Dead Space Pushed Up Again, Now Due Oct. 14

EA Redwood Shores' sci-fi survival horror effort Dead Space will arrive in North America even earlier than was once expected, with the game now slated to hit PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 on October 14, followed by a PC release on October 20.

Created in part by Iron Man and X-Men writer Warren Ellis, Dead Space was originally scheduled to hit in late October. However, the game was finished early, prompting EA to reschedule the console versions for an October 24 release in Europe.

It had been speculated that the game would arrive earlier in North America as well, though EA had offered no official word on the subject until today.

Filed Under
From The Chatty
  • reply
    September 4, 2008 12:30 PM

    They're doing it wrong. Don't they realize they're supposed to DELAY it two or three times? Valve does it, and look at how successful they are!

    • reply
      September 4, 2008 12:36 PM

      Especially because Valve spends time on polishing things.

      I've said it before and I'll say it again. There isn't any title in the world that couldn't benefit from getting more time spent on it.

      • reply
        September 4, 2008 12:50 PM

        Agreed. Just don't overdo it. *cough*DNF*cough*

        • reply
          September 4, 2008 1:01 PM

          now now, every day DNF gets delayed is another day people's fantastical hopes aren't crushed giving them time to get even worse.

      • reply
        September 4, 2008 1:32 PM

        You are mistaken.

        If a software product - not just a game, but any software - is fundamentally complete, usable, and stable, spending an extra two or three weeks tweaking and adding new features is about the worst thing you can do. Any feature worth adding takes time and care to implement and test. When you rush this, or do it at the last minute, you end up with buggy software.

        It remains to be seen what the exact situation is with Dead Space, but it's unfair to assume that it's being rushed out the door. It's equally unfair to assume that if it's ahead of schedule, it will ship without bugs - you can't catch everything in testing, and there's no such thing as bug-free software. The only conclusion that we can really draw from this news is that we'll be able to play it ourselves and make a fair assessment a little bit sooner than we expected.

        • reply
          September 4, 2008 1:42 PM

          Whilst I can definitely see your point, I don't see why things would necessarily have to be rushed just because they are added at the end of a development cycle. Not if actually reaching the when its done state is the main priority.
          And yes.. developers are often not allowed to make that final call. Deadlines sadly.. /o\

          • reply
            September 4, 2008 1:46 PM

            To add - if developers would have time to play their own product enough, then we'd not see nearly as many poor reviews. Those kinds of reviews that states that potential is there (in a given title) - but with obvious problems / bugs dragging the entire rating down.

          • reply
            September 4, 2008 3:22 PM

            In the 2 or 3 weeks they bumped this up, what do you think they could have added that would have been a significant addition? Plus, they'd need time to test, refine, polish it. And THEN they'd need time to fix the bugs...for all platforms it's shipping on.

        • reply
          September 4, 2008 2:25 PM

          I think you're a bit mistaken as well. Spending more time to polish a game does not equate to adding new features. It usually refers to testing and refining existing features.

          Are developers tempted to add new features, or make misguided tweaks with an extended deadline? Sure. Does this happen without exception? No.

          Whether or not a developer can afford to extend a deadline to polish a game, and whether they do good things in that time period is of course unknown.

          However, what is known, and can't really be argued, is that both Valve and Blizzard sitting on games and reworking them has benefited both their games and their reputation.

          • reply
            September 4, 2008 4:04 PM

            "Feature" was a poor word choice - my point is that when a project is essentially done, *any* code change is a risk, be it polish, feature, or even a non-critical bugfix. You have to draw the line somewhere. If all the features are in, all the critical bugs are resolved, and it's polished to the satisfaction of its creators, it's absurd to suggest that it still needs an extra two weeks worth of work.

            Sure, many games are released before they're ready, but is it really so inconceivable that every once in a while, one might legitimately be completed on schedule?

      • reply
        September 4, 2008 3:39 PM

        whatever man. you never said that before. quit makin' stuff up.