No, it's entirely on LRG - their company, their responsibility. This is their business model. There wouldn't be a "delay" if they operated differently. But, since their entire model has the customer footing the bill upfront for production of the product, every pre-order is almost a more reliable Kickstarter. They sell way more product than they can handle while maintaining a more "acceptable" delivery window. I'll give LRG a pass for any delays once product is handed off to a carrier. Everything before that is on them, though.
And that's not me complaining. I really don't care, but I don't expect most to be the same. I'm in no hurry for anything. But, hopefully most know by now what they are getting with LRG. I have no expectation as to when something might arrive. I've had cases where something ships and I barely recognize the name of the game. For anyone not wanting to wait indefinitely (most people, I'd guess), I can see why LRG would be a huge dissatisfier for them.
But, I am almost always happy with the end product and their customer service has been really good. The actual fulfillment of replacement items/parts is just as slow as everything else, but the actual customer service part of it is pretty responsive and accommodating.
I'm of the same mind as you when it comes to LRG, BrandonJF. I've not (and hopefully never will) experienced any issues with the games I've ordered ... except for the long delays in getting them.
Yes, of course, LRG is ultimately responsible for its business model, and clearly, the Company seems content to continue to stack on more product sales despite growing backlogs and delays. Your Kickstarter analogy is apt. Rather than take out loans, LRG is more than likely using cash infused through initial orders to fund publishing/operations. It's a model that's obviously causing many customer relations problems. At this point, LRG would be better off if they'd be more upfront about the delivery model and tell customers that games they order now would take until 2022 (or later) to deliver.
Again, not to defend LRG, but abstaining from taking private loans makes sense, as it's essentially a zero-interest "loan," and it's not unusual for small businesses to do this. That said, this model may work for publishing a few games a year, but it seems evident LRG's management may be running on fumes as it tries to grow the business using the same structure. I'm not sure what their options are, but no question LRG is going to lose favor with customers who don't want to put in an order and wait over a year to get their games.
What LRG is doing may work for folks like me, but I have to think we're the minority. Mainstream consumers are unlikely to be receptive to this model.
Unfortunately, I don't see many ways out of this for them (or customers), with the exception of LRG taking far fewer product orders. The problem, of course, is capitalism (or as some prefer to call it, "greed"). As long as game sales keep flowing, there is no incentive to pull back. And for all the backlash LRG may get online, its sales are doing just fine, and well, the company does bring unique titles to the physical space that wouldn't otherwise get such attention.
It's a love-hate, vicious cycle, but one most physical game buyers may have to get used to dealing with. Unlike movie publishing deals, where discs can be manufactured at various facilities, game platform publishing is dictated by the console holder, so it's a bit more complicated. Can it be managed better? Of course. Is LRG doing as best it could to level expectations? Probably not.
That the market for physical game sales is contracting doesn't help matters, nor does the fact that the largest publishers (including the console makers themselves) probably wouldn't mind seeing physical discs go away.
In this environment, I don't think you should expect much to change for LRG, or any other small publisher unwilling to foot the initial costs or take on the full risk. It's a fragile set-up, to be sure.
