Originally Posted by
Zenfoldor
I believe most games are pretty terrible until right up to the very end. The example he gave was in Sonic where they decided at the very end of the dev cycle that even having just 1 ring would allow the player to be able to continue if hit. Thinking about it, the game would be completely different without that concept.
That said, I do get your point. Even if the game isn't finish, the VISION for the end of that game should not be terrible, haha. Sounds like they didn't really have the vision perhaps, but they could have still made the mechanics a lot better in the last 6 months leading up to release, so I kinda see both sides.
Real question is, did SE do this because they knew it was gonna be a flop 6 months out, or did them doing this cause the game to flop? One way, SE is actually probably the good guy, the other way not so much. I'm not sure which side is correct.