first

FenderMaster

Tisk tisk. This is why I hate Halo 3

Volgin

word... when you play a great demo or hear some great info, and then find the game on shelves in the following week or two... it really pushes the hand to the wallet because you're still on that high note.

callmesteam

Halo 3 is a perfect example. It was hyped SO much, I was really looking forward to it, thinking it was going to be brilliant. When I played it, it just didnt live up to that massive hype, and it did leave me feeling quite disappointed, to the point that I wondered why I'd even bought the game. TV ads are fine, MGS 4 is done well, I see the advert once in a while and the advert doesnt hype the game, it just shows whats in it, making me want it. GTA IV did the same thing.

OkayOctane

YES.

I cannot overstate just how awesome it is when you learn about a game just months before release. You see the trailer, and you think, "That's going to be awesome! How long do I have to wait?" If the answer is more than a year, I'm already on the road to not caring.

jettokisora

I have one word:
Spore.

Seriously, at this point I barely even care that it's coming out, even knowing it should be awesome.

Achenar

Battlefield: Bad Company is good game with a revolutionary engine. Good job on EA for being diligent about you covering it!

B1ooDshOt

I certainly wouldn't mind knowing about a game closer to its release date, not a year or two before. Too many games these days getting canned halfway through development that we never needed to know about in the first place. Though I suppose that doesn't hold as true as much for the established titles.

fire ze missiles

Announcing a game a year in advance is alright. Constantly showing progress and news during it's development kills the buzz. Keep the update news up a to maximum 3 months before release. hell....2 months. But...at the same time, part of the fun of reading kotaku is all those tidbits of info. but it does kill the buzz. Even Fallout 3 starts to feel "bleh"

Padder

I don't want to know about games until they are close to launch...maybe 6 months away at the max. Eventually you stop caring as the years pass since the first trailer you've seen for a game.

goodridd

Does Nintendo love money(Yes)? Every gets too hyped about everything and everyone tends to get disappointed. Just look at the past 6 months. Brawl,GTA IV, Haze, Devil May Cry 4...and this is just from 6 months.

KM91

I don't mind knowing about a game for a long time. The pushed released dates add a drama which I find very interesting and for some would cause heartbreak. I hate the daytime television stories but love gaming news so for me this is my anti daytime story filled with surprises, intrigue, triumph, heartbreaks, and memorable moments.

lilaliendog

Yes i think too much hype can definitely kill a game, at least for me. Case in point, unreal tournament3. Back when it was called 2007, the hype was huge, and by the time it came out, no one cared for it. It didn't help that the game was nothing new, either.
The hype for mgs4 *almost* killed it for me, but I ended up enjoying the game fortunately. I mean, the first location which takes place in the Middle East, I felt like I was playing a GameTrailers movie instead of playing actual MGS4.

warxsnake

If you give a nine month before release date, then throughout those months the major fans of the series will be constantly discussing and awaiting the new game, they will crave for it. Then when it finally comes out, because of those nine long months of waiting and overhype, the game just won't deliver the way it should have. I vote for 4-6 months before a game comes out.

kylo4

Well a few things come to mind when I think about long hype cycles..

Forgetting about Duke Nukem Forever ('cause that's just ridiculous), look how long the Hype cycle has been for Starcraft 2. It was announced quite some time ago, and little by little new info is being released. I admit I get bored, and stop mashing the F5 key for a few weeks, but every now and then I check back, or Blizz has a big announcement to get me interested.

I am looking forward to SC2 probably the most, right now.

I think Konami did a good job with the Hype for MGS4. Even though I knew I'd buy it well before it was ever announced, the lengthy "Trailers" are really nice.

Maybe I missed the target here entirely..

Thugmunk

i would rather know nothing and be shocked by a release statement right before release... on top of that i find I'm more surprised and happy with a game the less i hear about it before play...aka sleeper hits like chronicles of riddick.
i wish games sold less on hype and misdirection
game marketing is much like movie marketing now...
attach a 2 on the title repackage and rake in the money repeat until money < production cost.

crobar

@MURDERFACE: mountain dew? how about the completely made up diorama thing that wasn't even in the fucking game?! I was so hyped up to battle my way up that huge infested hill thing, get taken hostage and sneak a plasma nade into that dude holding MC in the air's face. but noooo... let some douchebag marketing company completly make up a story to hype a game and dont put it into the game at all. much better idea.
im still sore about that, and im not even a fan boy :(

cavingman

I like knowing about games closer to launch as well. If you announce it super early, at least hold off on any major details until a few months before launch. I don't play Fallout, but when Fallout 3 was first announced, and I saw the planned release date, I was expecting to hear loads about the game all the time until I was tired of it. I still however, don't really know anything more than I did since the first day it was announced, and am interested in how it turns out still (although it must be torture for fans). This is how things should be done if you're going to announce early.

All points disagreed on Smash Bros. though >_> I love that game to death.

Mit

@Metal_Slug_Solid: Developers never have the time in the world. Ideally publishers want a balance of having enough time but not too much. Too much time would tax heavily on the budget, and having a truncated one could mean spending more to get issues fixed post-release.

Hype is good for business. It makes good games justifiable and mediocre games more desirable. Heightened anticipation creates good publicity and pushes publishers to meet expectations. Lack of hype causes otherwise solid games to sell short. I cannot see how too much hype could turn down a consumer as effectively as insufficient hype.

Hype is what made Gears of War successful. Hype is what makes the Wii successful.

ChiChi_BBQ

@mheadley: You've taken the words right out of my head.

chuffhoncho

Absolutely. I hate the wait.

TheRockingDead

I seem to be in a minority here, but I like the suspense, even though that sounds corny. I get really excited for games like MGS4 and Fable 2 and FF XIII, then a little sigh of relief when I finally get to play. As long as, like I said before, the wait is worth it.

broomperson

I remember when games were announced 3-6 months before release. And we got our gaming news in 200 to 300-page editions of EGM. And the Double Dragon comic from Marvel had just come out and it sucked so bad but you made yourself like it because it was fucking Double Dragon, dammit.

Koztah

Halo 3 was the perfect example of how hype can kill new games......................... Mountain Dew anyone?

MURDERFACE

it depends. halo 3/GTA4 hype was out of hand to the point where it was hard to match it (GTA4) to no where close to living up to it. (halo 3)

i think MGS4 hype wasn't that bad. it was more fans crowing about then ads getting crammed down your throat talking about the game being the second coming. the difference is not to go overboard pushing the product to the point that the consumer feels that they are overwhelmed hearing about it.

can't wait for the killzone 2 hype.......

jfx316

Another game to compare: Assassin's Creed. Was a decent game that got turned into the best thing since sliced bread. *shrug*

SpearXXI

Agree 100%. I like what MS has done with Gears 2. They didnt announce it until 9 months before it comes out and really have not been showing much at all (although there is a pretty awesome preview of the multiplayer up on IGN today :-) )

Gray665

I absolutely love what Nintendo is doing with shorter hype cycles. As much as I'm looking forward to games like Fallout 3 and such, knowing about them so far ahead of time does a lot to kill my anticipation. Hype-weary, you might call it.

Huckleberry

I like to know a product is coming - an initial "Hey guys, this game is going to get made!" is awesome, and enough media (when it's ready) to get a good idea of what it'll be like, then a blitz right before launch. But starting a media campaign way in advance and pressing it relentlessly into my face just turns me off (Hi, Halo 3! Good thing you sucked anyway!).

However, if you announce really early and then fail to release any real media for months at a time (Natural Selection 2, I'm looking at you) then I just start to forget...

Idontloveyou

When the company throws all it's chips in the ad campaign, then usually there is nothing left to entice the gamer, unless there is a current fan base. I stopped caring after awhile, for Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, when the wait time became so far off. I ended up playing the game, but my mind was wandering on the hype and created preconceptions of awesomeness that never delivered. However, the game still rocked... Just was not as epic as I had thought.

SpearXXI

The problem might not be how long is the hype cycle, but how much information is given before hand. I'm one of the people that prefers to learn about the game's secrets as I'm playing, I want to be surprised and excited during my first playthrough and not before.

The reason why I still read previews and reviews (besides not being able to stop myself) is because there are some stinkers like Enter the Matrix that catch you off guard and end up being a waste of money. But for my must have titles I try to avoid getting as much information as possible until I play it.

Masterpain22

I don't know how to answer the question is the longer hype cycle good or bad for gamers, but I can testify to two other, specific things.

First, the longer hype cycle is killing the traditional idea of console-moving killer apps. We have such a longer window of awareness, now-- usually two, even three years prior to a game's release-- and so the idea that one game, at launch, is going to cause a lot of people to buy a console just to play that title is definitely a dying phenomenon. Is this good or bad? Well, it's bad in the sense that you used to be able to count on a triple-A title moving a lot of hardware-- and now you really can't predict as accurately where and when your sales spikes will occur-- but it's good if you accept the phenomenon and embrace the idea that by using the long hype window, you can effectively sell a console for that "killer app" months or years in advance, and benefit from additional game and accessory sales on that console for a number of additional months. So, overall? Who knows.

Second, it's a put-the-genie-back-in-the-bottle kind of situation. Even if all the game journalists in the world decided to support a shorter hype-cycle, they couldn't stop the process. As Internet technology becomes more and more refined-- and broadband penetration nears ubiquity-- developers and publishers will have better means than ever before to push hype-- in the form of developer blogs, trailers, screenshots, concept art, betas, and demos-- straight to the consumer. So the hype has already passed you guys over, by and large. Bloggers and journalists are still participants in the process, but you're not driving it anymore.

wild homes

@OtherAdam: Yeah, that is true... seeing the same game over and over again at E3 each year can be quite annoying.

Sphinx

@chuffhoncho:
I agree, but would take it a bit further. Not only does it depend on the franchise but whether the game is actually a franchise. Longer hype cycles I don't think do that much to hurt games that are sequels and such, since in general we know they are coming we more or less know what we can expect and it really only helps I think to see how things are coming along. God of War 3 will probably provide a good example of this - it will likely be shown at E3 and I would be surprised if it released before holidays of next year. New IP on the other hand I think can be severely hindered by long hype cycles. If we don't really know that a games has a history of excellence - continued exposure over a long period just gives more time to doubt and frankly forget about it. Whereas if two-three months out the developer tossed up a great trailer and let the press demo it - knowing that they were playing a near final build of the game - I think the chances of the excitement hitting and maintaining clear through to an actual purchase is alot better.

mheadley

Would I rather know about a game for a shorter time? Absolutely. That's one of the industry's biggest problems right now, publishers hyping a game so early that by the time it comes out, we don't care. Even the greats are guilty of this (Blizzard).

Used to be, before the internet was in every household, you'd find about upcoming games MAYBE in a magazine, but pretty much games just sort of came out. Going in with no expectations is a great way to enjoy a game. The hype for GTA4 pretty much ruined that game for me. So now, I pretty much ignore all game previews. If it's not out, I don't care about it, because it probably won't be as good as the hype. Unless it's a Valve game.

Sushmonster

I think there is a definite balance to be achieved, here. I agree with the three of four months prior theory, maybe with a little teaser six to eight months out. As many others have said, too much hype and it's dangerously approaches let down territory. *cough CoD on Joystiq cough*

rei_a

I have a double standard. If it's going to be just another WWII shooter, then it can wait, and the surprise release might to better fore the sales. IF the game is going to be awesome (read: Starcraft II) then the extended hype is fun.

Woland

They should take a page from Blizzard's play book, like what theyre doing with Diablo 3 and the like, relatively quick to appear teaser sites, some info every other month up until launch. I hate seeing ads for a game every corner or page I look at. I've probably seen that smiley face grenade 8 times already today.

bshidoheat

I like Nintendo's new "6 months of hype before release". I don't need to know about a game a year or more before it comes out. A lot of the big games that get showed for the first time at E-3 end up coming out 2 years later and get showed again at the next E3. Don't need to know that far in advance.

OtherAdam

Too much hype = too high expectations = reality letdown.

I like hearing about games, I like knowing they are being worked on, sure. However, I think that producers/publishers would do well to keep in mind that when they hype a game, they are building up expectations which can bite you on the ass if the game isn't the Second Coming of Half-Life.

It is better to be surprised by a game and it's play than to be disappointed.

There is too much noise out there and it's going to get worse, I fear.

Marikir

shorter cause a wait isn't half as bad if you don't know your waiting

Gypse-scum

I don't want to hear about a game that I have to wait another year to play. What good does it do me? Moreso when games have a release date that is broken by half a year or more.

aveneyer

Oh yeah definetly, I think hype can generally build up a game that says its going to deliver fresh experiences and its going to have amazing graphics and blah blah and when it comes out we've got a generic first or third person shooter that if it hadn't have been hyped would have been recieved more warmly by everybody.
Take Alone in the Dark that was fairly hyped in my mind but now I hear about its problems and see on the cover in gamestop ' Maxim 4 stars!'....*sigh*
but then again publishers need hype, consider how well MGS4 has done in comparison to MGS3 a game which wasn't even a third as hyped

excel_excel

I don't think its too big of a deal if you don't get too caught up with it. I think its good to be informed of what games will be coming out but you don't neccessarily have to get hyped up about it. I guess its really up to the individual person but I don't really get caught up in hype for a game anymore, theres too many other things going on in the world today for me to care about a game a year away. I'll get it when it gets good reviews or if it interests me but I'm not going to be checking for screens months ahead of time. I didn't even know when GTA or MGS were going to come out till a month before the day (and thats when I put in my preorder).

NeVeRMoRe666

@Metal_Slug_Solid: I agree. Games should be held back from us until the last moment, and then everything thrown at us.

greeneggsnsam

reveal the game, then wait until 3 or 4 months before release to power up the hype train. done.

cavingman

It depends on the franchise, I think. The hype for GTAIV and MGS4 did nothing to tarnish my experiences with either of those games. Of course, those games have deep roots and Bad Company doesn't really have any at all. I'm thinking that could be a problem. Too much, too soon from a game that hasn't proven anything yet.

chuffhoncho

Less hype is better. The longer the hype is there, the more it will be a let down when the finished product fails to live up to the hype. With few exceptions, nothing lives up to the hype generated around it, especially hype that goes on for months and months before we actually see even a demo of what we're getting.

Build it up slowly. Let people know what's going on but don't drown them in it. I'd rather a game came out and be a surprise hit than know about it for a few years in advance only to find it isn't what I was expecting.

There comes that point where I go "enough already" and actually start to resent the subject of the hype. I'm sure I'm not alone in that feeling.

Teelie

In the case of existing IPs, I prefer the hype factor to build right from day 1. On the other hand, with new IPs, its good if hype is less. See, games like assassins creed, haze et. al. the initial hype was too much and the games couldn't live up to the expectations. Even with big IPs, too much publicity is bad. Just for example, the way Konami and Sony gradually hyped MGS4 helped its cause to reach a broader audience. GTA 4 was hyped so much and many were disappointed with the end product.

venkat55

Hmm, I don't let hype affect me. If I think the game will interest me, it won't matter how much coverage it gets, or how long it takes to be released after being first mentioned.

BPMλ

Yes. I'd rather have every good game I want announced and released as soon as I have enough money for it. But that's too much to ask for. I think games shouldn't be announced until they're almost done. That way, developers can take their time without being rushed, and if the game never comes out, nobody can get excited about it.

Metal_Slug_Solid

I want as much information possible about as many things as possible, even if it is about a game that may not come out for years. Just me something interesting to look at, think about, and get excited about.

Sphinx

I completely agree. I have lost interest in so many games that used to get me excited. I'll probably still end up buying them, but I'm just tired of talking about them. One that comes to mind is Little Big Planet. I know I'll buy it, but if I don't see another trailer again until release day, I won't lose any sleep over it.

I think three months is a good time table to announce a game.

cringer8

It would help Square-Enix. Too many gamers get pissed when they keep pushing the release date back. All is forgiven, though, when they release a great product (FF XII). From this gamer's viewpoint, I don't mind a lot of hype as long as the product delivers (thank you, MGS4). A bad game with a lot of hype, though, can be even worse because of it. I think a little research would prove that a lot of hype helps sale numbers (has this been done?)

broomperson

Absolutely. The most recent Smash Bros. and Halo games were total letdowns and there was way too much hype. I'm tuning out all the Street Fighter IV talk.

supercrap

no no no! we need gajillion dollar ad campaigns, laser light shows and "booth babes" ! right! how else are people gunna like our games!?

pandafresh

Short version of what I said:

I was really hyped to play Spore. And the demo is awesome. But it's too awesome. I would have bought the game the moment it came out without a demo. Now because the demo is so fun I probably won't be buying the game... because I'll be bored of making creatures by the time the game comes out. I already am in fact.

Elliuotatar

Less hype, yes.

I loved it when the first Splinter Cell was revealed around E3 2002 and then came out that following November. That was PERFECT! The game was great and we didn't have too long to imagine how it would be or have it constantly paraded in front of us.

Then there is MGS4, which I honestly was sick of around late summer/early fall last year. While the game apparently turned out great (me no get to play yet ...), fatigue most definitely set in with the endless hype over the last 3 years.

And, lastly, there is Halo 3. This is a weird one because, technically, hype lasted a little over a year (from E3 July 2006 to release in September 2007). While the game had a ton of hype (!!!), it was over a shorter period of time.

Soooooo, long story short? I think the shorter hype period is better, especially when its laid on thick.

DARTH_TIGRIS

Wow I love typing up three paragraphs of my thoughts on this only to have them dissapear when I hit submit with the message that I have to log in WHEN I AM LOGGED IN.

Elliuotatar

Oddly enough, yes, I would rather shorten the hype for a game. I think Epic and Microsoft are doing a pretty good job with Gears 2. Perhaps I would want it even shorter than that, though...

As for an example of someone doing it badly, I think that LittleBigPlanet was shown too early. I know that the game hasn't had many media showings, but I'd rather have that game shown at this most recent GDC than at the one before it. To me, even though I will be buying the game, it makes me less excited for it. It's too familiar.

I'm afraid the same thing might happen to inFAMOUS. I think that the Game Informer article for inFAMOUS would have been better served in a couple of months. I'd like to hear about more imminent game releases than those that are off in the middle of 2009.

ODLdragonjoe

I don't mind long advance previews - the media needs to have something to talk about but I don't pay much attention until a games a month or so out. Who has the time? Hype is part of the industry - if it's huge the developers and marketing people are doing their job. The consumer should be able to see past the hype. You can get a pretty good idea watching actual gameplay footage (not trailers or cut scenes) from gametrailers/kotaku/ign/gamespot. The gameplay footage doesn't lie, it's pretty easy to spot the garbage.

tdevore

Give me a couple of teaser trailers, and then maybe a couple of screenshots a month before release, and then a demo a week before release. Id be happy with that. It ruins the game when I know all the plot/characters/decent stuff before I get my hands on the game.

CanaryWundaboy

In my opinion too much hype can ruin the buzz but it's hard to tell how much. I was really excited for MGS4 before every second post on Kotaku was about it. Then it slowly became an annoyance.

I don't find that long hype cycles are bad, because if I get a few new pics or something every week it'd keep me interested. It's when they have too much in short periods that I get annoyed.

Llost

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
It's nice to know a game is coming so you can file it away under "Look Forward To" if you are so inclined, but the amount of BS game companies bombard us with is nothing short of a circus.
In the first place, it's all strategically engineered lies intended only to attract sheeple, which automatically makes me think less of the game and all people involved. So, obviously, better to go without on that one. Spore falls into this category, so even though my head tells me the game will be good, my heart harbors a fierce hatred toward it, and I can't even bring myself to play the creature creator demo.

Secondly, Webzen has soured me to the very idea that the games people say they are making actually really exist at all. Project Wiki? Parfait station? Huxley? Yeah. Sure. Whatever, man. Does your company actually make games, or are they too busy advertising their games to make them?

I understand that publishers can be pushy, I really do. I also realize that there needs to be brand recognition: if you don't advertise it, no one will know it exists, right? But for the love of God, tone it down. All this worshiping and kissing the feet of your "next big game" is really just creepy, guys, and I know you're just pretending anyways in hopes that it will "catch on". That insults my intelligence, and I no longer want to buy your games. Just a casual, "Hey, this game is coming out soon. Here's some pictures. See you there!" is enough for me.

And Developer Diaries? Srsly?
*hands suspended and tensed in strangling pose*

Comatose Turtle

@Antiterra:
OMIGAWD NMH IZNT A NINTENDO GAME!!

pandafresh

No need for hype, but in the Wii's case, I'd really like to know what's coming soon. I don't want media, just names. I'm way past "excited," and am now in "E3 is your last chance" territory.

Wolfers

@Antiterra: And before someone calls me out on it: yes, I know NMH isn't a Nintendo game. :)

Antiterra

What I want to see in general is less hype and more information. For instance, Fallout 3's inability to present more than a handful of screenshots at a time is a naughty sort of gaming tease that doesn't add anything insightful or well-meaning to the discussion and buzz surrounding the game.

Sure, I'm excited for Fallout 3, but screenshots that aren't placed in their proper contexts fail to excite me.

Give me one nice sheet of new information and a flurry of screenshots a month, as well as thoughtful blog updates, and we'll call it a day.

VictorStillwater

Short answer: yes, definitely.

I'm repeating myself, but one of the things I like about Nintendo is that they don't start hyping games 2 or 3 years prior to release. No More Heroes is a good example of how to hype a game - or maybe it's a bad example, considering it didn't sell a gajillion copies, what do I know?

The GTAIV hype train was unbearable, and despite loving MGS4 to bits, I also felt it got way too much coverage that had little to do with the basic question: "What's the game like?", which should be front and centre of any pre-release coverage.

I don't mind the "little nuggets", the funny anecdotes, the quirky pieces of news about a game as long as we don't get 17 a day.
But what bothers me the most are the articles which consist in little more than verbatim quotes from developers who understandably talk with the combined objectivity of proud parents and car salesmen.

@FenderMaster: What the...? Huh? What?!

Antiterra

I'd rather if games journalists did their jobs and covered games that came out, regardless of how much hype they've received. In fact, it'd be wonderful if the amount of hype made no difference whatsoever to the coverage, but that's just a pipe dream.

obonicus

@bshidoheat:

Agreed.

Again, a page from Blizzard's book is Starcraft II.

The release will be sweet, but I like not getting plastered with ads for it everywhere I look.

I have enough time to forget about the game.

Mact

Nothing has turned me off to a game more than these Battlefield: Bad Company commercials and video diaries. There is no way I will ever purchase this game simply because of the bad voice acting, and poor humor. Even though the reviews are decent, I feel they do not deserve my money for annoying me. I'm just bitter. Haha.

Zenrick

blockbuster titles dont need advertisement b/c teh fans will already hype it enough.a few ads is ok but what was done wit halo 3 was overkill. niche, artsy titles like okami could use more though. i coudlnt care about more fps.

maraxusofk

halo 3

ManjiKengo

There should definitely be shorter "hype cycles." There's nothing more disappointing than waiting years for a game that turns out to have a fraction of the features that were initially promised, ie. Fable. Or have the game turn out to be shit, ie. Haze, Hellgate: London.

I'm looking at you Too Human.

argh

I have a hype filter in my brain

devilmaycry2020

I definitely agree that games can be over-hyped. I almost don't want to play most games because of it these days.

Brocklesocks

As much as I detest what EA has done to NCAA football, the demo rocked/rocking my world. Here here for a surprisingly great game amongst the GTA4 and MGS4 window.

Punkateer

Totally unrelated to hype, but I think Warner Bros. should be suing the fuck out of the makers of Bad Company over the use of the smiley face as an ad campaign.

ObZen

Well, let's look at a few...

Duke Nukem Forever. Who believes it's coming out? Even with screenshots? It's become the joke of the decade.

Home/LBP. Man, I'd love either of these. When Sony mentions them I scarcely even listen anymore. If it's not here, I don't give a rip - I know what they are and I'd get them if I could; shut up and sell them already!

GTA4 - I love GTA4. I didn't love the previous games, but they were admirable sandboxes with enough cartoony dealbreaking glitches to be a game in themselves. When the hype exploded all over the internet, and down weeks of Kotaku backlog, I got so sick of the game I had to take a break from it before I ever even picked it up, and I was trying to avoid it in the first place!

Halo 3 - Halo was one of those games I can respect in theory but honestly wouldn't bat an eye if it dropped off the face of the earth. It's very well made on a technical level. Well, the first was. After that I stopped caring completely. The pretentious uberhyped ad campaigns that offered nothing for actual information, and the product merchandising tie-ins on the other hand made me hate the whole brand.

MGS4 - Awesome games, but I'm so far behind I'm on the second one. The hype was getting kind of ridiculous. I felt like I was going to see the whole game before I even got to the start of it! After hearing from friends that it only runs about 20 hours for them, I'm thinking I may have seen half of it, and I wasn't even trying. Maybe a more Halo-like "hey, it's here, come and get it!" would have actually been more appropriate - the people who want to know will seek details, and did, and bought the game anyway. On the other extreme were people covering their ears and going "SPOILERS! WTF MAN, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?! I DON'T WANNA KNOW THAT!" I'm kind of in the middle since I'd rather not have it spoiled, but I'm so far behind much of all the others were already known to be before I ever played.

On the other hand, I heard verrrry little on TWEWY and when it hit, I looked at it, went "looks sweet!" and got it, still having a lot of mystery to be discovered. When a game simply drops complete, and so importantly, debugged, if it's good, word travels. Rather than being teased with endless morsels like a Gran Turismo game, you can simply get it if you're interested instead of being disappointed into a state of apathy where news on the game doesn't matter because you assume it's not coming for ages.

fuchikoma

As was said before, too much hype = letdown (generally)

I was all hyped up about Twilight Princess for a year, by the end of it I stopped caring and still haven't bought it =P (though I do have it on loan)

namesRhard

I'm all for developers announcing their projects and allowing the subsequent communities to arise and get excited for whatever is announced. I just think immediately after that, they need to go into blackout mode and spend their time making the best possible game they can instead of crafting elaborate promo pieces to meet PR deadlines. Go wide with your game when it emerges from alpha and enters beta state and is actually a closer representation of what the finished product will be. 90-120 days out is adequate for a media blitz and will generate ample hysteria if the product is looking up to snuff. I don't even make my deposit typically until I see that a title has "gone gold", and that is right about the time that my enthusiasm for whatever it may be is starting to peak. It's even more rewarding to know that whatever it is you're waiting for is just about within your grasp, and the anticipation for it just gets better every day if you haven't had a year to water that excitement down. Teasers do a great job for the movie industry, that same model should apply to games. It would generate a lot more good will than another cycle of blown deadline after blown deadline and 2+ years of "bullshots" will ever be able to reap.

krackmonkey

Absolutely.

As it has been pointed out GTAIV, Halo3, Brawl, MGS4 hype did not cause those games to suffer, but I would remind everyone that these are the types of AAA games reviewers tend to start off with "You're going to buy this game anyway, but here's me telling you all the awesome reasons you're going to buy it!" Which is an entirely different discussion altogether, but the point is they are the few, there are only a handful of games each year that fit into that odd category.

weables

@Antiterra: * "but it could", not "which it could"... grrrrr...

Antiterra

@wild homes likes followers, loves to comment: Nice post, I'd follow you if I wasn't already. :) You put a nice perspective on things.

It's true that we used to be able to count on AAA titles at launch, and now consoles are increasingly sold on the promise of triple-As. The PS3 is a "shining" example of that, with MGS4 the first true killer app while other big names (FF XIII, GOW III) are still MIA.

And again, you're right about the genie-in-a-bottle conumdrum... which it could ultimately be a very good thing.
The less game publishers depend on the press to promote their games, the less the press will conversely depend on publishers for information and access.
If publishers steer their promotion efforts in different directions, there won't be as much bad blood when a journalist shoots down a game in a preview or hands-on report.
And that could give press outlets the independence we wish they had but know they can't always afford.

That, or publishers will just bombard us twice as much as before... ^_^

Antiterra

"Can Too Much Hype For Good Games Kill The Buzz?"

I'd say yes if it weren't for the Halo, MSG4, Brawl, and GTAIV hype machines.

It may not kill the buzz, but it sure as hell gets me sick of a game before it's even out.

TRT-X

please shorten the hype cycle. It makes it the pain of waiting more bearable and doesn't allow for too much hype

Corncob

You told a Microsoft representative that you were most looking forward to Nintendo's lineup?

...ahahahahahaha.

Z4N5H1N

I prefer a shorter hype cycle...
It was a real pain with Smash. I was one of the many who checked the site everyday, but by the time the game was close I knew about nearly everything. It was a mixed blessing though. For one thing, I'm kind of glad I checked the leak info because if I didn't know about the unlockable characters and then only found out about them after I unlocked each, I would have been a little disappointed. However, I actually wish I never checked the site updates at all because the most exciting character reveals for me were when I saw Ike and Olimar revealed. And I'm left wondering would I have been more excited when I first booted the game and saw them in the roster?

I'm happiest when I first know a game is coming, and then I don't learn anything new, and instead wait until it is released for me to start enjoying all the content. That's how I am with movies - it's what I'm doing with the Dark Knight and Wall•E, avoiding as much as I can, and just enjoy it all on the day I see it.

In the end, I am still quite happy with Brawl, but I experienced so much of it before actually getting the game, that its impact was a little diminished.

drivebyinsult

hype kills games for me. when i try to not listen to any the games ok (halo 3, ssbb) when i do the game/s are a melange of mediocre half assed everything (mgs 4, gta IV)i wont even comment on bfbc since i haven't had the chance to play it yet.

DarkTravesty

I think the problem with all the hype is that it is done so badly. Either they hype up things in the beginning that don't make it in the final game, or create expectations that they can't live up to.

BF:Bad Company is a good example of this, they have hyped the hell out of this game for months, especially within the last month. Yet most of the impressions I hear from people who have played the demo are mostly negative and the only people really excited about the game are usually fanboys who would have bought it anyways.

I don't see the worth in it especially when in the case of BF:Bad Company the hype seems to be defining and a bigger story than the actual game itself. Practically none of the BF:Bad Company hype I remember seeing in the past month has shown any actual gameplay other than the same clip blowing stuff up over and over.

This is a contrast to GTA4 or Super Mario Galaxy where the hype is really centered around actual game and what you can you do in game. They were effective because the hype is a accurate real representation of what you can do in game, and it is relevant in that it was ramped up close to the game's launch.

NullsRevenge

Too much hype starts making me dislike a game because i get sick of hearing it. I almost didn't buy Battlefield yesterday (in favor of operation darkness, but that got completely murdered in reviews, like 2/10's) and I got it and it's good.

But when I see marketing machines for it on every website I click it gets annoying, it almost feels like the game itself is cheapened. Halo 3's was probably the worst. It's important to hype a game. But it should be balanced. No 6 month multi billion dollar hype machines.

RidleyTJN

Please, building up hype for a game rarely works. When it does, it's beautiful (MGS4, GTAIV). When done poorly, you get crappy games AND a huge letdown (looking at you, SSBB and Halo 3).

That's why I've been tuning out all Mercenaries 2 and Battlefield: BC chatter recently, but I fear it may be too late for the latter...

FoxyGaz

@Sphinx:

Thirded.

Mact

I think hype sells consoles, even if it hurts the game experience. I'm not sure if that evens it out though.

everybest

Hype definately should be closer to release...not like a year or 2 before release and then throughout up until release...By then you just don't care...I think this is partly why I haven't finished GTA IV...

Elemence

A little hype won't hurt... sometimes will even benefit when the game is good enough.
But too much hype, or something that gets hyped for too long has high chances of attracting haters and people who get sick and tired of it.

I, for one, completely lost my interest on Spore due to the long hype.
I was stunned at first, thought it was awesome, but now... meh. And the Spore Creature Creator only made things worse.

If the game was released right after the first trailers and annoucements, I'm pretty shure I'd love it. Now? I'm not even gonna get it to try it out...

Bokusatsu_Tenshi

I just looked at a trailer for this game and have come to the conclusion that this is Wario Land. Why you might ask? Well, if Battlefield games had "Good guy" main characters that were happy saving the day, this game has the "bad guy" main characters just trying to get some gold... Just like Wario did on the GB.... DUN DUN DUN

SpearXXI

@obonicus: Hear, hear. Game journalists and companies both risk their credibility with "hype" - which is short for hyperbole, which means exaggeration. Companies do it by hinting at game features, graphics and release dates that turn out to be misleading. Journalists do it by buying into the hype for the sake of an "exclusive." How many times have you turned to an "exclusive" article "New Details on Hot New Game!" only to find out the company released a new screenshot. Whoopee.
Give us some credit for having brains.

Nevadan

Well, I don't like it when random games are just thrust out into the market when I do not know anything about it. Everyone likes to set aside some money in advance for games with the economy as it is, so I think it is important for developers to keep a solid balance between getting some previews out into the public, but keeping other aspecs of the game under wraps.

Elite Wombat

If you have all the information about a game before it comes out then your not surprised at all once its out because you know everything about it already.
I find this to be a very similar to the band TOOL. The band members feel that they don't need to sell themselves out to make money. Because it's all about the music right?
Compared to your linkin park & your greenday very little is known about them. But I get this itch because I want to know more & more.

It should be the same about the games.
In my head I've always looked at rockstar being the same. The only in-game I ever saw of gta iv was the IGN review so many days before release. Where as other dev's have a BLOWOUT of info & I think it just ruins it all.
-end rant

Bendable101

i ignored all the hype for GTAIV because i had no xbox 360 nor a ps3. i obtained an xbox 360 2 days before gtaiv came out and then hit the internet hard for info. i had never been so excited to get a game in my life, and i only knew anything about it for 2 days. thanks to that, i like very short press cycles.

newkular

Long hype cycles is what allowed Sony to push the Dreamcast off the market last gen and what saved the PS3 from being an abject failure this gen.

Guizzy

"Would you rather know about a game for a shorter period of time?"

I've been following games like LittleBigPlanet and Left 4 Dead for far too long. I really like what Infinity Ward did with Call of Duty 4, which was shown 6-8 months (correction?) before its release in a very polished looking state. Ubisoft seems to be following the same path with the new Prince of Persia title. So yes I would rather know about a game for a shorter period of time. Following a game for a substantial amount of time and being let down when the chance to play finally comes is incredibly disappointing.

Sadly when it comes to huge budget AAA titles I don't see the long-winded hype machine going away. Whether or not the game critically succeeds is secondary to its financial success. Of course both are tied together, but I just cannot imagine Microsoft (for example) not doing all they can to put as much hype behind a Halo release as possible. Or Nintendo with any of their flagship series or Sony with titles like Gran Turismo or God of War. As much as I dislike Grand Theft Auto 4, I was a "victim" of the hype generating around it.

Replica23

To me it depends, I mean when things aproach the HALO 3, GTA IV, level it can be a bit ridiculous. I don't want to know EVERY, SINGLE tidbit about the game or chimes that come up when you move the cursor during the start-up menu.

I'd like less revelation of "supposed" twist and characters relevant to the story.

I feel that GTA IV was massively guilty of abusing this. Within the month that game came out it was everywhere, every second, 24/7. And while a solid game, it most certainly didn't live up to the hype that proceeded it, same as Halo 3.

I think big budget games that are going to sell an ass load anyway, need to minimize the ugly hype machine. And games that could potentially return huge sales should get a little bit more lime light.

So to answer the question? Yes hype mos def kills it for me.

FunKrusher

Super Smash Bros: Brawl is released here in Australia today and I'm not really that interested... SSB:M was my favourite GC game by far and I'm a total Nintendo freak. Just hearing about it and reading about it for the past six months has really taxed by enthusiasm for it.
Bah, I'll probably pick it up and be completely thrilled by it, I just don't really have excited incentive to rush out and buy it immediately.

prawnmatic

Everyone should do themselves a favor and not read every little detail of the game they are looking forward too, you are almost always setting yourself up to be disapointed.

PITwelve

ArenaNet has squarely shut down the Hype Machine as far as Guild Wars 2 is concerned: the game was announced over a year ago, with beta to kick off this fall and a release in early 2009, and what do we know about it?

Comparatively, nothing. Not when you consider the likes of EA Mythic, who couldn't shut down the Hype Machine with a Warhammer. (Oh snap~!)

antialias02

I think every game company must present the game to the press the same form Activision does with Call of Duty. Call of Duty 4 was releaved to everyone in a short trailer back in abril '07 and later in E3 they have a demo walkthrough of single-player missions and in GDC they cover the multiplayer part of the game. The game launched in november and was well-received by the public and critics. This year with Call of Duty: World at War Activision seens to use the same strategy. Games must be revealed to the public 10 months before the ship date I think.

Ryuzaki

yea, i definitely think any info more than a year out is TOO much info about an upcoming title. Especially if it's being billed as the "next big thing". I'm glad Ubisoft hasn't overexposed Far Cry 2. I'm really looking forward to that game the miost, along with Resident Evil 5. Capcom and Nintendo both handle their PR stuff well, and are careful about what they show to the public. EA could use a few pointers from them.

target_render

Hard to say, I get excited about a game if I hear about it every once in a while, but then again if I hear about it too early I lose interest for long stretches of time, or completely. That's unless it's one I really want then I'm generally revitalized right before it comes out.

MPSai

I agree with this. I found Super Mario Galaxy not as great as I was expecting because i watched too much of it before it's release. Therefore, I knew too much to be blown away at every corner. Still, the game is awesome, and I want to go back and play again.

Umandsf

I think the issue is very possibly with the spread of hype. Lets say game A is in development for four years before its released, generally the game is announced two years before its out. Then there is a year of minimal media, stuff like movies in press events like E3 and whatnot, a few screens thrown around etc. Then in the last year the hype pretty much reaches critical mass and stays that way until release =/

By preference I would have that whole hype cycle compacted into one year, with the critical mass only reached in the last few months. That way my enthusiasm for a given game is less likely to drop over time in the face of pure media onslaught. It also means that when I finally get the game I won't have seen everything in there through screenies and movies.

ZhouYu

I think whatever Nintendo has been doing for the past 10 years or so, is the right way to let the public know about a game. Even with Zelda, we knew about the game well over a year before it shipped, but the information that came out, as well as the TIME in which it arrived is seriously important to public interest. As much as we want all the information given to us as soon as possible, if a developer shows all their cards too early, we feel like there will be no surprises to be found in the title. That's when it becomes merely something you felt as if you've already played.

ThisCharmingMan

Yeah I agree...I feel this was one reason why Fable wasn't as amazing as people thought it would be. I never payed attention to the hype Lionhead put out so I though Fable was an amazing game (I soon learned that ignoring the hype around Lionhead games was crucial to actually enjoy them). But i think letting people know what games are being made ahead of time is good..lets me know that there is something to look forward too. It's just there is no need for the hype to start early.

Cryogen476

Lets see about hype. I remember that movie Spider-Man 3 had a lot of hype and did too much to please everyone that it was a bad movie. Game wise I would say the hype for Halo 3 was crazy and made the game less appealing to me. The hype for Smash Bros Brawl made the game seem like a Game of the Year title when it failed to deliver anything that will make me want to play it again. Metal Gear Solid 4 however didn't have posters everywhere or anything till like three months before it came out which was fine because it was a much better title than Smash Bros Brawl ever will be. Remember the hype for Crysis? That didn't make everyone want to go rush to the store and get a super computer from the future to play it.

Fireblast

yes and 2 words will explain why ASSASSINS CREED

slyzxx786

Completely agree with Mr Totilo.

dnzperson

Yes, I'd rather know about games the year they are most likely to come out, rather than hearing 3 years of "maybes" and "targets". I would be fine with just knowing certain developers are working on games, and let the speculation fly. Case in point: Team ICO. We have no IDEA what they are working on. and I hope we don't until the year whatever it is they are working on is ready to be released. that way I can look forward to it, without it doing the usual "front page, second page, fourth page, little nickel, rinse, repeat" cycle.

0rin

Perfect example of overhype, Brawl.

Yofu

Less hype is definitely needed. I wonder if anyone is still interested in Duke Nukem Forever?

Sharpshooter_2

I'd love to know about games for a shorter period of time, but living in europe I can watch in depth walkthroughs of games on the internet before there's even a release date here. Damn americans need gag orders, japanese people not so much because, well, I don't speak/read japanese!

StuiWooi

Nope. Disagree.

Hype doesn't kill a game, the game itself kills a game irrelevant of how little or how much hype its been given.

If a supposedly 'overhyped' game wasn't hyped, the game would more likely not have even done as well.

Mario Galaxy was massively hyped up, still sold as well as expected if not more. Same as Zelda.

Halo3 was super duper hyped up, but look how much that sold, its sales must have utterly smashed expectations. Mind you I don't like Halo at all.

Overhyping doesn't 'kill' games, it probably helps it more. But certain hardcore games which were overhyped but still good games, end of the day probably still didn't do as well as the hype driven expectation made people think it would because it's widespread hardcore appeal probably wasn't much anyway. i.e. no matter how much you try to convince someone that something is really great, if its really really not their taste or preference its unlikely you can convert many of them to it.

Look at Haze, anyone want to bet that if it wasn't for the marketing/hype push by EA, it probably would have sold a lot less than it did plus the fact Haze isn't very good which everyone already thought it wouldn't be before it came out... yet it sold in surprising numbers for a crap game...

If a game just doesn't appeal to everyone or is just not very good, overhyping just adds sales. Its peoples expectations especially the gamers expectations that misleads.

How many times have we read on gaming sites this generation ESPECIALLY about the PS3, "oh wait until game x comes out then the PS3 will sell like crazy", then not long after an analyst somewhere echoing the same statement, only to find it just doesn't happen.

That kind of talk has only just started to die down because, its been many x games later and it still hasn't happened.

charsuipau

I agree that it's generally a bad idea to hype a game before you have a relatively finished product to show off.

There is an exception:
Games that have continual development updates.

MMO's, for example, can really benefit from long hype periods since players want to get involved early.
Another example is SSBB. People knew about it for a very long time, but the constant development updates really kept it fresh.

phor11

Truthfully, I'm just plain getting overwhelmed by the sheer number and size of all the really good games that have been released in the past year.

I'm behind by about 600 hours right now... And even though I *KNOW* I would really enjoy Bad Company - and even have money specifically earmarked for video game purchases in the form of gift cards - I'm not going to get it. It's a multiplayer game where the user base falls off after the first month, and those left playing after that are all the guys who have played constantly for the previous month.

For multiplayer based games, you have to get in early to enjoy the game and the wide user base, or else suffer in frustration.

And right now, I'd be tearing off the shrink wrap about this time next year...

JohnnyHundo

Yes, too much hype can kill buzz on a game. Also, prolonged hype can also make a game less attractive to possible late adopters. I think its best to make small important announcements on a game regularly or a period of time. I don't like huge gaps of time and information between official conformation and release of games.

Ryodestined

Definitely not good!
like for example battlefield shitty company!!!
I thought that game would kick COD4 ass to an oblivion!
Played the demo & its not even close to what they advertised!
& no its not about seeing it too much! its just about them lying & making up stuff that aren't in the game.

Q80

Um most of the games these days that get big hype are fps'. And I think people are becoming rather bored with fps that are mostly the same.

ViciousViper

Games rarely live up to the combined forces of hype, trailers, and the almighty imagination. Shortening the wait time would allow for less deatailed coverage and more surprises in-game. IMO, I would much rather wait 2 months than 2 years.

Elwood2112

Yes...happened to me with MSG4.

Wouldyoukindly