We Must Demand Better (A Patches discussion)

[goodfellagator22]

Quote: Originally Posted by mrprice33

but things happen in dev cycles, and code is very brittle. they have a deadline, and sometimes unexpected things happen late in deadlines that harm the integrity of a product. it's a good thing that patches exist, because games are far more complicated now, and there is a greater chance for something bad happening. think about it this way, you have a 20 page paper due in 5 minutes. you start printing it out, and while it's printing, you see that some of the pages suddenly are printing in japanese. it's maybe 1 or 2 of the 20, but it can really harm your grade. now, would you rather be able to go to your professor and say "look, i did the paper, but something weird happened and i'm going to turn in the paper as soon as it's fixed," or would you rather have to turn in the paper and get a C? that's the situation with patching now. stuff happens, and it's much better to have an easy fix (a patch), than a recall or no fix at all.

I'm gonna be a smartass here and say why would you wait for five minutes until it was due to print out a 20 page paper, that's just procrastinating.

But in all seriousness you are probably right, I honestly don't know much about the development of a game, if they are straight up pushed to the deadline with getting everything done and something randomly comes up at the last second, what can be done? I honestly don't know how that works or if that can happen.

I did completely agree the whole time that having patches available the entire time is a good thing, cause obviously it can only help improve the game in some way. I just hope they aren't putting things off just because patches are available now....which again would be an assumption.

[OMT]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigsmallwood

Every game is going to have a few bugs...Understand what I am saying: Patches are not a bad thing. Its the fact that these games are shipping broken and if a patch is to be released it should be for something minor. And games have "worked" out of the box....with minimal issues. Thats a fact jack. So ask yourself what planet you are from.

You're assuming there is some correlation between the ability to patch and the quality of a game. Like if it couldn't be patched, the game would be better.

Well, it isn't true. It is the opposite. With the ability to patch we can now improve a game post release whereas in the past we were stuck with what went out.

I'm pretty sure this thread gets started every year.

[VitaminKG21]

Quote: Originally Posted by Adam_Thompson_EA

You're assuming there is some correlation between the ability to patch and the quality of a game. Like if it couldn't be patched, the game would be better. Well, it isn't true. It is the opposite. With the ability to patch we can now improve a game post release whereas in the past we were stuck with what went out. I'm pretty sure this thread gets started every year.

The fact that is does ought to tell you something.

[SoxFan01605]

Quote: Originally Posted by adembroski

Yes. I also remember the days when player "models" were 8 pixels. I cannot understand the mentality that the ability to patch games is bad. Totally boggles my mind.

The ability to patch a game isn't bad. I think the concern is the apparent reliance some developers seem to have on them in letting us play supplemental QA rep.

I'm not saying that applies here, and I don't think anyone could honestly say they know that's the case for any game. However, I have had times where I've wondered whether or not shortcuts were being taken through the patch process.

[TheShizNo1]

BOOOOOO!!!! Get off the stage. Wrap it up

[BigDofBA]

Quote: Originally Posted by fishepa

Not really. In those days there was not a medium to transmit one's hatred and venom for developers of games. I really don't think any game ever "worked" out of the box, people just didn't have current technology to be able to get on forums and discuss how terrible everything is and how it can be changed. But that's my opinion.

Exactly.

I would also like to add that there wasn't even the ability to patch games back in the day.

[mrprice33]

Quote: Originally Posted by VitaminKG21

The fact that is does ought to tell you something.

indeed, that every poster thinks they are a special snowflake and need to try to "bring up an issue" when A) it's not an issue, and B) it's been "brought up."

anybody remember the bug in nfl 2k5 where if a running play was negated for holding, the running back would have negative yardage credited to them? so if it was an 80 yard td run, the rb would have -90 yards. aren't you glad they were able to patch that? should they have been raked over the coals for it?

[VitaminKG21]

Quote: Originally Posted by mrprice33

indeed, that every poster thinks they are a special snowflake and need to try to "bring up an issue" when A) it's not an issue, and B) it's been "brought up." anybody remember the bug in nfl 2k5 where if a running play was negated for holding, the running back would have negative yardage credited to them? so if it was an 80 yard td run, the rb would have -90 yards. aren't you glad they were able to patch that? should they have been raked over the coals for it?

No, because I never played 2K games .

I'm with the idea that it is a great thing that games can be patched as it certainly is always a good thing when mistakes can be corrected.

But I'm also a little skeptical when a massive company like EA with a super-popular and high-selling title like NCAA manages to ship a game with f'd up rosters, broken sliders and the the like. Seems to me they are paying just slightly less attention because they know they can go in and patch things (hopefully).

Just my take, probably wrong as I'm sure I'll be told after this post, but we're all entitled to an opinion.