even delays can be bad, just to give a example, FFXIV current expansion main selling feature got plenty of delays, and when got released?, people complained about it as being bad content, and when they updated it, the complains increased to the point what currently there had been over 3 weeks
No amount of patches can change the initial stigma, the initial impression some people got. I fully recognise that No Man's Sky has been patched into being a decent game now for example, but you still see people everywhere who froth at the mouth if you even dare suggest that the game is now good.
A patched game is only better if there are people still around to see it get better. And the only game I've seen have such a renaissance is Pokemon Go. And that's cause it went from 'super popular' to 'still played' due to bugs.
To a point. It's possible to patch bugs, even release alternate endings...but if a game just has bad mechanics, a bad story, etc....there's only so much patches can do. Sometimes a bad game is just bad.
@Kate Blackwell: This is what I came here to say. Elder Scrolls Online is a great example of this: it got significantly better as time went on, but you still see people slamming it or refusing to try it because the launch-day product was buggy and got bad reviews.
TacoMan, not sure if you were aware of it, but FFXIV was actually pushed ahead of schedule. Truthfully speaking, the game wouldn't have been any better if it hadn't been, but the opportunity to play test in house would at least have made the devs prepared for what happened at launch.
You unironically play No Mans Sky so I don't think you are the best person to take advice from on this.
It's like asking a black out drunk alcoholic tips on wine tasting. You are definatelly experienced in the topic but it's almost entirely personal emotional bias rather then facts and evidence.
Plus... Miyamoto's quote specifically refers to rushing a game being bad, not a game that had time but was broken getting fixed and becoming good. No Mans Sky was not rushed. FF XIV was not rushed. Mass Effect Andromeda was rushed. Aliens Colonial Marines was rushed, and it shows, even post patch
Sure, examples /exist/ of individual games pulling off 'games broken, but we patched it so now its good' and getting a renewed surge of sales... but that's not /typical/, and expecting your game to be one of the few that can pull it off is very dangerous.
The issue with patching a released game (and there is some sales statistics to back this up) is that some 90% of a games sales will happen in the first two weeks, and if you don't pull off a *spectacular* fix up after that timeframe, it isn't going to draw in new sales from a broken launch.
"It's not like I'm going to finish Nier anyways" them's fightin' words. Drakengard 3, it's acceptable because that f%^#^*ng final boss, but NieR, be it Gestalt or Automata, I have no words.
He's right, while you can patch stuff, you might never get that initial audience back on board if they got burned at release, and if your internet word of mouth is "that crappy game", good luck on potential customers even noticing it got better.
