twesterm said:
vlad321 said:
twesterm said:
Jordahn said:
pbroy said:
thejuicingamer said:
just another example of a game getting rushed off the line to achieve some quick sales, sign of the times |
How is this comment being productive? Ohh wait your just trying to rub it in. Don't you have a game you can play on your PS3 or something?? o_O Don't tell me your jealous because people with a 360 have lots of fun games to play and you just want to find the smallest things to make anything not on the PS3 look bad. Your better than that, aren't you?
|
In principle, what he's saying is true. With online options and fierce competition, I see it becoming more and more common to "skimp" a few things for the sake of time to later patch it if a common problem arises. I'm not saying for sure this was the developer's intent. It's either more noticable because it is, or it's simply because games are getting more complex so there is a higher chance of things getting missed.
|
Bugs just happen.
I would be impressed with any game that shipped with bugs. Some bugs are just harder to catch but when you have hundreds of thousands, those bugs are going to be found. Most of the time they are little things like a floating tree, other times they're things like this.
It's true that bug should have been caught but it being there in no way means it was rushed.
|
There are no bug free programs yes, yet I have yet to see game crippling bugs like these in any Valve game or Blizzard game, or a whole bunch of other companies I can name. How can they do away with crippling bug-free launches and Lionhead can't? Bugs are causes of lack of testing and lack of testing is caused by rushing a game. 1/4 of the time I spend on my programs is solely for testing and debugging, yet even after the game went gold they were making the co-op. This game is rushed and I hate how this is starting to be a trend with today's developers. It really serves to weed out the trully great developers from the rest IMHO. I'm also honestly surprised that a game with game breaking bugs is getting such a high score, sure the content is great, but what's the point if I can't even get to experience it? Reviewers should be more stern on issues like these, and then maybe developers will stop rushing their games.
|
Testing Half-Life 2 is different from testing Fable II. One is a linear shooter with limited options, one is a vast open world game with many options.
As for things like WoW, I guess you've never known anyone in any of the WoW betas.
|
I've been in all 3 WoW betas. Interestingly minus the crippling lag of thousands of players getting on at the same time in the same zones, there's no real crippling bugs that I've noticed in the release version. Nothing where WoW would freeze or you wouldn't be able to progress your character further in the game. There were those 2 quests back in terokkar, but you skip them and they didn't even give good loot or exp to begin with. And that one BWL bug they had when that patch went though, but a GM got on and unlocked the door for them manually. Also the WOTLK beta seemed very stable, but I won't judge until after the 13th when all millions of people have given it a go. There have been no game breaking bugs in WoW, and that's an MMO, which can run on hardware from 10 years ago, just think of how much hardware and drivers they are supporting. Meanwhile here's a single-player game which is supposed to run on only 1 hardware architeture and you can't even iron out the game breaking bugs like the game freezing? Blatant rush job, or just a poor job on part of the developers if it wasn't rushed.
