Slashdot Mirror
The Rise Of Bugs In Console Games
Thanks to GameSpy for posting a column discussing the increasing prevalence of serious bugs and glitches in console titles, especially in relation to several of this summer's 'blockbusters'. Singled out are Enter The Matrix: "Even if you enjoy the game.. you can't ignore the fact that all three console makers let Atari have a 'get out of final approval free card' when it came to testing...", as well as the new Tomb Raider title: "AOD froze up on me at least half a dozen times... Lara fell through invisible gaps in the street, walked through invisible gaps in walls, and refused to walk up stairs that she was supposed to be able to climb." What's to be done when, as the author says, "judging from the sales of these... titles, enough of you guys just aren't punishing the companies for releasing sub-par products to make a difference"?
How many of us have ever bought a game on the PC and the FIRST thing we do is check for patches?
Yet we still buy them the first day they are out, accepting this as common practice.
Is it any REAL surprise that companies would start pushing games such as "the matrix" (der, people bought that because it was THE MATRIX, its not THAT good, although I wouldnt call it "bad" either... its just, "meh") with bugs? These games will sell, and sell well, based on name alone.
I have 0 faith in all companies, save Blizzard. At least they havent completely fscked me yet (although the latest ACCESS VIOLATION error from WC3 TFT is starting to REALLY piss me off)...
This is my sig. Its pathetic.
I'm surprised the XBox hasn't had more buggy games, considering the ability of games to save patches to the hard disk. I think that was the first thing people feared when they heard that MS was putting a hard disk inside.
Unfortunately, this may be the way of the future. The PS2 has a hard disk attachment that Sony has yet to push, but you can be sure the PS3 will have one bundled in, along with some sort of subscription service to go along with it a la XBox Live. Of course, this service will provide new levels along with patches for poorly-done games, just as XBox Live will eventually do.
The unfortunate side of things is that most gamers don't finish games, and only get to see the single, linear quest the developers set out for them. Developers don't test the side quests or places out of normal reach because they rightly assume those places aren't as important. Even in the original Tomb Raider there were a number of places Lara should not have been able to hold on to, but could, and places that looked like handholds which weren't. Those weren't bugs; just design flaws.
- Cloud
I don't buy games because of bugs. I steal them and if I really like them and play them for more than an hour I buy them.
Buggy software pisses me off. How many car companies could sell a car whos door falls off when you drive off the lot? Even if it does, you can take the car back for warranty service and it is free to get fixed.
Try buying a game from Best Buy and trying to take it back because of bugs - they will laugh you out of the store.
...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
My website published an article a while ago about this phenomenon, and it's not limited to consoles either. Here's an exerpt (please note that part of this article is a bit dated):
Nearly two years ago, Civilization III was released for Mac and Windows. Since then the game has gone platinum, and hundreds of 3rd party maps have been released.
However, none of these maps were made by Mac users. This is because Infogrames has only one person working on a map editor, and though many copies were sold under the pretense that the map editor would be released, they haven't seen fit to fulfill their promise.
Mac users aren't the only ones to see a decline in quality and features. Infogrames also cut the revolutionary AI that was supposed to go into Civ 3 (now it's just a more processor-heavy Civ 2), as well as multiplayer. Not to worry though, Infogrames has decided to go ahead with the multiplayer patch, however they're charging $30 for it and calling it an "expansion pack." Right, an expansion giving you what was promised by the head of the design department originally. Thanks a ton!
The same thing happened with Global Operations--It was released unfinished. You see, Global Operations was going to be the counterstrike killer. It had guns modeled more realistically than any FPS, even to this day, it had spectacular visual effects and creative and strategic maps.
Yes, global ops was probably (and certainly IMO) the best realistic FPS ever made, however it had one small problem: THE NETCODE COULD SUCK A GOLF BALL THROUGH A GARDEN HOSE. It was so bad that it would constantly have bullets disappearing and chunking models, even on the fastest computers and lowest pings. It was so bad, in fact, that the sales were murdered before they could even release the first patch (it died so quick they never did fix it). GameSpot, GameSpy, and several other reviewers pointed out the perfection of this game's non-net features, but had to kill the scores all because of the netcode, and the fact that it was a net-only game.
I'm sure many also remember GTA III for PC, and how it was also made almost unusable by the crappy engine, even though the designers blamed the complexity of the game (note how well GTA III: vice city runs, contradicting this claim).
It is a sad state of affairs when game companies think they can get away with this kind of crap. It's probably because the reviews are getting less and less uncorrupted, the audience is getting more and more impulsive, and the hype is getting bigger and bigger.
Latewire
Don't forget that publishing games on a console platform has as much to do with politics as the game itself.
Many big publishers (Eidos, Acclaim, Activision, etc) are given what I call "slack points". Basically these are allocated to them for a few games that they can use to push through QA on a "fast track". They typically use these on big-name games (Tomb Raider, anyone?) and *especially* if these big games need to be out by a hard date, such as quarterlies, Xmas, license coincide launches (ie moveies) or console launch dates. (Launch dates are a little bit different because QA is a bit tougher than usual - you don't want your launch titles to be too buggy!!)
In addition to slack points, these big publishers will also use whatever else influence they have to push a big game through. Nowadays it's all about $$$ - if a bug is not a showstopper, well lots of people are willing to look the other way (anyone remember Digital Polyphony's GT3 not being 100% finished? Lots of examples).
"judging from the sales of these... titles, enough of you guys just aren't punishing the companies for releasing sub-par products to make a difference"
How do you know a console game is buggy before you buy it? Okay, maybe you know a good website or something, but does the general public? No. The general public buys a console game expecting it to work without bugs.
So how do you punish the gamemakers? Chances are you probably can't return the game -- it's considered software, so most major retailers won't accept a return unless it's defective and in that case will only exchange it for the same item -- which doesn't help because all of the same title will have the same bug.
So what do you do? Don't buy that publisher's next title? I suppose, but then it's a little harder to make a linkage between the original purchase and slow sales on a subsequent title. Maybe just write a letter to the publisher complaining and letting them know you won't be buying their next title. But a letter isn't exactly punishment, is it?
Yes, and in laughing you out of the store they open all sorts of doors. First of all, you can reverse the credit card charge (or stop payment on the check, or what not) from when you bought the game. Secondly, they invalidate any sort of EULA, allowing you to do all sorts of neat things with the software that you wouldnt have been able to under the EULA.
You've never worked at a Wal-Mart electronics section, have you? Sure, that's the stated policy. However, in reality, the policy is "do whatever the customer wants you to" (at least at the store I worked at, it was). If you whine and bitch and moan and ask to see a manager, they'll take your return. Hell, most of the time, you just have to be firm about it- your repeat business is more important to them than a measily policy (esp. since they'll just mark the game as "defective" and send it back to the manufacturer regardless).
We had one customer come in one time and complain that the South Park game contained "inappropriate language," and so she wanted to return it. Well, no sh*t, lady! There's a label on the front and back of the box that says "Mature: Language." Not to mention the fact that it's a South Park game. But she got her return. [sarcasm] The customer is always right. [/sarcasm]
Sono koro, bokura wa, sore ga sekai no shinjitsu da to shinjite ita.
Ah, games have had bugs for years... and it's definitely not a NEW thing to have video games development cycle shortened in order to get a product out by Christmas. I have Atari games with bugs in them too, and when you compare things, games these days probably have LESS bugs per unit of code than they used to. I mean hell, Mine Storm (the game built into the Vectrex) screws up if you beat level 13, because it tried to load information that isn't really there.
Obviously, some games have some pretty major bugs that stick out like a sore thumb these days... especially since imperfections aren't tolerated as well (sprite corruption in an Atari game isn't as bad as broken polygons, or a complete crash on a PC game), but I hardly think it's enough to warrant any major action.
-"One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." -EH