I've always been wondering as to why Bethesda released this game at 11/11/11? I can't help but feel if they spent a few more months on this game for 360, PC and the Ps3, it would've been a lot better.

It would've been for sure but they had to release it sometime.

'Cuz it sounds cool.

Because a date where all the numbers are the same is quite rare occurence. I agree though, it could've use a couple of months more work.

Well as far as releasing it later, they had eager fans. I know, I was one of the ones chomping at the bit at midnight and once they were done with what they wanted in the game, they clearly thought it was ready. Regardless of what you think.
Why 11/11/11? It's the only date with solid 1's for the next 100 years and its really easy to remember? At no point in time have I been like "Oh amn when do I need to pick up my copy of elder scrolls?"

I think it's basically just 'it was catchy and easy to remember' so the marketing team went for it.

People are really hung up on this date. Everything has a deadline. You try to squeeze in everything you can before the deadline comes. Had the marketing department stayed out of it and the game released on 12/03/11, no one would have this rallying cry. The game was in development for what, 5 years? A couple more weeks here or there would not have made this magical difference people think it would've.

Ninja'd.

It's easy to remember and sounds cool. It came back to bite them in the ass though, because now Skyrim is well known as one of the buggiest games to come out.

1. 11/11/11 is a good date and easy to remember. It is also something catchy and can attract more people to it.

2. Nothing can be perfect. Releasing the game in a suitable state is better than releasing it in a perfect state, as the latter can never happen.

3. Releasing the game earlier = gets money earlier. Better liquidity, safer business.

^this it is far from the buggiest [censored] game to ever come out

No Bethesda game that I can recall wasn't buggy as hell. 3 years development, and it still had those bugs, A for effort, and you can't say they didn't work hard. I wish they'd try to fix the bugs though.

I'm sure they worked their asses off. Skyrim is a good game, just buggy. Once the bugs are mostly gone it will be an amazing game.

its not the buggiest game ever though so your point is invalid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3hbb-qp3DA&feature=related the buggiest game ever is at the end

Some of the bugs in Skyrim have been around since Oblivion. Parts of their code need a fresh pair of eyes before they're ever going to be properly debugged. The bug that comes to mind is the one where a chest with too many items won't display them all. It's documented in the Unofficial Oblivion Patch as non-correctable (by modders) engine bug. It's still there in Skyrim.

Anyway, that's not a very critical bug, but the point is it would still be there if they'd waited a bit longer to release. Besides, they've been doing an excellent job with post-release support. It's been years since I've seen a single-player game get so much love from the developers after it came out.

I didn't say it was the buggiest. The video was interesting. The comment saying the barbie game looked better than cod mw3 was hilarious.

Yea seriously Bethesda needs to overhaul their current engine or just get a new one. That unreal 4 engine looks promising but i don't know how well it would handle a game like Skyrim.

Engines like Unreal 4 are designed for a different type of game. Yes, Bethesda needs to do serious work on their code, but the big advantage they have is being able to build worlds quickly once assets are created. You can't do that with any version of Unreal.

it sounded catchy so they went with it and overlooked alot of things so they would make that date. some of its being added in but i wont be satisfied until i can defend myself from slaughterfish or underwater mudcrabs.

The only game I've played that's done a better job with post release support is gran turismo 5. It's been almost 3 years and they are still improving it.

It probably would have been released around then anyway. People are just upset that Bethesda chose a 'cool' date - although why they're upset I can't understand.

Why because it was a stunt, they release on that date and for once people know when Skyrim came out. Well it worked and now we have a game with far too many bugs and CK that is a list of problems a arm long. They rushed Skyrim, simple.

It was a "cool" catchy release date. So now we have a game that was released to early and ridden with bugs now seven months later we still get to beta test the game and the first expansion is right around the corner...

Well said. It reminds me a bit of what was going on (still going on, in fact) on the Bioware forums after ME3 - they were all harking on about it being rushed for release etc. etc., all presuming that an extended deadline would somehow change the fundamental story of the game.

I think any criticisms I have of Skyrim - the need for more quests, more effective reputation, etc. - were all design decisions made earlier on. Pushing back the deadline wouldn;t have effected them (I would think).

People also talk on here as though marketing is a bad thing. Come on. Games are commercial enterprises, and 11/11/11 was a memorable date to release. It was like when they accounced Oblivion - just numbers appearing on the homepage, counting down... it was really effective. The problem was, the numbers were counting down to an announcement about an article in a magazine that you had to pay to read. So that was a huge let down. But the marketing had sparked a lot of interest.

What? The devs decide the release of the game? Or would that be Zenimax?