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".

If it's severe enough, yes, absolutely. Then I would say that your use of word bug is such that most people will not understand what you actually mean. Bug is generally understood to mean glitch in how software works, and what I have seen PoE only has quite minor glitches in its scripting and some bit more serious scripting problems that can in some cases force player to load the game. But nothing that seriously prevent most of the people playing the game. If you find game to be enjoyable because of those scripting glitches that is different from game having major bugs that would mean that there are fundamental problems in how game's code works and how it interacts with other software. Which are bugs that need to be fixed with hotfixes because they aren't just annoying but they posses threat for those who play they game or even have it installed. I would also consider bugs that prevent people playing game at all as major bugs as they mean that players didn't get working product when they bought the game. But scripting errors that make some systems in game work differently to what they were described I would not ever call as major bug or scripting that don't always launch correctly. But if you find game unenjoyable then that is unfortunate but sad reality when you buy entertainment as everyone has different tastes which means that every piece of entertainment don't work for them. If you feel that entertainment would had been more entertaining if it had higher production value that is fine opinion and you probably should look more AAA games which have much higher production values if you don't want risk you money on products with lower production value. Ok, we're really getting into the weeds here, but let me clarify even further. Writing which is so bad as to significantly impair my enjoyment of a CRPG would be a major flaw. Issues in systems or processes which significantly impair my enjoyment of a CRPG would be major bugs. While technically distinct and of differing degrees of subjectivity, neither is acceptable. (edited to omit majority of quoted wall o' text)

You haven't played a game since the 90's I take it. Lazy troll is lazy (See? I can make stupid, inflammatory posts which add nothing to the conversation too!)

I'd define a major bug as one which significantly impairs the core functionality of the software in question. This is a CRPG. Its core functionality is to entertain. One of the ways it does so is through the fictional accumulation of power and abilities. There are multiple bugs with impair this and they are therefore "major". So bad writing is major bug? If it's severe enough, yes, absolutely.

Sure, there is - particularly if a bug happens to you. There's a difference between complaining and asserting that Obsidian was in some sort of conspiracy to bilk money out of people by releasing a "broken" product though. I agree, there's no reason for me to think that these bugs were in any way intentional or malicious. But that doesn't necessarily mean they're acceptable. Oh sweet jebus there were so many things wrong with those games. I never encountered the uninstall bug with PoR2k1, but I played it for less than two hours before giving up and getting a refund/exchange from whatever store I had purchased it at.

I'd define a major bug as one which significantly impairs the core functionality of the software in question. This is a CRPG. Its core functionality is to entertain. One of the ways it does so is through the fictional accumulation of power and abilities. There are multiple bugs with impair this and they are therefore "major".

Absolutely on target. And let's be clear, we are talking about a product that doesn't "work" to the extent that a consumer could reasonably be expected to demand. We're not complaining about design choices with which we disagree, we're talking about core functionality that in many cases simply doesn't function.

I suppose the bugs with Windows, web browsers, financial planning software, big data software, educational software, etc. etc. were my imagination? You have yet to provide an actual argument about how a normal and competent development is guaranteed to produce zero bugs, and how each bug is clearly the result of extraordinary incompetence. You have also not provided an argument about how developers are meant to 'take it into account', beyond doing a lot of Q&A, patching the game on Day 1 and then in Week 1, and postponing the game for polish. All of which has been done. You answered your own question: do a lot of QA. Testing and bugfixing is an integral and ongoing part of the development process. To again clarify, I'm talking about MAJOR bugs. Producing complex software which is entirely bug-free isn't a reasonable proposition and I don't expect any company to be able to accomplish it. Producing complex software which is free of bugs that undermine the essential functions of said software for a significant portion of the user base is an entirely different matter and thousands of developers do it every year. Edit: I also take issue with your use of the term "extraordinary incompetence". I never said I think these bugs were the result of "extraordinary incompetence". In fact, I think they were the result of regular old, bog standard, run-of-the-mill, everyday failure. In this case, that failure took the form of insufficient QA; whether that was the result of bad programming, unrealistic deadlines, poor managerial oversight, genuinely "incompetent" testers, or anything else is completely irrelevant. Major flaws in a for-profit company's product shouldn't be excused, and in a free market economy, voicing one's unhappiness and "voting with your wallet" is absolutely the proper response. (edited to correct aphorism in last paragraph)

A delayed release could hurt Obsidian's revenue as well, especially when we seem to be in a time of CRPG resurgence. When releasing software saying "just two more weeks" is dangerous because you will never have a bug-free product on launch no matter how hard you try; just the larger group of players when compared to your beta testers and QA team will bring in new scenarios that you could not have thought of or possibly tested. I agree that some of these bugs are serious, but saying that Obsidian should have delayed again to try and catch every issue while they have to consider competition, the cost to continue development and the financial state of their company (OE was planning on shutting down before POE) then it should be obvious as to why they released. If you're that hung up on buying buggy software, wait a few months before you purchase. A fiercely competitive market and unstable revenue streams aren't the fault of the consumer and they're perfectly normal parts of a free market economy. Obsidian may have found themselves in a situation where they had no financially tenable solution other than to release a buggy game, but that doesn't mean that those of us buying it owe them some kind of "forgiveness". We can empathize with their passion for making games and the challenging circumstances under which they have to operate while still holding them accountable for their shortcomings.

So what's your reasoning as to why they would release the game with bugs? Do you really think they are that stupid that they'd risk their reputation like that? Do you think that they just said "aw to h*** with it, we'll just release it with bugs and be done."? Like, what logical, rational, reason could they have to not releasing it a month from now, completely (or mostly) bug free. Tell me why if you're such an expert? Because they can "get away with it?" How? Rather, it just forces them to be in a mad rush to get the bugs fixed ASAP so they can appease their fanbase. I can't think of one good reason they would chose to release it, knowing they'd have a buggy release, unless they couldn't help it. Here's my list of possibilities. Let me know if you think of any: a) Budget - they ran out of cash and needed the new income. Seems likely, especially since they already delayed it earlier in the year (if they were willing to do it once, why not again, if it makes the game better and they have the resources? Simple. They probably didn't have the resources. b) Their testers (the QA guys) are just terrible and Obsidian really needs to invest in new testers because they've been consistently bad. And any business as large and successful as Obsidian knows that bad testers should be rehired to do another bad performance, right? Cause that just makes sense. c) Somebody got lazy or missed something major, unintentionally. These things happen. Its human nature to make mistakes. How we fix them is what is important. Plus, as you mentioned, if EVERYONE simply MUST have these bugs just like you, but they are simply too unobservant or simply not as smart as you or some other BS, how can you possible expect a professional to find the bugs that got past thousands, if not millions, of people? That just sounds unreasonable to me. d) Obsidian just doesn't care. Which I highly doubt. As you mentioned, from a business perspective, it makes no sense to just release it for no good reason. So there has to be a reason. So which is it? Does Obsidian hate their fans? Was it a mistake? Are they incompetent? Or do you have some other solution? Maybe I'm just not observant enough or too stupid to realize it, so please enlighten me. Since you're an expert and all. The stakes are clearly vastly lower in game development than in many other industries, but none of the scenarios you describe above would be considered acceptable if occurred with an airline, or an automobile manufacturer, or a telecommunications provider. I don't think "oops, **** happens!" is a reasonable defense for a professional, for-profit business of any description. Bugs like this are not the result of unforeseeable circumstances, they are the result of things like poor deadline planning, poor allocation of resources, poor project management, or even negligence/apathy on the part of the company. I don't think the latter is the case here, but regardless, it is foreseeable that a game may have major bugs and developers should and can take that into account ahead of time.

100% right. Occasional flickering textures is a minor bug. A typo in quest text is a minor bug. Less than ideal unit pathing is a minor bug. I accept that these kinds of things happen and don't get heartburn when they're present in a shipped game. Characters becoming indefinitely broken under common and easily replicated circumstances is not a minor bug. The only reason for things of this magnitude being present in a supposedly final product is inadequate testing and bugfixing. Whether that's because of limited resources, poor project planning, unreasonable deadlines from publishers, or any of a thousand other circumstances is, and should be, essentially irrelevant to the customer.