Terrible pathfinding in towns

**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...

**Ludens** · 05-27-2007, 11:16

Originally Posted by blank

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?

However, a release will set hundreds of unpaid bughunters to work, allowing you to find bugs faster. Remember, the major bugs (apart from the bad A.I., and I think this may have been a design decision rather than a bug) weren't found until several months after release.

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.

I quite agree, but R:TW had been in development for a long time and release had been delayed more than once if my memory serves me right. At one point the publisher is going to demand that they release it and start working on the next game.

**Watchman** · 05-27-2007, 13:03

The longer the product sits in the pre-publish stage the longer it just accumulates running costs like personnel wages, without any returns of investement. Roughly comparable to goods sitting in the damn warehouse instead of the store shelf. Of course the investors would like it to start earning the money put into it as soon as possible, even if the developers themselves would prefer to iron out the last glitches a while longer.

And what Ludens said about freebie bug-spotting.

**blank** · 05-27-2007, 17:03

Originally Posted by Ludens

However, a release will set hundreds of unpaid bughunters to work, allowing you to find bugs faster.

Then why didn't the bugs get fixed?

Originally Posted by Ludens

Remember, the major bugs (apart from the bad A.I., and I think this may have been a design decision rather than a bug) weren't found until several months after release.

Then what the hell were the testers doing if the (VERY noticeable) bugs weren't discovered before several months?

Originally Posted by Ludens

I quite agree, but R:TW had been in development for a long time and release had been delayed more than once if my memory serves me right. At one point the publisher is going to demand that they release it and start working on the next game.

Then i don't know, did CA deliberately leave the bugs in?

**neoiq5719** · 05-27-2007, 17:13

u know, talking about CA´s job here is like talking to a wall. I dont know what is behind all this, could be love or whatever it is but these people have the uncanny ability to stand by CA no matter what crap they release. No point in arguing cos they will just come up with some B.S. excuse to justify CA´s horrible way of working. Period.

**Foot** · 05-27-2007, 18:11

Originally Posted by neoiq5719

u know, talking about CA´s job here is like talking to a wall. I dont know what is behind all this, could be love or whatever it is but these people have the uncanny ability to stand by CA no matter what crap they release. No point in arguing cos they will just come up with some B.S. excuse to justify CA´s horrible way of working. Period.

Your behaviour on this thread is certainly not very constructive itself. Unless someone can find a reasonable way to bring this thread back on topic, whether there is a fix for pathfinding in town, we are likely to close this thread. CA bashing is neither welcomed nor wanted, reasonable criticism is fair enough, but the attacks made here are unfounded, baseless and show dodgy reasoning and a severe lack of understanding about basic business economics and business models for game publishing firms and developing houses. Basically go find proper information on this subject or stop talking about it.

Foot