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

Phoenix-D · #6 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.

Captain Kwok · #7 July 28th, 2006, 07:30 PM

I recall SFI waited to release SE:IV Deluxe in stores after December for that reason.

Saber Cherry · #8 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.

Fyron · #9 July 29th, 2006, 05:27 AM

I still have some graphics issues with Civ4 on my ATI card.

Strategia_In_Ultima · #10 July 29th, 2006, 06:57 AM

For some reason Civ4 tends to crash to the desktop during wonder movies. Recently however I've had two consecutive occasions where, right after the game zoomed in on a city where I'd just built the Pyramids, it crashed my entire system and gave me a weird kind of BSoD I'd never seen before.

Ah well. The rest of the game is OK though IMO