's.
They do actually. I mean the PvP arenas did go down for maintenance twice in the last week. Companies can actually license the tech from A.Net - why reinvent the wheel.
Also, A.Net is using distributed servers in the server farm, meaning one is login, one has your toon's info, one is PvP, one WvW, and several others for PvE.
It isn't hitting just that there is a big difference from updating an alpha than having to delete it and download the whole thing again. That should worry everyone of us backers. I have never been involved with a company that couldn't setup a patching system. That is what keeps me wondering how good any of these developers are, or are allowed to do. Clearly everything has to come from Roberts before people can take a poop in this company. Yes am trying to be a little funny!
A game patcher wouldn't be their first priority when a SP campaign named SQ42 is that priority. Only this year there's finally visible progress on PU-specific releases and development (especially tech-wise).
It feels like it's something simple, until we get to see that to change Cryengine's default behaviors on both game loadings and patching (as the engine was never made to one MMO so it didn't need that), they did/are going to the core of the engine to make the new patcher possible, there's quite in-depth info on that on the Austin ATV (8:50 for the direct topic):
UHH, it should be a basic part of the game engine. Heck, A.Net even has a patent on their engine patching system - it is built INTO THE GAME. Basically, that is very stupid premise, that a patching system is not important. It is part and parcel of a game engine. If you can't patch it, it doesn't matter how nice the game is, if you have to download the whole thing over and over - it is just basic crap.
GW2 was smart enough to consider game patching before they built their engine and they are just about the only mmo that doesn't have to go down when there is new builds. They also never have downtime due to maintenance or any other bullcrap you get from all other mmo's.
They do actually. I mean the PvP arenas did go down for maintenance twice in the last week. Companies can actually license the tech from A.Net - why reinvent the wheel.
Also, A.Net is using distributed servers in the server farm, meaning one is login, one has your toon's info, one is PvP, one WvW, and several others for PvE.
Everything has to have maintenance at some point. There is no way to avoid such a thing completely. But it is not normal for them to bring anything down in GW2 by any means.
Comments
They do actually. I mean the PvP arenas did go down for maintenance twice in the last week. Companies can actually license the tech from A.Net - why reinvent the wheel.
Also, A.Net is using distributed servers in the server farm, meaning one is login, one has your toon's info, one is PvP, one WvW, and several others for PvE.