It is really sad that Crytek is taking their time fixing the hacking issue. More players will be disillusioned by all the cheaters, they'll stop playing Crysis 2 altogether, then Server hosts will start seeing that servers aren't being used anymore, they'll take them offline one by one, and then in a couple of months the Crysis 2 MP community will have 100 servers and we can say goodbye to patches and updates.

If you look at what Ubishaft did with Silent Hunter 5, pushing it out too early, loads of bugs that make the game nigh unplayable or able to be completed, Ubishaft dropped all support and contact with the SH5 community because the game was released in such a poor condition. If EA hasn't changed their ways, they'll do the same thing. They'll tell Crytek to stop wasting their time on fixing Crysis 2, and start work on the next Crysis (if it hasn't already started).

Too many publishers just push out games ruining the titles and the only reason for this is their "deadlines". Games really don't need deadlines. Hell, all the money they spend on the marketing alone could be put towards employees and beta tester!

Gamers will buy a game when it comes out, if it's now, next month, or the following year. The day that publishers created "Release Dates" was the day that quality in game releases started degrading, because it all had to do with meeting "the date". Publishers themselves created the Gamer's expectations and they have only themselves to blame for it.

Back in the early 90's games were being created and they came out when they came out. If a game was good, more people bought it and a majority of the games were not riddled with bugs. I don't recall playing games like the original Battle Of Britain, Close Combat, Gunship 2000, F19 Stealth Fighter, Grand Theft Auto, Keef the Thief, Wing Commander II, and many others, and requiring patches immediately upon release, or even throughout the lifetime of the games themselves.

It is entirely the publishers and developers fault that PC games are taking the quality dive they are, yet what ends up happening is that the community gets blamed for their short-sightedness.

On that note I'd like to thank Gearbox Software President Randy Pitchford at attempting to put a humorous spin on Duke Nuke'm Forever's May 3rd release delay. Gamers will still buy the dang game, either way you look at it. Release it in good condition and you'll have a following. Release crap, you get crap.

What really needs to happen, is that people need to wait before buying games. Wait for the forums to populate with information from people that did buy the games letting people know how good or bad the game is. Hurt Publishers and Developers wallets if the games are bad. It'll also teach Publishers about spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, on Marketing for the games. Review magazines such as PC Gamer and Maximum PC have already been bought by the gaming industry and you'll never get a truthful word from them anyways. Creative Assembly/Sega's Empire Total Failure anyone? A game that received a +90 rating when most people couldn't even start the game up on release date and a majority of items weren't even working in the game.

I don't buy questionable games at full price anymore. I wait until Steam or Direct2Drive offer them at reduced prices. This keeps my wallet fuller, (my wife happier), keeps me better informed about games playability several months after release, I'm not as pissed off about why games don't work the way they should or were intended to work, and I hurt the publisher and developer for doing a poor job on a game.

Anyways... enough of my rant...