First, thank-you for the feedback.
But honestly, You can say whichever you want, 5, 6 months, is just way over the top.
They, whoever they are, can do whatever they want, take as long as they choose to take, but when its 4, 5, 6 months interval between an update, from that point on, they don't have an argument to whomever questions or criticizes them about this kind of interval. They will just have to accept it.
They can't have it both ways.
if you ask me its just about money, and the way to make it last longer, thats my opinion.
What I think happens from this point on is they start just doing an update every 3 or 6 months. It won't go back to monthly updates.
I think they have a great game, and maybe because they have a great game, they are choosing to take longer. 4, 5, 6 months is not a "development interval" that just happens to take that long, whichever reason. That is definitely a decision they made along the way.
Is that going to hurt them? How would I know, I don't have their insider info. Maybe thats how it just happens with big budget games in this context. Maybe it makes sense from their business model to take longer once in a while. But it certainly opens them up to all kinds of criticism. In the end its usually money that has the biggest impact in peoples decisions, and I wouldnt be surprised if they will "milk" whenever they see an opportunity, I'm not on the inside regardless.