Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
That's fine when it's stated that the game is on early access, not that much when it comes out with micro transactions and all for 60 dollars and they don't even make clear they will patch it at all.
Glitches, crashes, corrupt saves, am I the only person noticing this trend?
- Thread starter Travalanche
- Start date
This ghoul has seen it all
Surf Solar
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
As if old games were perfectly bugfree upon release. Seems nobody remembers in what state Fallout 2 was when it got released.
Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
True, and with old games it was actually worse when they were buggy, with no internet one wouldn't know when and if a patch even came out.
Circa SimCity 2000, oh god. The games back then, just to get them to run, could mean days of troubleshooting, on the phone with tech support, even buying new hardware. Then 3d came out, it was even worse!
Lol nice avatar mobucks, where did you get it?
fred2
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
I don't know, it seem that everyone jumping on this one(like with kickstarter gold rush) Steam even created a special category for it. Latelly I get the sense that people who like old school games, are exploited for their desperation for good games.
Like I said before. Now days Kickstarters require us to become blind investors, and use people hype and desperation to chunk out money on crappy bundle-ware like hats/mousepads and retarded personality cults crap like cooking with Tim or watching Avellone play games
Their selling point is the sense that we are involved, part of the development process, but mostly its just couple of pointless polls and mail spam. Everything else isn't new e.g. for years paradox(mid size developer/publisher) involved their community by publishing developer dearies, explaining various aspects of the upcoming games. Open Beta aren't a new concept either, just now you have to pay for the privilege.I am afraid its like with DLCs, initially people said, sure why not, its just downloadable expansions, then we started to get huge plot DLC intervened in the games(e.g. FO:NV carrier plot) and day one DLCs.
Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
Uhmmm if people want anything other than little curiosities when they give money to a kickstarter, maybe they shouldn't do it in the first place because they don't seem to grasp what their role in the whole thing is, you are funding a project out of good faith and they just give you the extras as thanks and they can't use up all of the money on super collector's editions for every person that donates enough to produce one of those because then they won have money to start with the development of the game.
Also Lonesome Road's plot isn't necessary for the game, it is very non intrusive and it isn't cutting content out of the 60 + hours game in any way.... The shitty kind of DLC is the one that just unlocks content on the disc, that gives the game and ending on the ones that are 10 dollar skins packs.
Also Lonesome Road's plot isn't necessary for the game, it is very non intrusive and it isn't cutting content out of the 60 + hours game in any way.... The shitty kind of DLC is the one that just unlocks content on the disc, that gives the game and ending on the ones that are 10 dollar skins packs.
fred2
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
Our role was to donate a whole lot of extra money, to kick start this fairly dead horse, because we were desperate for a old school game. But now I hear that those guys might be planing on continuing with kickstarer gold mining as financing model, even worse it might be lunched before we even see the results...
So yes from a consumer stand point, kickstarer is farce intended to draw more money for the developer financial security. People here like to make fun of COD boys hype machine, but its exactly what they did here, inspired *insert classic game names*, say old school, rant about the big publishers and here we go:
It was really obvious and amusing how some people drunk this, but as long as the end goal was getting us a couple of old school games, it was fine. Although to be honest, I am also fine with the idea of more kickstarters, pre orders and or DLCs, because soon I'll be back to my usual way to approach this i.e. let all the hyped kids chunk out full price and premiums for crap, so they can ride out the day one release issues, bug test it for me and in half year time i'll buy it at half price, patched up, with almost all DLCs and nice selection of mods.
So yes from a consumer stand point, kickstarer is farce intended to draw more money for the developer financial security. People here like to make fun of COD boys hype machine, but its exactly what they did here, inspired *insert classic game names*, say old school, rant about the big publishers and here we go:
It was really obvious and amusing how some people drunk this, but as long as the end goal was getting us a couple of old school games, it was fine. Although to be honest, I am also fine with the idea of more kickstarters, pre orders and or DLCs, because soon I'll be back to my usual way to approach this i.e. let all the hyped kids chunk out full price and premiums for crap, so they can ride out the day one release issues, bug test it for me and in half year time i'll buy it at half price, patched up, with almost all DLCs and nice selection of mods.
Last edited:
I don't think anyone was originally arguing about Kickstarter indie game productions, I'm pretty sure the original point was that AAA titles are very commonly releasing bug-laden pieces of shit these days, even though they have more than enough manpower and money to do otherwise.
It's a combination of shit management and greedy execs, there's no really agreement or disagreement at all, it's just a fact.
Examples I already gave were Oblivion, Fallout 3, Diablo III being the worst. Again there's no argument or debate, it's just a fact.
Where a debate might be valid is whether old games did this as well; to answer that: on a industry-wide scale, no, they didn't.
Example is SNES. It's common these days for shitty console games to get patches automatically because they're buggy as shit. I never in my life have heard of a game-breaking bug in an SNES game, Because they aren't shitty. I didn't even know console games could have bugs until I was in high school. That's how few bugs those games have. The only bugs I'm aware of I read about on the internet; not encountered during play. I encountered some glitches but few and not game impacting.
Honestly I feel they do it just because they can. Gamers today are comprised of a higher percentage of mouth-breathers, children, soccer moms and whiny idiots than before, and, consoles today actually support automatic patches, so the game companies know they can get away with releasing shit products. So they do it. PC games go along for the ride, because they're now the minority of the market.
Summary of Facts: games today are buggier on average than old games, games today have significantly more release-day bugs than old games, console games today have significantly more bugs than old console games.
Bonus Fact: Fallout 3 should be bug-free because it's just Oblivion With Guns, and yet it still has many of the issues Oblivion had. Bethesda doesn't give a shit.
It's a combination of shit management and greedy execs, there's no really agreement or disagreement at all, it's just a fact.
Examples I already gave were Oblivion, Fallout 3, Diablo III being the worst. Again there's no argument or debate, it's just a fact.
Where a debate might be valid is whether old games did this as well; to answer that: on a industry-wide scale, no, they didn't.
Example is SNES. It's common these days for shitty console games to get patches automatically because they're buggy as shit. I never in my life have heard of a game-breaking bug in an SNES game, Because they aren't shitty. I didn't even know console games could have bugs until I was in high school. That's how few bugs those games have. The only bugs I'm aware of I read about on the internet; not encountered during play. I encountered some glitches but few and not game impacting.
Honestly I feel they do it just because they can. Gamers today are comprised of a higher percentage of mouth-breathers, children, soccer moms and whiny idiots than before, and, consoles today actually support automatic patches, so the game companies know they can get away with releasing shit products. So they do it. PC games go along for the ride, because they're now the minority of the market.
Summary of Facts: games today are buggier on average than old games, games today have significantly more release-day bugs than old games, console games today have significantly more bugs than old console games.
Bonus Fact: Fallout 3 should be bug-free because it's just Oblivion With Guns, and yet it still has many of the issues Oblivion had. Bethesda doesn't give a shit.
Last edited:
fred2
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
Hardware today is much more varied then it used to be. Games today are much more complex using a lot of third party middleware solutions, using huge teams(hard to communicate), far more extensive and less linear content, and creating crazy detailed environments that I have no idea how you begin to test.
I tend to agree that many people today are more whiny, because I didn't notice the bug apocalypse, or maybe its just my six month rule or that I am used to play with mods, so I am not that upset if once in a while I get a crush, I just restart and load.
As for "greedy" execs, its true for everyone, those who aren't "greedy" and play it safe go down in flames, something that we here are familiar with. Also IMO many don't understand gaming market, its competitive nature and importance of release dates and PR for AAA titles e.g. part of the stupid title war, many times beth is blamed for FO:NV bugs, because they didn't give Obsidian enough time to develop, but I'd like to remind those that Obsidian took the contract with estimate delivery date...
As for the "kickstarter debate", its more about the early access "privilege" as a way for those "greedy" execs, to bug test their games, without paying a lot of money.
I tend to agree that many people today are more whiny, because I didn't notice the bug apocalypse, or maybe its just my six month rule or that I am used to play with mods, so I am not that upset if once in a while I get a crush, I just restart and load.
As for "greedy" execs, its true for everyone, those who aren't "greedy" and play it safe go down in flames, something that we here are familiar with. Also IMO many don't understand gaming market, its competitive nature and importance of release dates and PR for AAA titles e.g. part of the stupid title war, many times beth is blamed for FO:NV bugs, because they didn't give Obsidian enough time to develop, but I'd like to remind those that Obsidian took the contract with estimate delivery date...
As for the "kickstarter debate", its more about the early access "privilege" as a way for those "greedy" execs, to bug test their games, without paying a lot of money.
Last edited:
Just a Google image search for "dogmeat fallout". I think it was a DeviantArt.
Had to add the "fallout" to search after realizing 90% of the results were skinned/cooked doggies by the barrel full in Asian street markets.
Just a Google image search for "dogmeat fallout". I think it was a DeviantArt.
Had to add the "fallout" to search after realizing 90% of the results were skinned/cooked doggies by the barrel full in Asian street markets.
Rats too.
TheWesDude
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
actually what happened with diablo 3 was a complete failure of network design.
they had enough servers to handle the load.
they had enough throughput to handle the load.
what went wrong?
their server cluster heartbeats was not out-of-band. a server cluster heartbeat should ALWAYS be out-of-band. when servers get hit hard and heavy, traffic tends to get dropped, causing packet loss. so when you slam a server, such as on a day 1 release, and your heartbeats are not out-of-bound, you have every server trying to take over or absorb some of the load.
5,000 people log in, you have 50 servers, should provide full load for 5 of those servers. what happens? the cluster hearbeats get lost so you have 50 servers all trying to suck up the requests causing flooding for the load balancing setup to where the servers are using more throughput than the data is. because nobody knows who is doing what.
no, you are assuming companies listen to and actually try to fix bugs. i knew a guy who quit EA QA to move to Blizzard QA and then after working there, left the job entirely. they would find bugs and report them to their internal trackers. then devs would rank bugs by severity and difficulty to fix. then managers would assign out who would fix the bugs. they said basically if a bug was not 1 or maybe 2 stars for difficulty to fix, or else 5 stars for its severity, they shipped before patching as it was not worth delaying a release. and to them the game was ready when the most obvious 1-2 star difficulty and the worst severity ones were fixed and the game was largely playable.
it doesnt pay to fix bugs, that is some programmer or developer not creating new content to use in marketing.
Sounds like you should apply for Network Admin over at Blizzard
Wow that's pretty cool. If only Blizzard would do that. Shit, if I remember correctly, even BioWare apologized for people hating the ME3 ending(s), and they released DLC for it. Although I think maybe you had to pay for the DLC but maybe they eventually made it free.
Walpknut
This ghoul has seen it all
Didn't Bioware only apologized after trying to cover their asses with the "artistic integrity" thing and when enough people started shit storming they eventualy announced the "Extended cut"?
TheWesDude
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Sounds like you should apply for Network Admin over at Blizzard
there are lots things people know you do and dont do for networking. of course people ignore it because of costs.
you can pay $3-5 grand for a layer 3 capable switch with gig interfaces or upwards of 10-12k for fiber interfaces. and then setup QOS to ensure uplink traffic from that device has priority.
or you can save the costs, setup in-band management with QOS, and under heavy load suffer balancing issues.
its all about money.
you dont do end-to-end vlans. what that means is you do not have vlans that cross the layer 3 zone boundries. your largest broadcast domain determines your broadcast storm vulnerability. by not using end to end vlans, you limit the potential impact of broadcast storms.
if you DO use end to end vlans, your routing tables are much smaller, and you do not use up IP space for subnetting. dynamic routing protocols do not advertise supernet routes for contigious subnets it advertises. you have to manually do that. that means more management and more work especially for IP space management. that raises costs.
there are lots of rules to networking. people in the business know those rules. the people in the business ignore those rules because it means less work for them, or else because those people who went to school and got their MBAs say its an un-needed expense.
and besides, its cheaper to add more servers and load balancers right?
and another dirty little secret about networking. when you hit 75% cpu or interface load, you start dropping packets. when you hit 90%, it gets really bad. some hardware vendors try to help mitigate that by prioritizing data over management traffic. but that has a downside. seeing a whole bunch of stuff go offline at once is scary as hell. its frustrating because by doing that, you lost management and you have to hope the equipment is still working and its just heavy load, or if its actually down. thats why you always plan for 2x to help ensure you dont go over the 50% mark.
Wumbology
Actually a sentient CRT
What's this about unpatched Morrowind?
If there's anything dire I would like to be informed. I'm playing right now. I mean, unless it's balancing issues, then it's not that big of a problem.
Wizards have always been overpowered.
If there's anything dire I would like to be informed. I'm playing right now. I mean, unless it's balancing issues, then it's not that big of a problem.
Wizards have always been overpowered.
fred2
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
I recently was reminded that for many of those "Triple A" titles marketing budget is almost twice as large as development budget, i think it put in perspective what is the most important for their monetary success. Also, I have to side with studios, delaying a release over minor issues is not worth it, and might prove catastrophic, instead companies should plan for longer Q&A periods.
Btw, it should be noted that this is hardly "Triple A" developer issue, everyone does it, for the same reason we all do i.e. financial constraints(budget run out, publishers/investors come knocking) and if we avoid the cheap ruble rousing of the vocal minorities IMO on average the larger studios provide much better support during the game life time.
I don't know about that, I think it was nothing more than PR department putting fires, not change of policy. In fact as far as I see, it's just another reason for big publishers to piss on niche audiences e.g. SimCity wasn't as bad as it was painted to be the vocal, most of them raging about the always online hoping it will not become a trend(it will) and day one lunch issues(which plague everyone) and fans of simcity4 who don't realized that this is going to be a much more causal title(not a surprise)
@fred2 speaking of Always Online: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents-gamings-annoying-future/
Last edited by a moderator: