Nintendo announces holiday release dates and lineup (non-ghost version)

[kanageddaamen]

osed125 said:

outlawauron said:

kanageddaamen said:

As a software developer I can tell you that is simply not the case.  Adequate testing is not difficult to do, it just takes time.  Since consumers have accepted the "rush to release and patch later" development model, patches have become ubiquitous.  Were people to say its nonsense (which it is) the games would take longer to reach release but would not require patching later on, whether it be for bug fixes or balance issues.

But developers do not have that luxury. In our current market, they are forced to meet deadlines by publishers who require games to be out by certain dates and times. EA employs thousands(!) of testers, and their games have bugs and glitches that dozens of patches do not fix. While I think developers should still be criticized for bugs, I'm not naive enough to expect there never to be a patch of fix for my games.

1) Doesn't matter if publishers are at fault, they are supposed to give us a quality product.

2) When it comes to software, a good management includes testing with the deadlines. Doesn't matter how big the project is, as a programmer I can tell you that. This is further proof that the game industry is having severe management problems (like game sales not meeting expectations, that's another big problem)

3) No software is perfect, there are always going to be bugs, and as a software programmer I definitely know that. But there's a big difference when those bugs are intentional or just happen casually. For example, Ocarina of Time is probably the most broken game in existence but those are stuff found intentionally by gamers, the software isn't perfect because it has those bugs but on a normal playthrough you rarely find any bugs and stuff, that's good testing. Then you have games like Skyrim that you get an infinite amount of bugs by just walking with your horse, it's not intentional and what it's fun to see a couple of times, it gets annoying after a while, that's bad testing.

4) Sometimes publishers and developers simple don't pay attention to the testers. They find a bug and they just don't care, or maybe they don't have time, but then again if it is the latter it goes to my 2nd point. 

The point is that, because publishers aren't maneging the developments correctly (or at least it looks like that on the surface) then we are having this type of problems. 

On top of the points above, were there a consumer lashback against rushed project policies, the companies would revise them, but people accept it as par for the course, which it need not be.