Ah, Brink... Everyone is waiting for you... You got delayed twice, but people are still waiting... Because you look awesome...

What do you guys think? What were your reactions to the delays? Do you care? And...Would you mind if they delayed it more?

This is the complete thread for discussion of Delays.


Thanks!

I rather wait six months extra for a good game that I can play for a lot of time, rather than getting it sooner and being pissed because it doesn't work as it should. I don't mind bugs, I do mind major gameplay flaws. The last "Wolfenstein" was a great example of this.

Yes. BUT -- What if it had no bugs, but they just delayed it for extra "balancing?"

That's... exactly what he said o.O
I agree though, I'll wait for a game to be released if it makes it better. Be it bugs, or balancing, I'll wait.

It go delayed?

No, just your opinions on delaying.

If it is to improve game and gameplay I'm all for it (as is the case with Brink). I do not mind the wait.

I can wait a bit longer. Plus, I don't mind if it gets put off specifically to avoid being released in competition to Halo 4 or CoD 8.

Delaying i just gotta say maybe you guys at splash damage and Bethesda softworks should have considered an open beta because then you could get some opinions from the gamers point of view look at Modern Warfare 2 despite it being most anticipated game of the year from the gamers point of view it svcked it didnt meet my expectations and many others its good to get an honest gamers opinion to find bugs glitches and other exploits because at the end of the games creation and it hits store shelves it gonna be the gamers playing your game like it the end of the world but thats my opinion personally it better to have gamers and creators opinions than just the creators opinion

Meerkat

I'm going to have to stick with the middle on this one as always. I would rather wait for a high, or rather highest quality game with tons of replayability.

Lots of people played it at PAX (I think that's where it was) and I have heard nothing but positive reviews.

A great game is only delayed until it's released.

A bad game is bad forever.

There making a cod 8? i never even knew there was a cod 5, last numbered call lf duty was call of duty 4, and id be surprised if they would make another, its the same game everytime just a diffrent era, cod is dying, also ithought halo reach was the last game there making.

aside from that i want them to delay brink if it means a better game. i want a perfected game not some [censored]t cod reproduction, but they should fget a beta out soon like mabey next month?

Well, they are coming out with MW3, then CoD Space Combat or sumthing liek that.

Nah, I want it now, fix it while I play it, I'll even help in the process.

I don't mind delays, however if this game turns into another Duke Nukem then I might strangle someone. I know it's going to be good but there is a limit to patience.

space/future would sound fail-ish and its kind of copying battlefield 2142

I've been waiting for a quality sci-fi FPS for a while. 2142 was good, but what's next?

as far as i know, upcoming battlefield games wont be sc-fi and im not sure anyones really making anything like that, well a good one anyhow.

This. I am fine with the wait so far. Waiting even more would annoy me. Anything past Spring 2011 would just go past my limits of patience. Up until now I could handle all the delays because I would rather have a truly great game late than a bad or mediocre game right away. But even more delays would just really annoy me. Even if it gets delayed again I would still pay off my third copy that I preordered at Gamestop, and of course Steam already has my money, and I used a giftcard for Amazon, so I would still get three copies, but I would be annoyed.

Delaying is never a bad thing. You don't want its release to be like BC2's do you?

I stopped thinking that way quite a while ago. Because delays have too often been absolutely random and did not improve the quality of a game at all (or just slightly beyond an absolute catastrophe).


To be honest, the lucky people (who did get through the whole mission on the Security side) got about half an hour of gameplay without the option to customise stuff (only the chance if they were smart enuff).
Of course the first impression was great, because that demo was pretty solid. I got totally hyped through this demo as well.

It can't be compared to a real test, still.


The next step for the COD-franchise would rather be copying Ghost Recon in terms of technology (not gameplay, of course. Ghost Recon is waaaaaaaa.......aaaaaaay more tactical.)

I personally think that you're being a bit too negative.
Yeah, delays don't always make a bad game amazing (If it's terrible to begin with, it's probably gonna stay that way.) but we've already established that the people that played the PAX Demo thought it was amazing. Either the delays have done nothing at all, or they've improved the game, but either one doesn't harm anyone. Worst case scenario is that they changed a few minor things, and made us all wait a few more months for those tiny changes. Best case scenario is that they had some really terrible things and the delay fixed them all and made it much better.
And yeah, it's not the same as a full on Public Beta, but that doesn't mean we can just discard it and say it means nothing. People played it, and they loved it. If they played 5 min of it and loved it, it's better then playing 5 min and already hating it.

I wouldn't mind the wait if it's to make the game better. Besides, Killzone 3 and Crysis 2 are right around the corner.....those 2 will keep me extremely busy.

Likely, my way of thinking won't apply to BRINK. But if it does, I can say "Told ya so."
BRINK presumably releases at the same time like other big games (e.g. Crysis 2), so they did not push it back for competition-reasons.

Generally speaking, though, delays do almost always hurt the popularity of a game; especially a new franchise.