Why was the game realeased when it has so many bugs?

[yoyolll]

So wait, the arguments went from "it's not that buggy" to "other games are more buggy, so it's alright"?

 

I don't care how buggy Skyrim or Witcher 3 are.  I bought Deadfire and my expectation for a $50 game is that it is thoroughly bug-tested and polished before launch.  Considering how many bugs were evident and 100% reproducible in the first 5 minutes, I think it's clear that Obsidian neglected to do adequate QA and left it to the backers and release-day buyers.

 

I always knew Obsidian games had messy releases.  And messy releases seem to be more common than good ones nowadays, which is why I almost always wait for the complete/definitive/GOTY or whatever edition before buying any game.  But I've enjoyed pretty much every Obsidian game so much I figured I should back Deadfire to support them. Well, this was the first and last one.  The import/save bugs and the sheer amount of broken quests in Neketaka tell me that Obsidian doesn't care enough about their customers and backers to deliver a quality experience.  They would rather cut QA costs by letting paying customers do the rest of the bug hunting.

 

Until Deadfire, I thought just about every Obsidian game was criminally underrated.  Now I understand why they get those scores.  QA is important, and with so many games coming out, first impressions really do last forever.  Reviewers do not revisit the game after it's fixed.  They put their review out at launch and that score is basically set in stone.  I can't imagine any reviewer could give this game a 9 or 10 out of 10 when there are so many bugs, even if the rest of it is perfect.

 

I hope Obsidian learns the importance of QA, but judging by their track record, I don't think that's going to happen.  I've certainly learned my lesson about buying Obsidian games before the fixed up, discounted complete/definitive version comes out a year after launch.  It's a shame too, because I would love to support such talented, passionate developers.  But I'm not going to let them use me as their QA.

Edited June 1, 2018 by yoyolll

[wih]

So wait, the arguments went from "it's not that buggy" to "other games are more buggy, so it's alright"?

 

 

I believe the real point here is not "it's alright", but "it is an inherently hard problem".

[Mikeymoonshine]

I didn't say it was alright, I've never said that. I said it was an industry problem not as bad as past obsidian games, not as bad as games released by much bigger studios. Even the save import bugs are not an obsidian exclusive problem. All the DA and ME sequels had bugs in their system. Even the dragon age keep didn't work properly on launch.

 

Is it ok? No, but it's nothing new either. I was really hoping the imports would not be bugged on release because that always seems to happen to me when I play a game with any kind of import system but they were annoyingly.

 

So what is to be done about it, it seems at this stage to be inevitable as these games have deadlines and there is only so long you can delay without losing too much money.

[Katarack21]

I'm not saying "it's okay". I don't think anybody is; I'm pretty sure that's a strawman.

What I'm saying is "It's normal in the industry, this is actually better than many, and you shouldn't flip your **** over it". All game developers need to be held to a high standard, but they shouldn't be held to some imagined standard of perfection from thirty years ago that didn't even actually exist at the *time*. Nor should Obsidian's *today* be painted with the brush of Obsidian from ten years back.

All this "Bugsidian" crap really annoys me, because it totally ignores the *VERY* real improvement Obsidian has made over the course of the last decade. It's like everybody forgot just *how* buggy KOTOR II, NWN 2, Alpha Protocol, etc actually *were*.

When you call "Deadfire" an "unplayable broken game", it's blatant hyperbole. KOTOR II was *LITERALLY* unplayable at launch for *almost everybody*. That's not a joke or an exaggeration; it's code was so broken that it *did not function*. They had to patch it day one *just so it would work*. I'm not saying this to excuse any of the bugs in Deadfire, I'm saying this because it's important to understand the context within which Deadfire exists compared to other games by the same developer and to give Obsidian their due in improvement.

 

[gkathellar]

I'm not saying "it's okay". I don't think anybody is; I'm pretty sure that's a strawman.

 

What I'm saying is "It's normal in the industry, this is actually better than many, and you shouldn't flip your **** over it". All game developers need to be held to a high standard, but they shouldn't be held to some imagined standard of perfection from thirty years ago that didn't even actually exist at the *time*. Nor should Obsidian's *today* be painted with the brush of Obsidian from ten years back.

 

All this "Bugsidian" crap really annoys me, because it totally ignores the *VERY* real improvement Obsidian has made over the course of the last decade. It's like everybody forgot just *how* buggy KOTOR II, NWN 2, Alpha Protocol, etc actually *were*.

 

When you call "Deadfire" an "unplayable broken game", it's blatant hyperbole. KOTOR II was *LITERALLY* unplayable at launch for *almost everybody*. That's not a joke or an exaggeration; it's code was so broken that it *did not function*. They had to patch it day one *just so it would work*. I'm not saying this to excuse any of the bugs in Deadfire, I'm saying this because it's important to understand the context within which Deadfire exists compared to other games by the same developer and to give Obsidian their due in improvement.

 

And thinking back, PoE1 got the same crap when it released. "Worst release ever herp derp its unplayable meep morp its a flop."

 

It wasn't true then, it's not really true now. Some people are experiencing pretty severe bugs, and that's bad. It's not the end of CRPGs.

[yoyolll]

I didn't say it was alright, I've never said that. I said it was an industry problem not as bad as past obsidian games, not as bad as games released by much bigger studios. Even the save import bugs are not an obsidian exclusive problem. All the DA and ME sequels had bugs in their system. Even the dragon age keep didn't work properly on launch.

 

Is it ok? No, but it's nothing new either. I was really hoping the imports would not be bugged on release because that always seems to happen to me when I play a game with any kind of import system but they were annoyingly.

 

So what is to be done about it, it seems at this stage to be inevitable as these games have deadlines and there is only so long you can delay without losing too much money.

How does this not seem like a huge issue to you?  Especially when considering that these types of games appeal to a largely older audience who tend to have more patience and less FOMO, therefore buying the game much later after all the patches.  This can't be a sustainable business model, can it?

 

I'm not saying "it's okay". I don't think anybody is; I'm pretty sure that's a strawman.

 

What I'm saying is "It's normal in the industry, this is actually better than many, and you shouldn't flip your **** over it". All game developers need to be held to a high standard, but they shouldn't be held to some imagined standard of perfection from thirty years ago that didn't even actually exist at the *time*. Nor should Obsidian's *today* be painted with the brush of Obsidian from ten years back.

 

All this "Bugsidian" crap really annoys me, because it totally ignores the *VERY* real improvement Obsidian has made over the course of the last decade. It's like everybody forgot just *how* buggy KOTOR II, NWN 2, Alpha Protocol, etc actually *were*.

 

When you call "Deadfire" an "unplayable broken game", it's blatant hyperbole. KOTOR II was *LITERALLY* unplayable at launch for *almost everybody*. That's not a joke or an exaggeration; it's code was so broken that it *did not function*. They had to patch it day one *just so it would work*. I'm not saying this to excuse any of the bugs in Deadfire, I'm saying this because it's important to understand the context within which Deadfire exists compared to other games by the same developer and to give Obsidian their due in improvement.

 

 

I didn't call it unplayable or broken.  I said many of the quests in Neketaka are broken.  And you're doing it again: you're belittling Deadfire's problems by saying KOTOR 2 was unplayable at launch.

 

But I guess my point is moot if there are so many people willing to bite the bullet and defend the state of the game.  I am not happy with the amount of money I spent versus the quality of product I received, and I can't imagine most people would be either.  But I certainly don't want Obsidian to go under and it's obvious at this point, after so many bad releases, that they are not going to take the lesson.  So I'm grateful for you guys who will continue to crowdfund them and buy their games at launch and put up with these bugs.  And I don't mean that sarcastically.

 

I will never buy an Obsidian game at launch again, I'll just wait for the complete/definitive whatever version.

[Palas]

Hmm... i am surprised about the heavy criticism about the bugs. Played 100 hours, just one crash and only 1 sidequest seemd buggy (that with the fruit, i want to let the fruittree grow and let the blamed thief die, but i could not get that result).

 

The rest i annoying, but not gamebreaking. Oh no, i take the Orlan baby and now it dosent appear? Man, it could have died in Cad Nua!

 

A bit worse is the relationship bug with Aloth (or is it not a bug? It could be, that it is very hard to earn his respect).

 

As some posted, in comparsion to others games its quite good. Especially if u consider the openworld like Questdesign, thats far more complex, than more linear storys

[Katarack21]

 

I didn't say it was alright, I've never said that. I said it was an industry problem not as bad as past obsidian games, not as bad as games released by much bigger studios. Even the save import bugs are not an obsidian exclusive problem. All the DA and ME sequels had bugs in their system. Even the dragon age keep didn't work properly on launch.

 

Is it ok? No, but it's nothing new either. I was really hoping the imports would not be bugged on release because that always seems to happen to me when I play a game with any kind of import system but they were annoyingly.

 

So what is to be done about it, it seems at this stage to be inevitable as these games have deadlines and there is only so long you can delay without losing too much money.

How does this not seem like a huge issue to you?  Especially when considering that these types of games appeal to a largely older audience who tend to have more patience and less FOMO, therefore buying the game much later after all the patches.  This can't be a sustainable business model, can it?

 

I'm not saying "it's okay". I don't think anybody is; I'm pretty sure that's a strawman.

 

What I'm saying is "It's normal in the industry, this is actually better than many, and you shouldn't flip your **** over it". All game developers need to be held to a high standard, but they shouldn't be held to some imagined standard of perfection from thirty years ago that didn't even actually exist at the *time*. Nor should Obsidian's *today* be painted with the brush of Obsidian from ten years back.

 

All this "Bugsidian" crap really annoys me, because it totally ignores the *VERY* real improvement Obsidian has made over the course of the last decade. It's like everybody forgot just *how* buggy KOTOR II, NWN 2, Alpha Protocol, etc actually *were*.

 

When you call "Deadfire" an "unplayable broken game", it's blatant hyperbole. KOTOR II was *LITERALLY* unplayable at launch for *almost everybody*. That's not a joke or an exaggeration; it's code was so broken that it *did not function*. They had to patch it day one *just so it would work*. I'm not saying this to excuse any of the bugs in Deadfire, I'm saying this because it's important to understand the context within which Deadfire exists compared to other games by the same developer and to give Obsidian their due in improvement.

 

 

I didn't call it unplayable or broken.  I said many of the quests in Neketaka are broken.  And you're doing it again: you're belittling Deadfire's problems by saying KOTOR 2 was unplayable at launch.

No, I am not. You are *entirely* missing the *VERY CLEARLY STATED* point of my post.

Edited June 4, 2018 by Amentep
Removed personal attack

[Mikeymoonshine]

 

I didn't say it was alright, I've never said that. I said it was an industry problem not as bad as past obsidian games, not as bad as games released by much bigger studios. Even the save import bugs are not an obsidian exclusive problem. All the DA and ME sequels had bugs in their system. Even the dragon age keep didn't work properly on launch.

 

Is it ok? No, but it's nothing new either. I was really hoping the imports would not be bugged on release because that always seems to happen to me when I play a game with any kind of import system but they were annoyingly.

 

So what is to be done about it, it seems at this stage to be inevitable as these games have deadlines and there is only so long you can delay without losing too much money.

How does this not seem like a huge issue to you?  Especially when considering that these types of games appeal to a largely older audience who tend to have more patience and less FOMO, therefore buying the game much later after all the patches.  This can't be a sustainable business model, can it?

 

 

 

I think it's starting to annoy players a lot and that this can lead to it damaging the sales of certain games yes however the outrage is selectivly applied based on more surface level issues and other motivations like politics. For example take Mass Effect Andromeda's rediculous animation bugs and countless other graphical bugs. The response to that obviously contributed to it's subpar reception on release. Yet that game was more stable on release than the witcher 3 and definately less buggy than anything bethesda releases these days. Does this mean it doesn't deserve criticism? No and I never said that it did.

 

So yeah i agree that it is a problem that can be bad for a game developer unless they get a pass for some reason.

[Amentep]

Discuss points not people.

[Verde]

The game has a lot of good, even great qualities. Like unique upgrades. But when you get a weapon with all 0's for a perk, it kills the mood. Same with randomly coming across a big quest only to have it pan out wonky or even unable to complete. Hopefully these things get ironed out.

[Ichthyic]

The game has a lot of good, even great qualities. Like unique upgrades. But when you get a weapon with all 0's for a perk, it kills the mood. Same with randomly coming across a big quest only to have it pan out wonky or even unable to complete. Hopefully these things get ironed out.

It took 4 major patches and 6 months after release to finally iron out all the major and most of the minor bugs in PoE 1.

 

then they introduced the final DLCs... and that took another 2 major patches, and STILL I ran into areas that failed to load textures for example.

 

that was when I stopped.  was almost done with the white march DLC, just about ready to finish that and go on to the final encounter with Thaos.

 

never finished.

 

hopefully, since this is a smaller game, they will do better with patches this go-round.

 

I will say... they DID try.  I'll give them that.

 

 

[Wildwanderer]

Why are a lot of people okay with really buggy games being released?  If we keep allowing game developers to do this, it's only going to get worse.  Pretty soon they'll start releasing games after a week of alpha testing and a lot of you will say "all games are like that, it's only has an average amount of bugs."

[Amentep]

Why are a lot of people okay with really buggy games being released?  If we keep allowing game developers to do this, it's only going to get worse.  Pretty soon they'll start releasing games after a week of alpha testing and a lot of you will say "all games are like that, it's only has an average amount of bugs."

 

Isn't that essentially what "early access" is now?

[E.RedMark]

 

Why are a lot of people okay with really buggy games being released?  If we keep allowing game developers to do this, it's only going to get worse.  Pretty soon they'll start releasing games after a week of alpha testing and a lot of you will say "all games are like that, it's only has an average amount of bugs."

 

Isn't that essentially what "early access" is now?

 

was there 'early access' before though ? 

 

early access always say 'you take the risk of playing an unfinished game that is filled with bugs , and your money will go toward polishing and adding stuff' .

 

Homewhever , I have seen some game that take the money then run away with it . Sure , the number is small..but still .

 

Also there is the front of peoples who think playing early access game is like they are doing the Dev work , playing a buggy game . That often lead them to 'this game better be free from bugs when it's out !'' . 

 

Personally , I think nowdays games come out buggy cose of many reasons . Some of them maybe lazyness ? we have no proof of that . But mostly , I think often it's the engine that is used . And really , those bugs don't happen to everyone . So to anyone who complain about buggy game on release , plz explain why NOT everyone get the bugs ? 

[Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell]

What ever company does people will always complain. 

 

Games have gone from few kb to 40gb with that budget has increased hugely.

 

People complain to much at little companies you end up losing them. You don't want just big companies they destory market and produce just what they want as it be limited compitition.

 

No I not saying don't complain, but complaining about games having bugs at release not really anything new. As games get more complicated and expensive to build there no way games will ever be released bug free. We should complain if company doeswn't address bugs/issues. We should push companies to interact more with gamers. But complaining at company for game release has bugs just waste of time.

[E.RedMark]

 

 

 We should complain if company doeswn't address bugs/issues

So true ! there are games even though they had alot of success....some bugs were never fixed . And yet the game is still being sold as is..

 

Now that , deserve a complain ! 

[Amentep]

 

 

Why are a lot of people okay with really buggy games being released?  If we keep allowing game developers to do this, it's only going to get worse.  Pretty soon they'll start releasing games after a week of alpha testing and a lot of you will say "all games are like that, it's only has an average amount of bugs."

 

Isn't that essentially what "early access" is now?

 

was there 'early access' before though ? 

 

early access always say 'you take the risk of playing an unfinished game that is filled with bugs , and your money will go toward polishing and adding stuff' .

 

Homewhever , I have seen some game that take the money then run away with it . Sure , the number is small..but still .

 

Also there is the front of peoples who think playing early access game is like they are doing the Dev work , playing a buggy game . That often lead them to 'this game better be free from bugs when it's out !'' . 

 

Personally , I think nowdays games come out buggy cose of many reasons . Some of them maybe lazyness ? we have no proof of that . But mostly , I think often it's the engine that is used . And really , those bugs don't happen to everyone . So to anyone who complain about buggy game on release , plz explain why NOT everyone get the bugs ? 

 

 

My point was that we're already there at that point where games are released after the first alpha (seemingly) and built before your eyes.  I'm not sure if its good or bad.

 

With respect to buggy games I think the culprit is always the same - time and money.  Sometimes a company - unless they have really, really deep pockets - will have to push a game out regardless of how much more polish could be put into it if it were delayed.  Even if you have the money to throw at QA (hire more testers, buy more configurations of computers for QA to test on), if you don't have the ability to spend the time to identify, test and fix bugs and then QA again, throwing the money at the QA group would be pointless.

[Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell]

Also need think of game release is often thought out with regards other games.

 

Would be pointless bringing game out same time as grand theft auto 6 comes out as you probably kill your own game.

 

So yes money important on deciding when but also other games too.

[E.RedMark]

 

 

 

Why are a lot of people okay with really buggy games being released?  If we keep allowing game developers to do this, it's only going to get worse.  Pretty soon they'll start releasing games after a week of alpha testing and a lot of you will say "all games are like that, it's only has an average amount of bugs."

 

Isn't that essentially what "early access" is now?

 

was there 'early access' before though ? 

 

early access always say 'you take the risk of playing an unfinished game that is filled with bugs , and your money will go toward polishing and adding stuff' .

 

Homewhever , I have seen some game that take the money then run away with it . Sure , the number is small..but still .

 

Also there is the front of peoples who think playing early access game is like they are doing the Dev work , playing a buggy game . That often lead them to 'this game better be free from bugs when it's out !'' . 

 

Personally , I think nowdays games come out buggy cose of many reasons . Some of them maybe lazyness ? we have no proof of that . But mostly , I think often it's the engine that is used . And really , those bugs don't happen to everyone . So to anyone who complain about buggy game on release , plz explain why NOT everyone get the bugs ? 

 

 

My point was that we're already there at that point where games are released after the first alpha (seemingly) and built before your eyes.  I'm not sure if its good or bad.

 

With respect to buggy games I think the culprit is always the same - time and money.  Sometimes a company - unless they have really, really deep pockets - will have to push a game out regardless of how much more polish could be put into it if it were delayed.  Even if you have the money to throw at QA (hire more testers, buy more configurations of computers for QA to test on), if you don't have the ability to spend the time to identify, test and fix bugs and then QA again, throwing the money at the QA group would be pointless.

 

I think it's a time issue . Even EA who has lot of money , and can give 5 years to make X game...

 

The game still end up coming out with bugs . 

 

And I don't mean 'Oh noe! poor them , they run out of time ' since most of the time it's 'Oh noe , they rushed the game..Grrr WHY ?!'' . 

 

I don't think they can catch all of the bugs regardless , if they put time and money though . Especially when a game come on different platform . 

[Amentep]

I remember back in the BIS days a developer (can't remember who exactly now) talked about the difficulty of creating a computer game and the fact that 'in the wild' there would be a lot more combinations of hardware than could ever be accounted for by QA.  Add into that the natural complexity of RPGs and the variable of how a player might handle things in the game...

 

Even with time and money, I agree that odds are PC games will still come out with bugs simply because they can't test every possible available combo that could run the game.  This was the appeal of console gaming at the time from the developers point of view - that you could design something for a single piece of hardware that would always be the same.

 

That said, I can also see why people would make the argument that some of the game breaking bugs encountered that seemed to catch large groups of people should have never happened.  Its a legitimate position to have.

[E.RedMark]

yeah , my friend play DAO on console . And she tell me the game never crash for her . I have the same game on Steam (pc) , and the game crash every 20min even after I tweaked it like hell . 

 

Yet the issue , is after the game was a success ...why not go back and optimize it ? cose that's the main issue . it's not a bug , the game freeze and crash everytime a bunch of darkspawn spawn on the map (or others monsters like wolf or bear ) . 

 

And it's use DirectX 9 , and unlike DA2 that can be switched to a different DirectX...you can't . 

 

I really think , once a game is released and you are done high fiving and counting how much money it brough in . You should fix the game as much as you can . 

 

Especially since it will still be on sale for years to come . 

 

It's horrible to leave a game on sale , with a damn bug that can stop one from playing it . 

 

DAO expansion had that , Kotor 2 has a horrible bug that happen randomly and stop you from playing completely . 

[Lokithecat]

I remember back in the BIS days a developer (can't remember who exactly now) talked about the difficulty of creating a computer game and the fact that 'in the wild' there would be a lot more combinations of hardware than could ever be accounted for by QA.  Add into that the natural complexity of RPGs and the variable of how a player might handle things in the game...

 

Even with time and money, I agree that odds are PC games will still come out with bugs simply because they can't test every possible available combo that could run the game.  This was the appeal of console gaming at the time from the developers point of view - that you could design something for a single piece of hardware that would always be the same.

 

That said, I can also see why people would make the argument that some of the game breaking bugs encountered that seemed to catch large groups of people should have never happened.  Its a legitimate position to have.

 

Its one thing to have a completed / solid / bug free game, that has software conflicts with certain graphic cards, or processors etc... the product is finished, working, and just doesn't agree with x combination of hardware software.

 

Its another thing entirely, when 'self contained' parts, like story, importing saves, combat balance, or creating histories aren't working correctly.  Its not like we're having massive patches to fix balance, because the game doesn't work properly with some computers.

[Wormerine]

 

The game has a lot of good, even great qualities. Like unique upgrades. But when you get a weapon with all 0's for a perk, it kills the mood. Same with randomly coming across a big quest only to have it pan out wonky or even unable to complete. Hopefully these things get ironed out.

hopefully, since this is a smaller game, they will do better with patches this go-round.

 

I will say... they DID try.  I'll give them that.

huh...? ekhm... Deadfire is not smaller than PoE1. If anything, it has more mechanics, maps and interations for something to go wrong. 

[Katarack21]

Why are a lot of people okay with really buggy games being released?  If we keep allowing game developers to do this, it's only going to get worse.  Pretty soon they'll start releasing games after a week of alpha testing and a lot of you will say "all games are like that, it's only has an average amount of bugs."

Slippery slope is a logical fallacy. Games are inherently buggy; it's not any worse now than it was 20 years ago. People just look at the newest game with a critical eye while nostalgia clogs their memory of the past.