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"?
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?