Its a common thing when video game companies suffer from over-promising and failing to deliver the games, it does not help how they keep pushing the games release too many times and falsely hyping people.
(please log in to view the image)
Examples of delayed video games that were mediocre or just bad.
1.Duke Nukem Forever
2.Mighty No. 9
3.Aliens: Colonial Marines
4.APB: All Points Bulletin
5.SOCOM 4: U.S. Navy SEALs
6.Wheelman (2009 game).
The video game developers have a very bad habit of crying wolf.
So is your opinion that because SOME delayed games were bad all delays in general are bad? That seems...silly. Going by Nintendo, they delay their games all the time and they are AMAZING. Should we do a list of games that were delayed and turned out awesome? Does that disprove the point you are trying to make? Going by your logic it should, given the fact that you seem to think a few examples of delayed games being crap means delays in general are bad. I take it you like the trend of game companies releasing unfinished buggy garbage instead of delaying it and actually finishing the game? So can I use Anthem, Fallout 76, No Man's Sky, etc. as examples for why not delaying games leads to garbage games? What is your answer to that?
The point of what I am saying is that Shigeru Miyamoto should not generalize the idea if a game is delayed its forever good. does that mean he thinks bad or mediocre games that were delayed many times are forever food like the 6 listed in the OP?.
Video Game developers like to cry wolf many times and get everyone hyped up for no reason as they delay the games way too much.
Anthem is actually a good example of how bad decisions break games, no matter how much time passes.
Really, the major problem is consumers throwing money into obvious schemes that don't improve a game. Loot boxes, early access full priced garbage, promises that take months or years to be realized, if ever.
I'm a pretty stingy bastard, who never sinks a dime into micro transactions, rarely buys dlc, and would rather wait on a game to be sure it's worth my time, instead of pre-ordering every new thing just to stay "relevant".
If everyone was like me, the industry would need to work harder to release the best quality goods, and not **** around with their core audience.
But if people are willing to throw money at them based on promises, hype, or "paid cheat codes", who can blame the company for chasing easy money?
People seem to be coming at this as some kind of zero sum game here. It isn't. Sometimes games get delayed and they suck. Sometimes they get delayed and they are better for it. Sometimes a game sucks because it's released unfinished to make a deadline. Sometimes a game sucks because of poor management and design decisions. Are delays fun? No, nobody likes to wait extra time for something they want. However, I would rather have more games get delayed than be released unfinished, and yes, I know that sometimes the problem has nothing to do with time, but sometimes it does. Again, we can always go back to Nintendo. They delay all the time for the right reasons it seems, as their games are usually polished to a sheen. The original point of the thread seems to be that delays suck and games shouldn't get delayed, to which I say sometimes delays are necessary, and I would rather have a delayed game than an unfinished one, even though sometimes the problem is that management sucks. The thing is though, if the game sucks because management sucks, then it is going to suck regardless of a delay or not. Delaying a game can potentially help it be a better experience, although not always. Releasing an unfinished game to fix it later almost always sucks.