Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

What's your opinion of bugs?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#41
Morgoth

Morgoth

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 10099 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
The problem with most software companies out there is that they don't take their time to plan enough their game code (making an analysis, writing down the specifications, planning all features that get into the game (not adding some in the end as Volo said), and then implement the code and test it). If programmers are frowsily during the planning stage, there's a much higher possibility the game code will become buggy and it is more difficult to maintenance it later, which is probably caused due to 1) laziness/lack of knowledge or b) time restrictions or c) both. So just only relying on QA doesn't really mean the game will become less buggy. If you give your programmers 2 more months time FROM THE BEGINNING to plan out their features (not immediately implementing them) I'm betting the game code is far less buggy than giving those 2 months for QA afterwards.

#42
Alien_77

Alien_77

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 50 posts
  • Location:Vienna - Austria
  • Steam:ED-E
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
I think its also a matter of budget, if a software studio isnt get paid from a publisher to do a patch, they probable dont write one. Therefore I think if Activision didnt pay a dollar more on Troika, they didnt really work in their "extra time" on Vampire Bloodlines. Or do you work a month or two for your firm for free? It's not a fact, It's just what I think.

#43
Zach Morris

Zach Morris

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 486 posts
  • Location:Bayside, California
Do you guys think they should review games and then if an important patch is released re-view the game again? I mean some of the games you guys are talking about might gain a really good score after the fix.

#44
ShadowPaladin V1.0

ShadowPaladin V1.0

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 8772 posts

Do you guys think they should review games and then if an important patch is released re-view the game again?  I mean some of the games you guys are talking about might gain a really good score after the fix.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Most of the time thats pretty much irrelevent to how well the game will do. In most cases the initial run of the game is over long before a patch is released which would significantly improve the score.

The real problem is that reviewers dont include the bugs in their overall scores. TOEE should have never scored more than about 40% based on it's bugginess at release yet some places rated it up in the 90's.

#45
mkreku

mkreku

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 8561 posts
  • Location:Uppsala, Sweden

Most of the time thats pretty much irrelevent to how well the game will do. In most cases the initial run of the game is over long before a patch is released which would significantly improve the score.

The real problem is that reviewers dont include the bugs in their overall scores. TOEE should have never scored more than about 40% based on it's bugginess at release yet some places rated it up in the 90's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, but there are examples of when a patch will almost change a game. Devastation comes to mind. That game, when I reviewed it, suffered from horrible physics that made the game very annoying to play, which in turn affected the final score. A month after I'd reviewed it, they released this 102 MB patch that completely changed the physics to the better and the game became much more playable. I would have given the game a better score if I had reviewed it after the patch.

Also, I always take bugs into account when reviewing a game. I gave Bloodlines 78% and I probably lowered the final score by 10% because of all the bugs (especially the game-stopping one).

#46
Sammael

Sammael

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • Location:Venal Fortress, Maladomini, Nine Hells of Baator
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
My overall attitude towards the bugs depends on their nature.

I don't mind graphics glitches (people standing on air, parts of models showing through walls, textures not loading properly), although they do reduce my general opinion of the game.

I don't mind rules bugs as long as they are not numerous, such as they were in ToEE. A large number of small bugs can be more irritating than one or two major bugs.

Bugs that affect side-quests in RPGs are annoying, but since these aren't critical path, they can be somewhat forgiven, if they are fixed in a patch reasonably soon after the game is released. I've encountered at least one such bug in Vampire: Bloodlines, and it annoyed the hell out of me and made me break my character concept to be able to finish the quest.

Game-stopping bugs that have a workaround (Sacred's water bug) aren't as annoying nowadays as they were in the days before the internet became so prevalent. Still, a game with a game-stopping bug pretty much assures that I'll never buy another product from that developer again.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users