Games and Bugs

[core_luros]

Now, is it just me or are games coming out with a lot more issues? I have been playing for years and it just seems that too many gameplay altering bugs have messed up some games for me. Fallout 3 is a great example because near the end of it, characters stretch out and in parts characters are just missing. Fable 2 had another issue where characters info would stay onscreen and you couldn't fire your gun because it just accessed their info.
It could just be me but it seems that games should be worked on a little bit more to me. I could care less that a sequel comes out a few months earlier, as long as it is playable.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Huge open world RPG's like Fallout 3 have surprisingly few bugs for such a big game. I'd say that through patches and such, we are having less bugs, AND the ability to fix them.

In short: No, I do not agree with the statement that games have more bugs.

 

[Ghonzor]

I've noticed buggier games are released as well.
My guess is that devs think they can just release a patch later to fix everything.

Some games though, like Fat Princess, had unforeseeable bugs and such. The devs were great about listening to what the players had to say and fixing the game accordingly. That is why Titan is one of my favorite independent developers now.

 

[Marter]

Games are being released with significantly more bugs/glitches, because the Developers can just patch it later on. Instead of waiting an extra 2 or so months, they can just release the game and have players discover bugs that will then be patched.

 

[Ghonzor]

I agree that games should be worked on a bit more before we get them.
I'd rather wait for a playable game then have one that I can't do anything in.

 

[Axle_Bullitt_19]

I belive its because they think they can just release a patch for it latter. The lazy Bastards! Also after getting the DLC for Fallout I was having issues left and right. You think they would have had enough time to fix that shit after how long it was on the PC and 360, not to mention the fact they had pushed the original release back as well.

 

[RatRace123]

Dragon age is the last game I played that had some glitches, I'm guessing that games have to ship out early in order to compete with other games. Or they just don't catch the glitches. Or because of the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and they want that, NOW!

 

[core_luros]

In response to HUBILUB, there in lies the problem. People have to wait for their game to be patched. It shouldn't have to be that way. Sometimes you can't fix it unless you get the DLC for the game. So I paid for the game and now I have to pay to get it fixed? Games shouldn't be something you have to wait for.

 

[Cabisco]

Betas, all multiplayer games should have a public beta. I don't want to have to spend the first month on a game with it being fixed. After Gears 2 and modern warfare 2 it's clear to me that from now on, i wait a month before buying games without betas.

 

[wkim564]

Welcome to the future, where games are finished after they are released.

Seriously though, I agree there were some seriously buggy games made that could have easily been fixed

 

[Shru1kan]

Huge open world RPG's like Fallout 3 have surprisingly few bugs for such a big game. I'd say that through patches and such, we are having less bugs, AND the ability to fix them.

I agree with the first part. Wholeheartedly.

But after seeing so many kids complain about MW2, playing gears of war and such, there's an astounding amount of bugs in such a small map with so few mechanics.

 

[Doc Incognito]

Most games seem fine to me. Even Fallout 3, a game world large enough to lose your head in, functions amazingly well, despite open-world games' tendency to glitch. It's a great improvement over the glitchiness of Oblivion.

 

[Cherry Cola]

In response to HUBILUB, there in lies the problem. People have to wait for their game to be patched. It shouldn't have to be that way. Sometimes you can't fix it unless you get the DLC for the game. So I paid for the game and now I have to pay to get it fixed? Games shouldn't be something you have to wait for.

Patches are free.

And this is a great concept. If you released a buggy game in the last two generations (and they had buggy games) you would have to live with it. Nowadays, every game has a chance to redeem itself through patches.

And I don't think there are lots of bugs nowadays. With the exception of online playing, since online often has bugs, but having bugs in online is basically unavoidable. Single-player games have remarkably few.

 

[number2301]

Repost of a repost of a repost. Buggy games have been about for decades. The difference is now you can actually fix the bugs with patches.

Look up Frontier: Elite 2 or Frontier First Encounters. Apparently Pong had some bugs as well, and with a game that simple what hope do modern developers have?

 

[core_luros]

In response to HUBILUB, there in lies the problem. People have to wait for their game to be patched. It shouldn't have to be that way. Sometimes you can't fix it unless you get the DLC for the game. So I paid for the game and now I have to pay to get it fixed? Games shouldn't be something you have to wait for.

Patches are free.

And this is a great concept. If you released a buggy game in the last two generations (and they had buggy games) you would have to live with it. Nowadays, every game has a chance to redeem itself through patches.

And I don't think there are lots of bugs nowadays. With the exception of online playing, since online often has bugs, but having bugs in online is basically unavoidable. Single-player games have remarkably few.

Ok there are fewer, i'll give you that. The problem i seem to keep having though is that the bugs that i come across are game-messers. They don't erase it or anything, they just make it impossible to play. These are the same bugs that they have yet to fix.

 

[AoGenius]

The first thing which comes to mind is the example of my fellow Computer Science and Software Engineering students. If the result assignments and projects we program on our own have a fixed down-ratio with earlier years, I can understand the many bugs and problems.

Anyway... Blizzard. They usually take years upon years til they publish a game. I think it's awsome, cause the wait only makes it better, and then you get a COMPLETE game, which you probably won't have to patch. Then again, some say they get tired of waiting and the game doesn't interest them when it comes out. What do you think?

I hate patches. That's something that wastes my time. It's probably a bad example, but I bought The Witcher when it came out, and a year later they made the Enhanced edition, which I heard was really great but I couldn't patch it cause the manufacturer (Atari Israel) was apparently bankrupt by the time it came out.

But yeah. I know what you mean. One of the main reasons why I don't try most of the new games (even if they sound interesting) is because I get this assumption they're buggy as hell and that I should wait till a few patches come out (or till I can afford them).

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

Games having functionality mean developers would have to do more work..they want to do the work but then the compnay paying to make the game says "we want it by this day" so they satisfy that monster and at the time and just say to themselves "sure it's bad but we can fix it later after we count our money"

 

[BillyShakes]

How many Half Life's could Activision had cranked out in the time it's taken Valve to make two and some bits?

This man speaks truth.