Official SE5 release date announced - September 12

Ed Kolis · #1 July 28th, 2006, 04:35 PM

http://www.strategyfirst.com/press/D...ArticleID=3296
Yeah, it's not August, but it's not that far off anyway!

Though I wish the boxart was a bit more "glowy space combat" and less "brooding Jraenar infantry", I guess the boxart doesn't matter, it's what's inside that counts, right?

Ragnarok-X · #2 July 28th, 2006, 04:38 PM

The game is pretty cheap imho.

edit: that will probably mean 2-3 more weeks coding, afterwards the game will go gold which usually 3-4 weeks.
Is 3 weeks enough to make the game worthwhile ? im curious

Captain Kwok · #3 July 28th, 2006, 05:00 PM

Who is saying the game isn't worthwhile now?

$40 is an excellent value.

Tampa_Gamer · #4 July 28th, 2006, 05:15 PM

I would also keep in mind (based on his history with SE4) that Aaron is always committed to fixing bugs and adding player-suggested improvements well after the usual two month patch window of most other games. By releasing in September, instead of trying to aim for a December release of the holy grail (e.g. a bugless game), the fans benefit from being able to suggest improvements and provide feedback.

Ragnarok-X · #5 July 28th, 2006, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Tampa_Gamer said:
I would also keep in mind (based on his history with SE4) that Aaron is always committed to fixing bugs and adding player-suggested improvements well after the usual two month patch window of most other games. By releasing in September, instead of trying to aim for a December release of the holy grail (e.g. a bugless game), the fans benefit from being able to suggest improvements and provide feedback.

This is dead argument. I would rather have a bugfree game, then a bug-filled (or even only with occasional bugs) game 3 months earlier. Its easy, releasing a bugged game earlier will allow the producer to earn money "earlier". Since a decent game usually earns you a load of $$$ you not only win a lot on interests, but "patching" will require less work than a "full" day of coding for a proper release.
There are so many examples of this...MoO3, Civ4, HoMM5, Titan Quest etc ++
In response to your "the fans can ask for suggestions" thingy -> what exactly makes it different, if the fans ask for support in september or december

Saber Cherry · #6 July 29th, 2006, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Ragnarok-X said:
There are so many examples of this...MoO3, Civ4, HoMM5, Titan Quest etc ++

Titan Quest is already in the "Halls of Shame", I see

That's not really fair, though, considering that half of it works half the time, and that 25% is very fun. For some reason, people (probably nVidia users) seem very willing to forgive/defend Civ4... not me, though.

Games get reviewed at release. If a 'C' game at release is patched a month later to be an 'A' game, it will still eternally have 'C' reviews, and have sold like a 'C' game for the first month... and forever after, because in month 2, people will still see 'C' reviews. I understand why people ship an F- piece of trash, and patch it later so it won't delete your registry anymore... since in another 2 months, it would basically be an F- piece of trash with slightly more obsolete graphics. But I don't understand why people spend years developing an 'A' game, and ship it 2 months early as a 'B-' game.

Not to say this is happening here; I have no idea, and I'm not commenting on Space Empires (though I do wonder if GalCiv2 is stable yet). But in general, this whole concept of "faster and brokener" that plagues computer games is utterly baffling to me, since it is so obviously idiotic and self-defeating. Even the excuse 'I thought it was done' is obsolete in elementary school, when you find out that turning in a test as soon as you have scrawled something by every question does not magically grant you a better score than people who take time to make sure the answers are right.

Tim Brooks · #7 July 29th, 2006, 08:12 AM

Quote:

I would also keep in mind (based on his history with SE4) that Aaron is always committed to fixing bugs and adding player-suggested improvements well after the usual two month patch window of most other games. By releasing in September, instead of trying to aim for a December release of the holy grail (e.g. a bugless game), the fans benefit from being able to suggest improvements and provide feedback.

I hope you are correct. But, there are two things that could possibly work against this:

1. It takes two for patches. Both the developer and the publisher must support the game. Aaron wanting to update the product doesn't work if SF won't allow it. And SF has a record of not supporting releases for long. Look at JA and many of their other titles. They are still selling half completed games from 3-4 years ago.

2. Aaron is no longer an independent contractor and now, more than ever, not in control of his game. Malfador is now SF.

Xrati · #8 July 29th, 2006, 10:00 AM

Face up to the times! MONEY / GREED drives just about every business decision these days. Even if Arron is not ready to release SEV there will be pressures by SF to get it out. All business's have their "profit schedule" for the end of the year business projections. You as a consumer, will never know "what goes on behind closed doors" when it comes to product releases. I've seen companies put garabage out, knowing that they'd have to rework the product, just to meet their promised delivery date.

Be careful of what you ask for, you may just get it!!!

Tampa_Gamer · #9 July 31st, 2006, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Tim Brooks said:
I hope you are correct. But, there are two things that could possibly work against this:

1. It takes two for patches. Both the developer and the publisher must support the game. Aaron wanting to update the product doesn't work if SF won't allow it. And SF has a record of not supporting releases for long. Look at JA and many of their other titles. They are still selling half completed games from 3-4 years ago.

2. Aaron is no longer an independent contractor and now, more than ever, not in control of his game. Malfador is now SF.

Tim - you are absolutely correct. It was his dedication to the fans by continually patching and adding things to SE4 that has partly kept me involved with the series since 2000 (and of course the inherent fun in modding and relationships with other fans over the years). It's funny how patches with mostly bug fixes and some new features make you want to play certain games again. Typically, anytime a new patch comes out for a game I will typically give it a whirl again, even for some that I shelved long ago.

I know that when confronted with the patch question on a chat as recently as this weekend, Aaron confirmed his intent to patch SE5 for a very long time (one part of the equation as you put it). However, if SF does not support Aaron in his wishes, then I don't doubt the SE series will die an untimely death.

Phoenix-D · #10 July 28th, 2006, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Captain Kwok said:
Who is saying the game isn't worthwhile now?

$40 is an excellent value.

There have been rumblings from beta testers that SE:V isn't 'done'. Without much detail.

As for a publisher-pushed release date- I doubt it. I don't trust SF, but they'd have more to gain from a delay. Publishers LOVE November/December releases, for example..unless perhaps they thought SE:V would get lost in the flood.