Bugging out: Why updates and patches aren't good enough

BeefJack: "These days, we seem to accept bugs in games like Skyrim on the grounds that they’ll be patched out soon enough. But are they? And should that even be an excuse in the first place? Emily King thinks not..."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
scrambles2344d ago (Edited 2344d ago )

If a game is massive, expansive, or being trying out new stuff then i believe its fine for there to be bugs. The engines some games run these days are insanely complex and will have problems. People asking companies to produce perfect games in 2 year periods have no idea what theyre talking about and are just whining cuz everything isnt perfect especially if the company isnt a massive one. patience people patience.

GraveLord2344d ago

I disagree. For a bug as game-breaking as this one it's not acceptable. Especially since the same bug was present in previous Bethesda PS3 games.

Look at Grand Theft Auto IV. The game is massive yet I've never seen any game-breaking bugs. I don't recall any bugs really......

Baka-akaB2344d ago (Edited 2344d ago )


I could agree with part of what you say However , what was the new thing Skyrim is supposed to be trying there ? It's the same formula since eons , refined obviously , but also with some features and mechanics cut from previous games of the Elder Scrolls .

Bethesda's products still ends up awesome , but they are filthy liars . THey can't even be honest about the engine , and kept flaunting some new revolutionary one , when it's still gamebryo inside and incredibly badly compiled and not even 1% optimized , as proven multiple times by fans and modders .

The game had already its public by the heart , what was the need to make up that much crap ?

scrambles2344d ago

no one ever said i was talking bout skyrim brosef =/

iamnsuperman2344d ago

It doesn't matter how big games are bugs shouldn't be present. It is called quality control. I have seen the old "its a big game so there are bound to be bugs so it is OK excuses" appear a lot but is it really OK?. You go out and buy a game that is broken in some from. To me that seems wrong. When I buy a product and do not want it to be broken straight out of the box. The fact of the matter is these developers are using the opportunity to fix it later to reduce testing cost. We have become test subjects for games. Bugs in games are unacceptable. Its clear some developers just cannot handle the demand the industry puts on them as much as others and some developers are just to over ambitions because they can afford to make buggy (sometimes game breaking bugs) games because there are people like you who say it is OK its a big game it will be fixed eventually or its really "complex". Utter rubbish. There are standards and I am surprised that as a consumer base we do not put enough pressure on these developers to not quality control to the standard they should be at. Do you complain when you buy something that has fault? I do no matter if it is a game or any other product I spend my money on.

MariaHelFutura2344d ago (Edited 2344d ago )

Bugs are acceptable, every game has some bugs. Game-breaking bugs are not, IMO. Skyrim has a lot going on at any given moment, just like online shooters and MMOs. Which ironically also have problems w/ bugs.

RBLAZE19882344d ago (Edited 2344d ago )

But the thing is, Bethesda is a bnig enough company, They aren't trying anything new and they have essentially been making the same game since Morrowind so you'd think that they would have some of these things figured out and fixed. It is so evident that this was lazy and corner cutting development on one platform and ported over because even amateur modders on the PC have stated that the optimization on the PC version of Skyrim is non existent and that Bethesda didn't even try.

I remember a game like FF7 on the ps1, it was huge and was polished and shipped finished. It didn't need updates becaue updates weren't possible at that time. With the consoles having constant internet access it gives all developers a lazy attitude because they can just fix it later. This is one of the things wrond with the industry and one of the reasons I think bethesda don't deserve all the hyped up credit they get. Skyrim is just a graphically and geometrically upgraded Oblivion there is no reason it should have so many nasty bugs. It's atrocious.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2344d ago
Tonester9252344d ago

That's why I respect Nintendo a lot. They release a game with minimum to no bugs. Console and PC game developers know that they could release a game, get all the $, then fix the problems later. Fix game breaking bugs first then the rest later. Why? Maybe because "everyone" buys games first day. I believe there should always have play tests and betas. Make these Devs do their job, all the way!

ilovemyps32344d ago

Black ops were flawed,because:
- this game is maybe the one who can drive sales,specially in usa.Microsoft needs to secure is baby, by having the best version.
- this game is a mine for gold subscriptions, to Microsoft. They need to secure their baby, to have more and more people playing it,for this to happen,Xbox version must be the version to pick,and by choosing the Xbox version, you need an Xbox
-once again, Microsoft wants to secure their baby, with exclusive dlc.even if they need to pay huge millions to Activision to secure the dlc, st the end, people,even owning both consoles, will choose Xbox over ps3, for the future extra content/dlc
- Activision knows THIS game is the most important one, for Microsoft,as it keep making Xbox sell,along with millions of gold subscriptions.they will do whatever they can, so Microsoft gets the best version.
- when you see Microsoft paid 50 millions for gta4, it isn't hard to imagine how much they have been paying, to secure the best version of cod,docs, etc

Come on, for developers like Activision or treyarch,how is it possible that the ps3 has online issues, lag, etc, since the net code is exactly the same for both consoles, but written in maybe different languages? Come on, if I say house or Maison, its different,but it means the same, right? The same is with their netcode.these guys know how to program, its not an excuse. The game should have the same behaviour,with the same netcode. But it doesn't,since ps3 online was only means Activision/treyarch did those issues and lag, on purpose.

Since the Xbox version has to be the best one, what could they fuck up, on the ps3 version? The graphics? Mmm, no.the sound?mmm,no.what else? We really need something that will make people want to distroy their game.mmm, ok, let's fuck the netcode. People will wait 15 minutes to join a game, people will get disconnected,people will lag. Let's make their online experience disastrous.

No conspiracy, this is what really happened.

Meanwhile,at Microsoft analyst office:
"Great, we have 10 million people playing black ops online, and we sold 2 million consoles, just for that game, in a few months."
"Great, Activision did a great job,with ps3.they really deserve what we paid to them"
"Yeah, and those dlcs cost us a lot of money,as well.but money isn't a problem,here"

"Ringgggg. Hello, its Activision ceo, we are preparing next cod game, we need to know what to do with the ps3 version"
"Hello. Ps3... Yeah, right... Hahahahha"