The possibility of patches has definitely increased the number of bugs in the 'final' product. Day 1 patches are all too common now.
What I don't get is digital downloadable games with day 1 patches or any patches right after you download it. Why not update them on the server. Here download and install the obsolete version first, then when you think you are ready to play, download another 3 mandatory patches, wtf.

It also makes me more reluctant to replay older games. PS2, GC games, just put them in and play. HD console games need to be installed and patched. There's no quick showing a few older games to a friend anymore.

I think basically patches and updates are good, as they make the product better (most of the time).
But it puts me off when I have to download an update if I just want to play a few minutes. By the time the update is over sometimes I'm not in the mood any more. :/

I also had this happen to me quite a number of times. I wanted to try Battlefield 3 multiplayer for the first time and when I put it in..... BOOM an hour's worth of updates. It was also lame when my friends would come over and we had to wait for the patches to install before we could start playing.

Yeah, the article addresses this. Collecting modern games might be pointless as some would just be unplayable in ten years time without the necessary patches. Idk I feel like the industry could benefit if we excluded the ability to patch. Then we can rightfully mock the games for being incomplete and broken on release day and developers will be pressured to make their games better.

I'd say patches, etc. aren't a problem at all - like most things its preventing abuse of them that's the issue.

Some developers seek to deliver great code and patches/DLC is generall a good extension of the game or represent further optimization of the code or repair of small bugs.

Ohter developers however abuse the ability, rush games out the door with a patch later attitude and basically exploit the system to our detriment.

The ability to patch is better than not having it. The ability to easily receive game extending DLC is better than not having it. But of course all systems are open to abuse.

What I will say is that, particulrly for Western developers (and to be honest hardware if I look at the launch 360), there has arguably been a bit too much "rush and fix later" and a bit too little "let's get it right then launch".

The excuse given is normally market conditions and so on - but my view is that is the companies problem, not mine. Sadly though the majority of gamers are willing to forgive/forget where the games and devices are fundamentally good - perhaps a little more than they should to keep the system in better balance.

Patches shouldn't be stopped, but they should at at least try and get a game complete before releasing the game.

I would almost rather have with one or two glitches they when i go to game a game... you need to update.....downloading update.........downloading update. By the time its done i'm bored of waiting and..have....come....on...vgchartz.

god my life is boring.

i never seen them as negative b/c now theres hope that your game could be improved also patches usually are for the online MP component

gens ago you would be forced to have a broken game permanently it doesnt bother me that more devs are using this and releasing games with day 1 patches game development has come a long way it is more complicated to get everything done in the timeframe there given

the only thing the bothers me is when they dont patch things up or a long wait for a simple fix

Yes because it's an excuse for developers to release games that aren't fully finished or polished.

No because games are bigger than previous gens and if a bug or glitch slips through the cracks despite extensive testing their would be no other way to fix it.

I moved to consoles from the PC because I couldn't bear the messy quality control PC games had during the 90s. However, as far as I can see, the introduction of XBox 360 and PS3 brought the old PC developers to the console realm. Except for Nintendo products and a few exceptions, console gaming is nothing more than an affordable downscaled version of PC gaming. All the advantages but also the flaws. As a matter of fact, except for Nintendo, I don't see the point of buying a next-gen console, whenever it is available. It seems that I can do better with a PC if I can stand the numerous bugs and endless patching.

I dont think so, because in the PS2 era there were many games with some big bugs, that unable you to continue the game, just like in Soul Reaver 2 (those damn crows). And you had to do some weird mumbo-jumbo in order to avoid the bug, sometimes having to restart all your playthrough if you didn't save quite often.

I think game patches are a good thing for consoles/handhelds, just like with PC games, and nobody is complaining about those patches.