Terrible pathfinding in towns

**Ludens** · 05-26-2007, 15:16

Krazilec, that quote is from bovi, not me.

**bovi** · 05-26-2007, 15:28

As Blacksnail put it in another thread concerning the amount of bugs in shipped products:

This was the most recent game I could find without bugs.

People are perfectly willing to buy bugged games to get them early. Therefore, publishers are pushing developers to release early. If everyone returned every game with bugs there would be no games with bugs. Then again, there would be no games.

**blank** · 05-26-2007, 16:49

Originally Posted by bovi

If everyone returned every game with bugs there would be no games with bugs. Then again, there would be no games.

that doesn't make any kind of sense. Are you telling me a professional developer team who work on the game every day are not able to fix even the major bugs? Then i wonder how the hell they could make the game in the first place

Yeah, sieges might be nightmarish in RTW, but i at least expected them to be fixed in M2TW. Then i found out that they are exactly as bad in M2, and the game also slows to a crawl. My humble suggestion is to stop making expansions and FIX the f*****g game first, but what do i know

**Kralizec** · 05-26-2007, 17:04

Small bugs are inevitable and I can accept that. They're not the point, though. Stuff like the passive AI bug and the 2-handed weapon animation bug are the marks of a beta version, and beta versions should not be shipped out to stores.

Originally Posted by bovi

People are perfectly willing to buy bugged games to get them early. Therefore, publishers are pushing developers to release early. If everyone returned every game with bugs there would be no games with bugs. Then again, there would be no games.

There's the problem. RTW was a learning experience for me. I didn't get RTW until the 1.2 patch was out for a pretty long while, but 1.3 & 1.5 were a long time away. To be fair I wouldn't return a game for the load/save bug alone but I wouldn't be willing to pay a full 50 bucks for it either (wich I didn't)

If people had higher overall standards about what they expect for their money, developers would gladly spend another 3 months hunting down the largest of bugs, knowing that it would earn them more money.

**bovi** · 05-26-2007, 21:17

The sense is that if everyone returned games that had a bug, no developer would recover their costs. Which are legion. Of course they are able to fix the bugs. But it costs a lot. Cost-effectiveness is the watchword here.

**neoiq5719** · 05-26-2007, 22:11

Originally Posted by bovi

The sense is that if everyone returned games that had a bug, no developer would recover their costs. Which are legion. Of course they are able to fix the bugs. But it costs a lot. Cost-effectiveness is the watchword here.

And doesnt it cost any money to start working on patches to fix screw-ups too?
So why didnt they just do it before the release of the game and not after, u sound like by the time CA finished the game, they didnt have a single pound left in the bank.Come on is just a matter of serious work, planning and above all proffessionalism for me.

**Watchman** · 05-26-2007, 22:37

Originally Posted by neoiq5719

And doesnt it cost any money to start working on patches to fix screw-ups too?

Maybe, but at that point the game's already in stores and making money right ? The longer the pre-release developement takes the longer the firm is just losing money, after all.

**Foot** · 05-26-2007, 22:41

And you must be aware that it is most often the publishers who push for early release. They are the ones with the purse strings, and often this means that details in later development (including beta-testing) are missed.

And if you don't think that development studios can go under after successful games and with big publishing houses supporting them, take LGS as an example.

Foot

**blank** · 05-27-2007, 10:49

Originally Posted by Watchman

Maybe, but at that point the game's already in stores and making money right ? The longer the pre-release developement takes the longer the firm is just losing money, after all.

no they aren't ''losing'' money. They simply start making money a bit later, and with no major bugs they would likely make more in overall, no?
I'd like to think i'm not the only one who'd rather wait a few more months for the complete game than have ridiculous bugs in them, like RTW/M2TW or Gothic 3.

Sadly, the publishers usually don't agree, expecting it to be a disaster to release the game somewhat later. There are exceptions of course, where you see the deadline pushed back quite a bit (Resi 5, Alone in the Dark 5). But then, naturally, some kids come to various forums and bash to company for fixing the bugs...