DEVs, fix your damn bugs!

[OptimumSlinky]

Seriously, I am starting to lose my cool with developers these days.

Crytek still hasn't fixed all the weird sound bugs in Crysis 2, or any of the broken AI behaviors in the campaign, and it's been how long since that game was released?

Battlefield 3 is pretty much broken between the party system and the weird glitches I seem to be getting regularly (sound cutting in and out, game froze after the F/A-18 mission the first time).

And Bethesda still hasn't fixed that HDD install texture issue on the 360.

It's sad that Modern Warfare 3, probably the LEAST creative or inventive game of the year, is also the one that has the most polish and fewest bugs.

This "release as is, patch it later" shit has got to stop. Especially when they never bother to go back and patch it.

 

[zerocool84]

Being able to patch games is what hurt this generation and gave devs an excuse to be lazy.

 

[OptimumSlinky]

It wouldn't bother me so much if they'd ACTUALLY patch them. But they don't. And so bugs just sit there for months and months, and games remain broken.

I miss the days when PC developers would release a game, and SUPPORT it (as opposed to just dumping it broken on the market and then rushing back to start the sequel). I played Quake 2 and then Quake 3 for YEARS (same with Unreal Tournament)

 

[Rage187]

The texture issue was fixed in 1.0.2 I think. I had no issues once it was installed after the patch.

 

[Sonikku]

Before Microsoft would not let developers doll out a patch just for the sake of curbing bugs, they actually had to include (then free) content. Console games were hardly ever buggy back then. Now? "Ship now, patch later". The PC credo. It's all about getting the product out there by the big holiday rush or before that next fiscal quarter these days. If that means having to patch your game over and over and over again or even having to restart a game from scratch after a game killing glitch like in Dragon Age Origins, OH WELL.

 

[RedRooster]

I've read that MS only allows three patches over the life of a particular game, so devs have to fix a lot each time or risk "wasting" one of their chances. Granted, not fixing anything ever is a bad way to do business, I agree.

 

[American Gunner]

I've read that MS only allows three patches over the life of a particular game, so devs have to fix a lot each time or risk "wasting" one of their chances. Granted, not fixing anything ever is a bad way to do business, I agree.

I'm pretty sure several games, including Gears 2 had more than three patches.

 

[OptimumSlinky]

I know it's nothing new, but at least in the "golden age" of PC gaming, games had larger communities that stuck around for multiple years. Now, they finally patch it just in time for the sequel to hit, and then the whole community leaps to the new game.

I mean, how many enduring games are left? Team Fortress 2? World of WarCraft? StarCraft? And all on PC, two made by Blizzard. Everything else is sequel #8.212343 with bonus pre-order content.

 

[purbeast0]

I know it's nothing new, but at least in the "golden age" of PC gaming, games had larger communities that stuck around for multiple years. Now, they finally patch it just in time for the sequel to hit, and then the whole community leaps to the new game.

I mean, how many enduring games are left? Team Fortress 2? World of WarCraft? StarCraft? And all on PC, two made by Blizzard. Everything else is sequel #8.212343 with bonus pre-order content.

2 out of the 3 games you mention are sequels or have sequels, and WoW has tons of expansion packs.

just sayin.

 

[TKE899]

I've read that MS only allows three patches over the life of a particular game, so devs have to fix a lot each time or risk "wasting" one of their chances. Granted, not fixing anything ever is a bad way to do business, I agree.

Pretty sure MW3 has already pushed 4-5 patches and at least 1 more is needed for the crappy lag compensation.

 

[OptimumSlinky]

2 out of the 3 games you mention are sequels or have sequels, and WoW has tons of expansion packs.

just sayin.

They have sequels and expansions, yes. But WOW has been around for how many years now? I don't mind expansions, add-ins, etc. What I find annoying is when I purchase all the DLC for MW2, all the maps, and then MW3 comes out, and the whole community jumps ship to product that, while fun, could have simply been an expansion of the MW2 game assets. Basically, I loathe having to pay again for maps I've already purchased previously, and I hate developers forcing the community to migrate. I get it, they want to make money. Still, in an ideal dream world, I'd rather see MW as this massive beast, with all the online maps integrated, all the new weapons as DLC, and the campaigns as expansion packs.

 

[Sonikku]

I fully understand what Optimum is saying. These days if day one DLC content doesn't leave you feeling like you're only buying part of a game, then store exclusive preorder "bonuses" definitely will. These days there are games like FF13-2 that have "dlc" already on the damn disc. You need to "buy" the dlc online though to get it UNLOCKED. EA is also a prime offender here. Features in madden like extra teams that were always a part of the standard package last gen are now separated and sold separately, as though paying ten bucks more for every game and dealing with being bombarded with in game advertisements simultaneously was not enough. I tire of being nickel and dimed.

 

[AstroManLuca]

It's sad that Modern Warfare 3, probably the LEAST creative or inventive game of the year, is also the one that has the most polish and fewest bugs.

This is because MW3 is just MW2 with different levels pasted in. It's literally the exact same game with only minor details changed.

 

[rayfieldclement]

I think that games that have bugs in them should get LOWER scores from magazines that games that have NO bugs in them. I am talking about review scores from magazines.

They MAY aready do this...

 

[Tweak155]

I'm pretty sure several games, including Gears 2 had more than three patches.

I didn't play Gears 2 until a few months ago, and it had tons of glitches.

Batman AC still has the save game glitch. Which luckily I haven't been hit with.

 

[OptimumSlinky]

I guess my point is BF3 is finally playable on Xbox 360, after almost 3GB of patches and updates. That's just sad.

But hey, at least DICE supports their product. Crytek has already abandoned Crysis 2.

 

[BrightCandle]

Last Autumn 1/2 of the games I bought were unplayably broken. I still can't get F1 2011's multiplayer to work reliably.

What most disappoints me however is the review sites. They get these games, they can't miss the fact they have problems and yet they neither report the problems to the readers nor do they decrease the games score because of them. They rarely even bother to report on how broken they are. The media is in on it and combined with the war on customers we have no rights to a working product. Its enough to make you stop playing games altogether.

 

[OptimumSlinky]

Absolutely. The media fawned over Battlefield 3, yet the initial release build had a broken party system, ran like garbage, and frankly was a step back in many ways from Bad Company 2.

Either they didn't actually TEST the game, or they're in the pockets due to advertising dollars.

 

[alent1234]

good luck

these days the silicon has bugs
the bios/firmware has bugs
drivers have bugs
animation/art software has bugs
dev kits have bugs
game engines have bugs
and developers introduce bugs of their own

 

[purbeast0]

you all should have seen how buggy street fighter x tekken was online from the get go. the game literally had no sound effects 90% of the time. and it shipped like that, and took them over a month to fix it. and now that the fixed it, the online mode is laggier than before.

oh, and before they fixed the sound bug, they claimed it was a side effect of the netcode and they COULDNT fix it.

they also said microsoft's framework would not allow them to have 2 people playing online on a team, on the same xbox360. they said microsoft's framework doesnt allow it. even though, halo, gears of war, mortal kombat ... all let you do this.

oh yea ... and that missing feature was in the instruction book as a feature included in the game, and was also advertised as part of the game.

 

[exdeath]

Being able to patch games is what hurt this generation and gave devs an excuse to be lazy.

It's not the developers being lazy, it's the publishers being greedy and rushing to make an extra buck on holiday launches, etc. You can pretty much blame EA and Activision exclusively for everything bad that has happened to the gaming industry the last couple years.

Well that and the mouth breathing "gam3rz" that continue supporting these crooked business models with their wallets.

It's kind of like politics... do you blame the politicians, or do you blame the 51% of the public that is retarded enough to vote for them? Both.

 

[exdeath]

It wouldn't bother me so much if they'd ACTUALLY patch them. But they don't. And so bugs just sit there for months and months, and games remain broken.

Because they already have your money, they don't care any more. Better to get Call of Duty 19 1/2 Hyper Turbo Ultimate Pink Ops Edition out the door and fill a billion pre orders than to waste time patching a week old game that doesn't make a million a week anymore. Your customers will just have to deal with shitty products, you have money to make!

This business model has worked well given that there is no recourse (you can't return a shitty or bugged game).

 

[exdeath]

They have sequels and expansions, yes. But WOW has been around for how many years now? I don't mind expansions, add-ins, etc. What I find annoying is when I purchase all the DLC for MW2, all the maps, and then MW3 comes out, and the whole community jumps ship to product that, while fun, could have simply been an expansion of the MW2 game assets. Basically, I loathe having to pay again for maps I've already purchased previously, and I hate developers forcing the community to migrate. I get it, they want to make money. Still, in an ideal dream world, I'd rather see MW as this massive beast, with all the online maps integrated, all the new weapons as DLC, and the campaigns as expansion packs.

Everything you speak here is an intentional business strategy favored by EA and Activision. Nickel and diming cheap broken casual games is what they prefer.

 

[exdeath]

Last Autumn 1/2 of the games I bought were unplayably broken. I still can't get F1 2011's multiplayer to work reliably.

What most disappoints me however is the review sites. They get these games, they can't miss the fact they have problems and yet they neither report the problems to the readers nor do they decrease the games score because of them. They rarely even bother to report on how broken they are. The media is in on it and combined with the war on customers we have no rights to a working product. Its enough to make you stop playing games altogether.

With reviews it's all "OH LOOK MOAR GUNS, SPLOSIONS AND TITS AND IT'S CALL OF DUTY OMFG!!!! ZOMG GRAPHICS!! GRAPHICS GRAPHICS!!!!1! A+++++ 11/10"

What I refer to as the Halo and Fast and the Furious generation... these ADHD inflicted mouth breathing stick and keyboard turning casual masses of self proclaimed "gam3rz" have ruined it for us all.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

It's sad that Modern Warfare 3, probably the LEAST creative or inventive game of the year, is also the one that has the most polish and fewest bugs.

Of course it has the fewest, the game is a 5+ year old game with a new coat of wax on it. The fact that people keep buying it in droves year after year only shows how universally stupid the gaming community really is.