Enough with the patches

Darkiewonder - 424 days 8 hours ago

So it's better to wait many months or years for the game to be perfect then?

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply

Some_One_Plays - 424 days 8 hours ago

For example Lair is an off-line only game therefore if the game is broken it's the original code. With games like Socom: Confrontation online only games traffic can happen around launch time something developers can't foresee. Before you create something like this educate yourself something that journalist fail to do.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Apocalypse Shadow - 424 days 7 hours ago

do i like patches?

no.patches shouldn't be necessary.if devs took the time to make a game,you won't need them.but i knew already that if consoles came with hard drives and were hooked to the internet,we were going to see patches like PC.and i hated it on PC.

but through the bad,there is good.sometimes,you may think you have done everything right and still make a mistake.i like that devs can go back and fix that mistake.i have grown to except that.i tolerate it.but it doesn't end there.

to me,added dlc content to a finished game is a patch.and there has been great content added to games.but in my opinion,it applies to firmware updates as well.my ps3 has become a whole different beast with the patches that have been released.it is even more amazing than the launch 60gig i purchased.so that is GOOD.

and what would happen if we have to wait for a game to release.

"there's a glitch.""got to patch it.""can't release it yet."
"framerate is not 60fps,it's 30.""got to fix it.""can't release it yet."
""there's a pixel out of place.""got to patch it."can't release it yet."

if devs have to spend more hours to make everything perfect,you will have less games and more waiting times.

and we already see how 360 fans treat ps3 fans on waiting for awsome games like mgs4,killzone2,LBP,GT5,etc.the y would have a field day if devs times increased for us.

i can wait,but i can also understand their(devs)dilemma when making games on short schedules.because when you rush,you tend to make mistakes.

apocalypse................

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

outlawlife - 424 days 7 hours ago

people fail to forget when games didn't have patches

if a game was broken you had no hope of it getting fixed, your money just got wasted

patches are a good thing as long as they aren't leaned upon like a crutch, some companies have leaned on patches recently but not as many as it could be

castle crashers is an example of a team that just didn't have the resources, a very small team built that game and they just didn't have the resources/know how to properly play test the game and get it running perfectly on launch(still no patch btw)

if anybody followed that game you know it was in development for a long time, and that was only an live arcade release..it took them early as long to develop that game as it does for a full on release

as for fable 2, there aren't any glitches int he game that break it as long as you follow the on screen instructions(ie don't leave the area means don't leave the area) but lionhead has always released buggy games and always will, their playtesting just isn't up to par for some reason, i think they just paint themselves into a corner with pinning down release dates way too early,

the patch for fable 2 was for co-op which had a hang up and may not have made it but the patch was ready the day the game was out so how can you complain? it took maybe 30 seconds to install

but patches aren't going anywhere, and some developers will abuse them, and some won't it just depends on how the company is run and what the mindset of the dev team is

if there is a hint of "we can fix it with a patch" mindset then thats what will happen, you'll get a patch...maybe

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Forbidden_Darkness - 424 days 6 hours ago

i myself love patches!

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Final_Rpg - 424 days 4 hours ago

It's true guys. Instead of just patching everything later they should do it before release. Why release something flawed and incomplete?

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Tristanh82 - 424 days 3 hours ago

my post was deleted before about going off at bethseda towards there game Oblivion and that i wouldnt buy fallout 3 because i aint gonna pay anymore to them lazy developers for not fixing bugs, like the witch not taking my bloodgrass to make me the cure for vampirism so i have to play the rest of the game as a stinking vampire, so personALLY i dont care if games get updated its when developers sell games make millions and dont update them. they ripd off all the fans of Oblivion so its only a matter of time before you find bugs all through fallout that they wont fix

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Merritt - 424 days 2 hours ago

I think some bugs are inevitable. You have a testing team of say ten people as opposed to hundreds of thousands playing the game when it's released. There are bound to be some errors found.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

jlytle1234 - 424 days ago

et for the atari is no where close to the level of production and complexity of modern video games. Games today are multimillion dollar projects with dozens to hundreds of people involved around the world. They have to push out these games at break neck speed and sometimes theres too much code to make sure its perfect. Et for atari can be made by a single person with a home computer using flash. Et didnt involve networking and multiplayer, which just ups the complexity of a game.
Socom had a beta and they issued 6 patches for it. By the end it was playing pretty solid. Something went afoul when they released the final build to the public. Sometimes sh!t happens. Try learning a little about the process of making high budget games, instead of mouthing off in your blog about things you dont even understand. learn to appreciate the fact that you pay 60 bucks and can expect someone to fix the problems as opposed to the cartridge days where you paid 60 bucks and got screwed if it was broken.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Delive - 424 days ago

It shows continued support and awareness to resolve errors. Not like any of us don't make mistakes. Continue doing a good job developers and ignore articles like this one.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

kevnb - 424 days ago

patches are nice when they can improve a game.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

moe84 - 423 days 23 hours ago

Using patches to make improvements is one thing. Using patches to fix game breaking issues and glitches that should have been right from the factory, stupid, laziness and downright a waste of money. Some things however can't be resolved through patching. FPS issues especially. Most of which is from the console/system not having the hardware to run the game smoothly. For this, game devs need to make games that work, actually trying to tune the game for w/e console they are running on.

Strictly online games like MMO's are a little different. There are going to be so many patches for content updates that you are going to have issues eventually. Which can be resolved through patching....successful MMO's anyway.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

Tristanh82 - 423 days 12 hours ago

yeah i agree but its the eras that dont get fixed that i have the problem with.....Bethseda= Oblivion not fixed= me pay 110 Australian dollars for a faulty game that has been out for yonks on all platforms its ripping us all off, pick up your game Beth, i got a patch for farcry2 7 days after the release date.....

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply

FBl - 424 days 8 hours ago

That's what you get for buying an Xbox 360;Bugs,glitches,and patches

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply