Open question~ PATCH PHILOSOPHY

[OMT]

Quote: Originally Posted by doctorhay53

I would agree with you if this post was from 10 months ago. However, since it's happened 2 years in a row, I believe it is important for someone to think about what caused this problem and ways to avoid it in the future. The way I see it, if you guys can spend less time patching major bugs, that should give us a higher chance of getting other patches, such as community requested gameplay tweaks, etc into the game instead of simply fixing problems.

From my quote: putting in a better process in the future for making sure bugs are caught before the game is final.

[Vikes1]

Quote: Originally Posted by CandyEyes32

Owning the responsibility for the issues says a lot about you. Thank you again for this post Adam.

Well said CandyEyes...and very true.

Making a mistake makes you human. Owning up to it makes you a man. Adam has done that. Gotta respect that.

[JerseySuave4]

Quote: Originally Posted by hcopenhagenh

I disagree. I have a buddy that used to be die hard. He was at 3 or 4 websites a day. He put down 08 after a couple of months and didn't even purchase 09. He doesn't post anywhere anymore. I see him online last week for the first time in over a year and he was playing NCAA 09. Come to find out, he bought the game used really cheap. He messages me... "Bro, this game is about as broken a video game I have ever played." This is a person that hadn't played in forever. People do notice. That is why there is a trend of lower sales numbers. Again, in THE REAL WORLD... this game is broken. If the volume on a Sony Home Theater Receiver was broken would you take it back? That is reality. If the pass rush is Broke then the game is broke. I don't care about bugs, glitches, or whatever. That is all semantics. A bug or glitch means the game is broken.

you're wrong, you said your buddy used to post in message boards, 3-4 different boards a day and was a diehard, so obviously he is someone that would be aware of some of the things the more hardcore gamers pick up on, even if he hadn't played the game in a year. You dont just go from a diehard to someone with no knowledge of bugs & glitches. There is prob a 13 yr old out there, that has never been to a NCAA Football message board, that just likes football and likes playing these games that will get the game and never notice roster problems or the pass rush not being perfect. There is prob a lot of people like that. But as someone that follows the game closely and posts on message boards, we're at a point where we know about all the flaws and pick apart things almost to nausea so things that may not bother a casual gamer bother us.

If the volume of a Sony Home Theater was broken then obviously you wouldnt keep it because a home theater system can't work without the volume. You say the pass rush is broken. I disagree, i have had no problems with the pass rush in the demo. Many others have the same feelings as i do. Some people feel its not what it should be. Does the game still play and work even though the pass rush isn't what you think it should be? Yes. Like i said, i think the pass rush was fine on the demo. So when it comes to pass rush, thats an objective opinion. When it comes to the volume on a Home Theater System and whether its broken or not, thats black & white, not opinion. Its either broken or not.

A bug or glitch does not mean the game is broken, it means the game is not flawless and has areas that need to be fixed or improved. When you go to the doctor with a bug do they tell you you're broken? Are you still able to live? You just are not at the ideal health.

My car makes a funny noise when i drive long distance at high speed after a certain time period, doesnt mean my car is broken since it still is running. It means there is a problem with my car that is keeping it from reaching peak or ideal performance.

You call it semantics but its not, calling it broken is calling it the wrong thing.

[OMT]

Quote: Originally Posted by JerseySuave4

you're wrong, you said your buddy used to post in message boards, 3-4 different boards a day and was a diehard, so obviously he is someone that would be aware of some of the things the more hardcore gamers pick up on, even if he hadn't played the game in a year. You dont just go from a diehard to someone with no knowledge of bugs & glitches. There is prob a 13 yr old out there, that has never been to a NCAA Football message board, that just likes football and likes playing these games that will get the game and never notice roster problems or the pass rush not being perfect. There is prob a lot of people like that. But as someone that follows the game closely and posts on message boards, we're at a point where we know about all the flaws and pick apart things almost to nausea so things that may not bother a casual gamer bother us. If the volume of a Sony Home Theater was broken then obviously you wouldnt keep it because a home theater system can't work without the volume. You say the pass rush is broken. I disagree, i have had no problems with the pass rush in the demo. Many others have the same feelings as i do. Some people feel its not what it should be. Does the game still play and work even though the pass rush isn't what you think it should be? Yes. Like i said, i think the pass rush was fine on the demo. So when it comes to pass rush, thats an objective opinion. When it comes to the volume on a Home Theater System and whether its broken or not, thats black & white, not opinion. Its either broken or not. A bug or glitch does not mean the game is broken, it means the game is not flawless and has areas that need to be fixed or improved. When you go to the doctor with a bug do they tell you you're broken? Are you still able to live? You just are not at the ideal health. My car makes a funny noise when i drive long distance at high speed after a certain time period, doesnt mean my car is broken since it still is running. It means there is a problem with my car that is keeping it from reaching peak or ideal performance. You call it semantics but its not, calling it broken is calling it the wrong thing.

I've been racking my brain trying to come up with a good analogy on this, but really can't. It seems to be unique to software.

[JerseySuave4]

Quote: Originally Posted by Adam_Thompson_EA

I'm not sure how possible it would be. There are 3 main "parts" of a video game... code, data, and content. For example, game logic is code, playbooks are data, audio is content (or as we call them "assets"). Code can be patched easily. Data is tricky. Content cannot be patched. Our cameras are not "hard coded," they are "data driven." So every camera in the game (gameplay, cut scenes, beauty shots, replays) has a data file that sets up the camera's position, its target, FOV, stuff like that. So we'd have to find out if we can include a new camera file via the patch. Assuming we could, the next step is determining how the end user will switch between cameras. There needs to be an option in a menu somewhere. This is part of our UI, which is conent and cannot be patched. However, some of our UI is driven by code so we might have a place to do that. There would certainly have to be some investigation done and designs written to patch cameras. It might not be feasible at all... we really wouldn't know unless we spent time investigating it. Who knows, maybe we already are investigating it? Sorry I don't have a clear yes/no answer. As you can see there are a lot of questions that all must come up as "yes" before answering yours.

yea no problem i dont know much about the patch process so i wasn't sure if something like that was even possible but you did clear it up. It sounds like something that would be extremely time consuming and may not be worth the time & effort to worry about this year. I'll just have to suck it up and use this camera for this year but i'm sure you guys have been made aware, and if not are being made aware now that the new camera has had mixed reviews so hopefully for next year's game you guys do consider at least having the option to go with the classic cam or the new cam.

I appreciate the time and quick response.

[mattbooty]

Quote: Originally Posted by hcopenhagenh

To me what your saying is unacceptable. This lacks customer service and putting out a quality product. I don't care how hard it is or how much code is written. If they can't produce a game that doesn't need a patch DAY 1 to play the game then it is BROKEN!!!! They shouldn't be manufacturing the game if that is the case. They should delay the release. What they are doing is poor business practice.

I absolutely agree 100% that any software product should not require a patch day one. Patching down the line is in most cases inevitable (and if a company never releases a patch for a product it is not because it was bug free it is because they either weren't found or were not a priority for that company to fix). The day one patch is a black mark on EA and I'm sure they are well aware of this fact.

Quote: Originally Posted by hcopenhagenh

Do you watch College Football? Someone on the DL does not get pancaked every play. NCAA 09 at least one got pancaked every pass play. THIS IS NOT COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!! EA is advertising a Collegiate Football Game and the OL/DL is not up to the level of collegiate football. There are other thing broken on this game also.

I've been a season ticket holder for PSU since I graduated, I have not missed a game, I watch college football every fall saturday from the moment I wake up until the moment I go to bed unless I'm driving to or from a PSU game.

By your reasoning does that mean if PSU schedules a 1AA team and dominates them every snap (until the 2nd, 3rd, etc string come in) that that game was not a college football game after all? Even though it was a football game played between two colleges you are saying the quality of OL/DL play is what decides what that game should be considered? If I peel an orange and it turns out the orange was waaay too bitter and I can't eat it it is still an orange, it didn't magically become something else even though it didn't taste like I expected/wanted it to.

[mattbooty]

I know for people not involved with software these seem like foreign concepts but that doesn't make them any less true. When computers began to hit mainstream and software became prevalent it was a totally new paradigm and new rules had to be applied. This happens anytime there is a shift like this or a totally new product category is introduced. The complexity of software design is so far beyond anything up to this point that it requires new rules. If the rules said software cannot be released if there is ANYTHING broken, THERE WOULD BE NO SOFTWARE. Especially if the definition of broken is "does not meet the standards of every individual consumer" as it seems to on these boards. And this is coming from someone disappointed in NCAA!

If you buy a car and after a few weeks of driving it decide you aren't happy with the comfort of the seats, the car is not broken, you may not be as happy driving it as you thought you would be but the car still gets you from A to B. If later on it turns out that one of the parts of the car is defective and its the manufacturers fault, they issue a recall and fix it for free or at a reduced rate. THIS IS A PATCH! The principle is the same.

I don't want to go round and round arguing the semantics of what broken and unplayable mean to everyone, I just was hoping to shed some light on this from someone familiar with the industry and not associated with EA (sorry adam but i get the feeling some here won't believe a word you tell them hehe).

[doctorhay53]

Quote: Originally Posted by Adam_Thompson_EA

From my quote: putting in a better process in the future for making sure bugs are caught before the game is final.

My bad....yes, I agree with you

I just really hate when people tell me 'forget what's already happened and let's move forward'. It's a cop-out in my opinion, because most of the time the best way to move forward is to figure out who/what screwed up in the first place.

Not that it matters to any of us here.