Shellshock: Nam '67 Gold and Delayed

This Eidos Profit Warning (thanks Frans) shares Eidos' concern about their margins for this fiscal year, combining the contradictory news that ShellShock: Nam '67, their upcoming Vietnam shooter is both complete, and delayed. That's right, in spite of pronouncing "ShellShock: Nam '67, has been approved on PS2, is completed on PC and Xbox approval is expected imminently," the article goes on to warn not to expect the game's release until September, citing a soft market and a traditional summer slow season as the reasons for this unusual move:
On May 20, 2004, the Company reported that the recent and unexpected softness in the games market, particularly in the US, was negatively impacting unit sales of Hitman: Contracts even though it was charting well in Europe and the US (and continues to do so). Since that time, this market trend has not reversed and the industry is about to enter the traditionally quieter summer period for game sales. Given these circumstances, and notwithstanding that the game is now ready to release, the Board has decided to hold the release of ShellShock: Nam '67 until September so as to provide this important new franchise with a better opportunity to deliver its true potential.
View : : :
25.
 
Blah blah blah
Jun 18, 2004, 03:39
25.
Blah blah blah Jun 18, 2004, 03:39
Jun 18, 2004, 03:39
 
1. So, the PR speak is just saying something is wrong? <yawn>

2. Look, Hitman has never been a revolutionary title, but it has often been fun or amusing. Hitman 2 definitely took some long, forward strides whereas Hitman: Contracts literally was more of the same. Yeah, yeah, some things got polished in the old levels, but it was easily the least improved/amazing of all the three games.

3. Do not necessarily blame the market outright; a lot of crap has been pushed out by many a developer and the Eidos name certainly has some controversy around it...

4. You know, I am incredibly sick of this "They all buy games in winter!" thing. When was this last accurately tested? I mean, the market has so heavily favored the Christmas season for so long, I wonder how any of the current data could be relevant. Personally, I do not have a damn thing to play these days. I picked up Arcanum - an old, outdated RPG - to play for a bit and even that will be over soon (ahhh...the joys of a god-like level 38 melee fighter.)

Looking at release dates, looking at all four platforms (PC, Xbox, GC, PS2,) there is one game each that I am interested in for the months of July and August respectively. Now, looking at October through December, again counting all platforms, there are seventeen(!!!) games that I am interested in.

Yeah, over half of those will be delayed outright :o, but it shows the major imbalance of the developers/publishers. It is not that I only buy games at that time - that is when all the damn AAA games are scheduled. Take any two of those games and release them now; I would immediately go out and purchase them. Meanwhile, come holiday time, even I will only be able to purchase so many of those games. For...well, at least one or two :o...of those games, I either will not purchase them at all or only at an incredibly cheap ($20?) price point - forcing down the market price for the titles and/or taking away from potential income.

5. The delay will not help the game all, unless it has more to do with internal company issues or it has obvious design/technical issues. In which case, the entire press release is utter crap.

Feeling like saying TankYouHaveAGoodDayWouldYouLikeFriesWithThat? now,
Ray

-----
"You're worried about morals? Beat them senseless and steal their clothing, dammit! Steal! Steal!!"
http://users.ign.com/collection/RayMarden
http://www.dvdaficionado.com/dvds.html?cat=1&sub=ANF&id=ray_marden
I love you, mom.
Everything is awesome!!!
http://www.kindafunny.com/
I love you, mom.
Avatar 2647
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
2.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
4.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
7.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
   More lies
9.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
10.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
     Re: More lies
12.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
      Re: More lies
14.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
3.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
5.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
6.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
8.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
11.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
13.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
15.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
18.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
 .
19.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
  Re: .
16.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
17.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
20.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
21.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
22.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
23.
Jun 17, 2004Jun 17 2004
24.
Jun 18, 2004Jun 18 2004
 25.
Jun 18, 2004Jun 18 2004
Blah blah blah
26.
Jun 18, 2004Jun 18 2004
27.
Jun 18, 2004Jun 18 2004