A finished game upon release is still better than an unfinished game. At least the finished game is playable whereas an unfinished game may be stuck in its unfinished/unplayable state if the publisher/dev studio decides to move on rather than fixing what is broken.
Ex. Anthem still has glaring playability issues months since launch. It was also promised a roadmap. Now it seems more than likely fixes will take long (or won’t come at all) and meanwhile the content from the roadmap has been delayed indefinitely.
On the other end, Division 2 was a finished game at start and as a result its release went smooth with hardly any bugs at all and if there were they got fixed rapidly.
Kotaku even says this at the end of their review for Division 2:
“To have played The Division 2 for a month has been to experience an ongoing conversation with the developers and to have witnessed rapid iteration—some of it planned, some clearly not—atop an already impressive game that looks and plays great. The Division 2 is the new standard for how to launch an evolving game and an experience I’m looking forward to playing and following for a long time.”
This^ should be the norm. I can accept an unfinished game in an early access title where you can buy it cheap now instead of more expensive later. Good examples of this are Subnautica, Rust, Divinity Origin Sin 2, etc. However the purchase still comes at a risk that at least you’re aware of.
An unfinished game from a triple A publisher, that’s a NO-NO.