By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
enrageorange on 04 December 2012
Edit Thread
Cobretti2 said:
enrageorange said:
Cobretti2 said:
F0X said:

Bethesda is probably the only publisher that can make me angry about QA testing. Especially because Obsidian got blamed for the bugs in Fallout: New Vegas, when in reality it was Bethesda's typical QA department doing a typical bang-up testing job.

Edit: Oh, and Polytron. They took five years to make Fez, and it was still hardly ready for primetime. Nor do I understand why it was so critically acclaimed, but that's a different issue.


The problem is game patches. They know that they are allowed to patch games so they skip right over the testing and let the users find the bugs. Then developers try to fix them with patches.

All console makers need to make a stand and have standards written in there for every major game breaking bug that makes the game totally unplayable X amount of % of sale revenue will be lost.

Microsoft has a similar feature in place. Game patches cost x amount of money. The problem is while that certainly might help in certain situations. It is disasterous for games that are meant to be updated rather often. Ofc they can make exceptions like they did with minecraft, but then you get the issues of who gets exceptions and why.

Hence why I said for major game breaking bugs that prevent you from finishing a game. I have no problems with minor bugs like falling through a texture here and there.

Genuine game updates are OK with me. But with skyrim and their previous efforts on PS3 it is clear they did not give a shit.

Sorry misread, thought you said every patch.

Realistically, though such a standard might prevent developers from trying to make ambitious games.

Heck even Grand Theft Auto 4, which had a ridiculously huge budget, and 4 years of development time had glitches that broke the campaign if you did certain quests in an order your "not suppose to". Developers will play it very safe, and even more so than currently games will just be 5 hour heavily scripted campaigns. It truely is impossible to test every possible.

Don't get me wrong. Bethesda clearly ships out products they know are filled with bugs. But they are also the only developer at the moment trying to make such ambitious titles. The only terminology I can think of is that is reasonable is that if there is a glitch that will eventually become present no matter how you play the game, then you face the consequences. Something that clearly was caught by the testers but ignored. Skyrim for the ps3 would have fit that description.