Nortalud

I have been playing for more than 20 hours and never experienced a single crash or freeze. Either you have a faulty PC or are extremely unlucky... Or perhaps your anecdotal evidence and my anecdotal evidence aren't sufficient to allow us to draw any meaningful conclusions? My point was that the patch issued to address several major bugs (which were definitely not unique to me) also introduced another major bug (which may be unique to me) and that I am therefore irritated and exasperated with Obsidian.

Irony, thine name is k1rage...

Here I was content to let this post die a quick and merciful death, and then Obsidian goes and releases a patch that fixes several (not all) of the major bugs affecting me and many others but which has now caused me no fewer than three crashes. And I'm not talking crashes to desktop, I'm talking full-on kernel-blasting-forced-cold-reboot crashes without even so much as a blue screen of death to give me comfort. It has literally been years since a game, or any other piece of software for that matter, has caused my PC to repeatedly crash like that. Please, Obsidian, have mercy and spare me from any more of your "fixes", I've gotten the message loud and clear: wait a year for your games to be stable and then pick them up at 75% off.

Can someone provide or point me to a Reader's Digest version summary of this apparent controversy? My immediate and admittedly uninformed opinion is that removing something this bit of poetry(?) for fear of giving offense is probably an overreaction and that the reaction to this overreaction is probably a mindbogglingly over-the-top overreaction. But like I said, I'm not very well informed about the topic and would like to get up to speed.

My post was by no means intended as a troll (though I admit the title I used is kinda' troll-y). I am unhappy about the state this game was in when I bought it and am communicating my concerns in a manner which I think is likely to ensure Obsidian's awareness of them. Things have evolved from there into a (mostly civil) debate as to the nature, implications, and, if you'll forgive my grandiosity, broader meaning of the bugs which caused my unhappiness.

To be fair, your name is BugsVendor, so it's probably expected that you'd have more bugs than others. How else will you keep your stock levels high? An excellent point which I had not pondered. I must reconsider all of my life choices.

BugsVendor, on 03 Apr 2015 - 12:53 PM, said: Upon what do you base that assertion? What amount of time do you think would have been required in order for these bugs to have been identified and addressed pre-release?

I would be interested to hear some examples of what you might consider "significant" flaws. Classy

The above is the PC gaming equivalent of victim-blaming. "You want a bug free game? Don't play it from day one release it without adequate QA & bug fixing." is how that should read. Consoles aren't better But yeah ... 30+ hours and one single crash and thats it. Nothing broke my game ... And as always ... as harsh as it might sound ... biggest bug often is the one with the mouse & keyboard infront of the screen. I wasn't making a comparison with consoles, just clarifying that I was limiting my comment to PC/computer games. And are you really saying that people who double-clicked to equip armor, or tried to have their party go up/down certain staircases in Raedric's Keep, or equipped the Horn of Whatchamacallit on a cipher were actually the ones at fault rather than Obsidian?

I don't disagree that some of the bugs are game-breaking either. That doesn't mean the game is broken though. This may sound like semantic nonsense, but to me a game being broken implies that it is, in essence, a paper weight. It won't play and there is no way to make it play. Or if it does play it can never be played to completion. I'd even call the uninstall bug of PoR2001 broken since the consequence of that bug was so very heavy. But a bug can be game breaking and not break the game. When I had my quest item eaten about 20 hours into Arcanum and I had no way to progress the essential quest, that broke my game. Other people had completed the game. I restarted and following tips on how not to encounter the bug got past that part (I don't recall it being fixed at that point). It was a game breaking bug; the game itself was not broken (even if the systems were broken). Your definition of "game breaking" seems to me to be extraordinarily and unreasonably narrow. It sounds to me like you're saying that as long as a game is not so thoroughly awful that it in some way damages your computer and/or will not run under any circumstances whatsoever, that it is not "broken" and that it is reasonable for developers to expect players to independently research workarounds for said bugs rather than for players to expect developers to prevent such bugs from existing in the first place. I'd define "game breaking" as something which significantly impairs the core functionality of said game and/or which significantly diminishes the ability of the player to derive enjoyment from it.

And again my fine fellow, I say that the core functionality isn't broken, people have beat the game without the issues you've experienced and your seeming wish for a bug free game would never be achieved unless Obsidian never released the game. No amount of additional time with the product would cure what ills you now with respect to your game experience. Are you saying that the major bugs which are apparently being fixed in a patch today could not have been identified and corrected by Obsidian pre-release, regardless of any additional time and resources they may have chosen to devote to testing and debugging? Or are you saying that it's impossible to ever reach a point where PoE is entirely free from all bugs and errors of every magnitude and description? Or something else entirely?

The above is the PC gaming equivalent of victim-blaming. "You want a bug free game? Don't play it from day one release it without adequate QA & bug fixing." is how that should read.

One need not excuse major bugs at launch in order to appreciate the masterpiece which a game may have eventually become. From an economic standtpoint, it's more important than ever to avoid declaring a game with major bugs "done", given today's Steam-driven (har har) PC gaming environment. Launching significantly flawed products only reinforces the already-problematic mantra of "wait for the Steam sale". So you would have never bought a Baldur's Gate, an Elder Scroll or a Fallout? Had I some way to know that the games were seriously flawed at the time of their launch but would likely be fixed at some indefinite point in the future, then I would delay my purchase until that time arrived (usually after they've gone on sale). Had I some way to know that the games were seriously flawed at the time of their launch and likely would not be fixed, then I would attempt to research the nature of the flaws and, if I thought them to be severe enough, not purchase the game at all.

And yet I haven't used any Ad Homminem attacks against you, totally contrary to your response. If we're going to play the fallacy game, then you're right, you didn't use an ad hominem attack. You used a tu quoque fallacy to deflect my criticisms of PoE, and then you argument from fallacy in response to my criticism of your post. Retrospective determinism (and just plain not true) Hasty generalization False analogy There now, wasn't that productive? Appeal to ridicule

One need not excuse major bugs at launch in order to appreciate the masterpiece which a game may have eventually become. From an economic standtpoint, it's more important than ever to avoid declaring a game with major bugs "done", given today's Steam-driven (har har) PC gaming environment. Launching significantly flawed products only reinforces the already-problematic mantra of "wait for the Steam sale".