I must have hit a hot button, because we got more responses to this week's question than to any other in the past, Lara Croft excepted. We asked how you felt about missed release dates and whether you would be more interested in having companies give dates and miss them or in hearing no date at all until right before the game's release. We got a variety of responses, ranging from deeply angry about missed dates to folks who'd gotten so used to it that they just didn't mind anymore.

　　Many of you who wrote in talked about the effect of slipped dates on your financial plans. Games are expensive and it's clear that many of you save carefully to be able to buy the ones that you really want - and when you've hoarded your money and then the game is a year late...well, frustration ensues. However, a number also commented that they were glad when games slipped - because that gave them more time to save up.

　　But everyone agreed that companies shouldn't rush games on any account - waiting forever is still preferable to getting stuck with a bad game.

　　It seems that it might be a good idea to keep dates as vague as possible until the game has gone into final code. Developers need deadlines to work against, there is no doubt, but those deadlines should perhaps be internal, and the various stages the game is in reported to the public. As one reader suggests, the process might work well if treated like a movie:

　　"Perhaps video game developers should take a more 'motion picture' like approach to the release of their product. Which would mean just letting us know the stage of development the game is in: green lighted, pre-production, post-production etc. And then just letting us know when there is a definitive release date. If the developers want to go back to the drawing board because the initial build is not up to snuff...then fine. Screenplays get revised and there are casting changes all the time which can prolong the development of a film. Same principle applies. Tell us when a game is gonna be out; constantly changing the date is far more frustrating than just letting us know the progress of the game's development." -Chris T.

　　In any case, though the majority of you came down solidly on the "tell me nothing until you can really commit to a date" side, there were varied opinions. Here are some of them. Game companies, take note.

　　The link below will take you to the responces.

　　-Moira MuldoonWe want accurate dates:"I would prefer it if Nintendo or third-party developers could set THEMSELVES a deadline and try and stick to it." -Will S.

　　"Personally I would much rather hear about a game once it has hit the shelves. Forget all the release dates. If I can't buy it yet then I don't want to hear about it." -Tom B.

　　"I would like them to develop a realistic deadline and stick to it. I have to live with my promises. I would rather wait than receive a product full of bugs, but would also like to see some responsibility in the original scheduling and planning." -Rob G.

　　"Having observed this happen time and again, one begins to lose confidence in Nintendo and their 'official release dates.' It's gotten so bad that people are now *expecting* a delay with Zelda. Delays should not be the norm." -Al C.

　　"A company that cannot keep its word cannot keep its consumers." Vins B.

　　"So the release dates are important but they should give an accurate reason why it's going to be late and inform the consumers about it." - Michael

　　"As a long-time gamer, few things irritate me as much as expecting a game to come out on a certain date, rushing to the store on that date, and discovering the inevitable delay. I feel too-early predictions are little more than a tactic game companies employ to fool each other into thinking their games are going to come out earlier than they possibly can--information to the consumer really has very little to do with it." -Zach S.

　　"I wish game companies only told us absolute release dates! Nintendo especially. If you own a N64, you have dealt with delay after delay, even the system itself was delayed. Nintendo needs to stop promising when it will come out, and, 'Just do it.'" -Randy M.

　　"I THINK THAT THE COMPANIES SHOULD CERTAINLY PROVIDE RELEASE DATES. I ALSO THINK THAT THE DATES THAT THEY GIVE SHOULD BE ACCURATE FOR THE DAY THAT THEY GIVE THEM. HEY...WE'RE ALL CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE TRUTH. DAY TO DAY...THAT'S THE WAY IT WORKS. IF THEY HAVE TO REVISE A DATE, REVISE THE DATE. WE'LL ALL DEAL WITH IT AS IT COMES. MOST THE TIMES THE DATES ARE FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION AND ANTICIPATION ANYWAY." Todd Z.Be vague for a while:"My preference is this: Give us an estimation, something far off, and say, 'We hope it will be out then, but we are going to make sure it isn't full of bugs, we'll keep you posted.' Then, make a good product. If your initial estimation is blown, that is ok. Then, when you KNOW when it will be done, tell us. There's my $0.02." -Derrill G.

　　"I'd rather companies announce a game and give it a TBA release date until the game is about 90% complete and a realistic release date can be given because delays might cause a person once hopeful for a product to loose faith and can start some very untrue rumors." -Ryan

　　"I would rather a company say "Next year" than to say February and have it released in August! I hate delays!" -Jonathan

　　"Companies should give ETA's (estimated time of arrival) the keyword being in there Estimated. Companies always estimate unrealistically. The need to provide a margin of error (on average 2-3 months always the margin of error being 2-3 months later)." Adam F.Missed dates aren't so important:"I think it is better to have some general idea about when a game is coming out, even if the date is not exact. If I know a game is coming out a certain month, then I just keep my eyes open for more exact dates. It is better to know something than know nothing." -Mandy L.

　　"I have been an avid gamer since the dawn of gaming and to tell you the truth, I don't care so much about a firm release date as long as they don't sacrifice the game for a deadline." -Sean M.

　　"My thinking is that the more we rush release dates, the more the companies pressure their programmers to finish them as quickly as possible, then you get something like War Gods. Pretty crap. I think people should back off the companies a little and let them work their magic. What would become of this Utopian way of thinking is more quality games rather than quality-potential games." -Jeremy S.

　　"I am an avid Gamer and I feel it is a necessity for companies such as Sony or Nintendo to put out release dates for their new games. I purchase many games a year, and I tend to stick to a certain genre of games. A known release date could easily deter me from buying a somewhat mediocre game, and wait for something better." -Rob G.

　　"I think that the companies should give out release dates only when they know for sure that the game will be out by that date. I have been a fan of Nintendo for years and have pretty much gotten used to the delays, so it really doesn't matter to me, but I would really like it if they at least got one release date right." -Patrick S.

　　"I would rather have a release date and then have them release it late. It would be better so I could have something to look forward too and then maybe forget about it and then remember when it comes out." -Chris S.

　　"Since i've been a nintendo fan since "game & watch" times, i dont care about waiting or constant postponements because when they arrive, they're usually awesome (mario kart 64's ai is soo sick i dont even want to play it)." -dzihead

　　"I would rather have at least a vague idea of when a game is coming out rather than nothing. You grow to expect them to miss most of their release dates." -Jacob H.Bad Dates Cause Fistfights:"I can tell you it's a huge letdown when you really want to play a game, and it just isn't out when they said it would be. A friend of mine called a local electronics dealer to see if they had gotten any copies of Zelda2, the clerk replied " Yes, but there's only one left so if you really want it I'll put it under the counter until you get here. Well to my friend's surprise when he arrived the clerk had lied about the game coming in. This was mid-summer, we'd be the first kids to have the game. And I'll swear to this, my friend turned a very dark color of red, and at the tender age of 13 proceeded to knock the crap out of that sales clerk. I won't go on with the story as it's too long. But if you have any pull with game manufactures, you might want to tell them," Hey these kids are hooked on your games like crack, so get them out there on time and you'll make more money." -Brian C.Deadlines are good:"I prefer to hear a deadline, even if it's likely to be a month or so early than the actual release date. In the case of games like Zelda 64, where it's over a year behind the first original deadline, I think that's going overboard. In their defense, they do have a new format and marketing considerations. Even if it gets to the point where deadlines are often several months too early, it at least shows the company is communicating with the public. The ONLY time I do NOT condone giving deadlines is when it's a product that was NEVER meant to come out in the first place. (I forget the buzzword for this... 'vaporware', is it?)" -TruelanceThe money thing:"I would rather them give a date and miss it than not saying anything at all because then people like me always wants to know the release date so they can start saving their money to buy the game." -Robert W.

　　"I set aside some money to prepare for a game that sometimes gets pushed back many, many months later. Turok 2 just slipped, Banjo-Kazooie slipped to July, I keep hearing MK4 (my fave game) keep being pushed back and then forward and now I hear July which is just horrible. I am 22 and I remember the days when games came out on a pretty decent schedule. I can remember Mortal Fridays being advertised so long in advance and when September 9th, 1994 came around I knew MK2 would be out and it was. Same with Donkey Kong 2 on Dec. 3, 1995." -Sutaz

　　"While it's a bit disappointing to be let down by delays, it's still better to have an idea as to when the game is going to be released than to not know at all. It gives us a chance to budget our money, know when to spend and when to save. Otherwise, you're left out of the crowd when the game comes out and you're running around penniless." -SadBuddha

　　"To tell you the truth I would rather know about new releases before they come out. Then I have time to get ready to save to get it." -Justin L.

　　"I think it is better for a company to wait and give a definite release date. When I hear a first release date, I save up all my money only to be disappointed that the game won't be released for another two months. That sucks!" -A.L.A reader quotes Nintendo:"Funny thing is that I heard what Nintendo said to someone who asked them the same question about their games being late. "Why don't you set a date you know you can be done by? That way, when the game is finished early, it makes the consumer feel as though they are getting a 'bonus.'"

　　Nintendo's response: "We feel that we should be given all the time needed to create a solid, quality game instead of rush it. True, giving a much extended release date at the beginning would stop the postponed releases, but this creates a problem: When a company sets a release date, they work constantly to meet it. That way, if they miss it, they are continually pressured until the game is finished. However, if the company doesn't feel pressured to finish the game, they will create a mediocre game instead of something that's prettier and more in depth. We set dates because we think the game will be done by then. If it isn't, pressure builds. But if we don't feel pressured to finish a game, we will thus create poor games.

　　And then our reader checks in once more:"So, after reading that, I think that setting a release date is a better idea than something that's so vague. " - Bob S.